Is it worth sacrificing a segment of physical practice for theory?

[shingo]

Hey,
     The title says it all really, over the last few months or so I keep attempting to boost my below par theory with some studying but due to numerous reasons, many beyond my control, it has to be postponed.
     Anyway, I am still in a situation where I cannot fully donate any designated time for theory which is likely to be un-affected due to exams and other commitments but I had the idea of maybe introducing theory into my nightly practice regime (which I take great care not to break) in place of a 30/40 minute slot of practicing, so I will only be doing 1.5 hours a night.
     Is this worth doing, I realise that my theory must improve at some point so this would allow me the time to get started going throught the books I have to read and utalise, but at the cost of practice time is this a false investment? Is this arrangement only liekly to impede on my physical practice and progress?
     Thanks for any advice.

[thierry13]

Why don't you try to combine theory and practice : study your pieces deeper using the theory knowledge you have, and compare your theory books with the actual pieces you are playing.

[dan101]

As a composer and pianist, I cannot over-emphasize the importance of theory. If taught in an innovative and fun manner, it gives piano playing more depth and understanding.

Seasons greatings.

[Bob]

Yes, I would say so.  As long as it's useful.

Study something enough that it sticks and then drop it and get your practice time back.

The theory I learned in college was mainly chord identification and understanding function -- progressions.  That's what I think has helped the most.  The voice-leading not so much. 

I have one theory book that I started in on after taking all those courses.  It was so detailed I got bogged down, but it's just explaining things as simple as changing a lightbulb. 

Chords -- so you can read many notes at once
Progerssion -- so you can understand what's coming up next and see even larger patterns
Form -- That's really basic, but it's another way to understand the whole.

Some of it gets so detailed or so abstact.


Applying it your pieces is good.  Also playing through all the chords, scales, etc. is good to to have that general arsenal. 


That's assuming you know the scales and intervals, etc. before you start.  If not, work on that stuff for sure.

[shingo]

Thanks for your replies.
     I have scales etc and know the basics but I just feel I am missing out by not knowing some of the more complex and detailed aspects of music. As if I only have extended my branches on one side, the physical playing side and not so much the theory.
     I have trouble with ryhtem reading and similar things in regards to my current playing, probably relying to much on recordings and replicaating to an extent. And there is no way I could ever start a composition with my level of knowledge, not that I wish to, but I am intrigued and wish to explore the 'mechanics' more now. It's just finding time for this that is a problem.

[timothy42b]

I think this might depend on your personal learning style.

I tried reading my wife's theory books, and none of it stayed with me or proved useful.  So for me, taking some regular practice time and using it on theory would be a waste.

But on the other hand, quite often I come across something in the music I play that I don't understand or need to know.  Then the time I take to go to the books and figure it out is directly useful and I seem to retain it. 

What works for me might not be right for you though. 

[tcovenent]

I was already substantially proficient in theory before I started learning the piano, but I can't tell you how much it helped to actually experience it on the instrument. I wouldn't recommend devoting so much time to it (Even though it is definately important), I'd suggest you get a short and sweet theory book (Not the big quasi philosophical ones by Piston and Schoenberg, unless you REALLY have your mind set on becoming a composer) maybe find some time to read through it, and then examine the sheet music for the pieces you play, especcially the ones you're paticularly aurally familiar with, and discover where the chords, scales, modulations et al really come into play.

While theory definately IS important to any musician, if you've got your mind set on being a player rather than composer I wouldn't suggest sacrificing so much time for it.

[guendola]

From my experience, theoretical knowledge actually shortens the time you need to learn a piece and memorize it, when you apply that knowledge to the piece. Knowing the theoretical structure of a piece makes you think on a different scale than thinking on notes or measures. From a certain level on, the fingers are able to play ideas rather than single notes. For example you see and alberti bass and you know roughly how to play it along a given chord progression which leaves you with learning deviations from that only. This even applies to fugues where you can understand some logic of the voices and anticipate a big part of the score by memorising maybe 50% of it instead of 100% (of course you have to read the whole score to make sure your anticipation was right). But frankly speaking, this only one half of the truth. Experience is as efficient as theorie in these same fields of playing music.

So my advise: If you are keen on learning theory, do it, but don't expect miracles. It will certainly add to your musical understanding and performance but it is impossible to calculate a benefit on practise efficiency.