How important is Theory

[jono1]

I am a mature student I suppose, having been taking lessons for the past 5 years.  I really enjoy playing Chopin and now some Liszt.  Probably grade 7/8 level, although I have never taken exams.  I do worry sometimes that apart from being able to play the major/minor scales/arpegios I have never really delved into the theory side very much.  None of my piano teachers have really been interested in going into Theory in any great depth.  I do wonder how many good pianists out there are like me and learn a piece by the music without really knowing about chord progressions/structure and how it all hangs together?

[mcdiddy1]

I think it is challenging to teach a great deal of theory into a piano lesson. Learning piano technique, music literacy, and musicianship skills is more than enough to cram into a typical 30 minute lesson. Theory in my opinion is so vast and in dept it is better to learn that in a class solely focused on theory.

[dcstudio]

my friend, if you enjoy playing that's really all that matters.  A lot of people here aspire to that elusive "concert pianist" status--and they should be theory experts, really.  Many forget that people just like to sit at home and play.  You are doing great!  btw--my friend, with a doctorate in performance, who is a "concert pianist"  continually tells me that "theory is not my strong suit."  I am a blue collar working pianist and theory is completely ingrained in how I think.  so, you make the call....
keep enjoying that Chopin! 

[werq34ac]

Some people with a true gift may "guess" a "correct" interpretation due to their natural instincts with music. However, theory provides the means for a "correct" interpretation. One must know where the music builds up tension and resolves it. Think about cutting your nails in the dark. You can do a decent job, but really it's easier with the lights on.

[dcstudio]

Some people with a true gift may "guess" a "correct" interpretation due to their natural instincts with music. However, theory provides the means for a "correct" interpretation. One must know where the music builds up tension and resolves it. Think about cutting your nails in the dark. You can do a decent job, but really it's easier with the lights on.

Yes, I "guess" a "correct" interpretation because I have enough confidence in myself to trust my natural instincts--and I am paid well to do just that.   Theory provides a means for understanding music and how composers constructed their music.  It helps me in every aspect of my playing. 

btw--gonna quote you on the nail cutting thing--that's an awesome analogy...and I mean that sincerely.   

[gore234]

If you have the ability to play chopin and listz pieces, why not learn more theory so that you could possibly compose your own pieces?  Taking just one music theory class could help you a whole lot.  When I learn a piece, I also look at the chord changes and try to figure out why the composer wanted that chord to be played next.  I try to analyze the piece to see things that I already understand from the music theory I already know.   

[jono1]

Many thanks everyone for your kind and very constructive comments.  I totally agree that one needs some theory and to this end I bought The AB guide to music theory Part1by Eric Taylor some years ago and tend to dive into it when I need to brush up on something.  As for the whole subject of theory  it is daunting and I do admire those who have been to musical college and gone through this. Popular pianist like Elton John spring to mind!
At 65 years old, and having started again when I retired at 60 I think I have enough to be going on with learning new pieces and improving my technique and repertoire!

[jimbo320]

Try looking at it in this perspective.
Equate playing music to building a house. The first thing you build is the foundation. The stronger the foundation the stronger the house. Not knowing how to build a foundation you study the ins and outs. The more you learn how to build a foundation, the better chance your house has to stand.
Theory is the foundation of music. Some people don't get into it much but it usually shows in their music...

[dcstudio]

Try looking at it in this perspective.
Equate playing music to building a house. The first thing you build is the foundation. The stronger the foundation the stronger the house. Not knowing how to build a foundation you study the ins and outs. The more you learn how to build a foundation, the better chance your house has to stand.
Theory is the foundation of music. Some people don't get into it much but it usually shows in their music...

hmmm...a very logical approach.  Music is square--like a foundation?  I don't think theory is meant to be used as "blueprints."  It is called "theory" for a reason.   Your words express serious doubts in that foundational approach you use.  Music doesn't really fit in a box or a house, wouldn't you agree?  I am not judging you at all--it's just that sometimes--when we build such a foundation at such a young age--we need to go back an expand it or "fix the cracks" so it can withstand all that we build on top of it.  Foundations do crack...anyone who owns a house will tell you that.  Don't be afraid to re-examine what they taught you...  you will not dishonor those who helped you build that foundation. 

[keypeg]

What if we redefine both theory and foundation in much broader flexible terms?  I see a problem in how many people who were taught formally learned "theory".  It seems to be some abstract stuff on paper with lots of fancy words, quite divorced from music, and cerebral.

Music has patterns and structures, and they are beautiful.  Houses, by the way, can be dome shaped, and cathedrals with their vaulted roofs are awe-inspiring - so huge and heavy yet seeming so light.  How does that cathedral stay up?  It is because structural principles are well understood - the concept of the arch being the strongest structure.  That understanding is a foundation, is it not?  Without it, the cathedral would not stand.  Merely imitating a cathedral without that understanding could lead to collapse and injured buildings.

When you play music and notice that the first and last part are the same and the middle part is the same but 5 notes up, that is theory.  When you play G7 (V7 of C major or minor) and you hear the F and G rubbing against each other, and then you play C, where the F slides down to the E, the G stays where it is, and the D slides to the C, and suddenly there is no rubbing and everything has gone where you felt it wanted to go, that is theory.

Blindly memorizing I ii V7 I and then following the formula doesn't give that much.  Learning to label things as "cadence" "anticipation" "secondary dominant", "rondo form" or whatever is pretty empty and seems to be how it is taught.  Some ways almost seem to alienate us from music rather than leading to any usefulness.

What if theory is not a "foundation" as in the sense of a house sitting on something - but elementary?

[jimbo320]

My analogy was meant as an abstract way of thinking. Not meant to be so literal. I'm sorry but I was trying to use some imaginative way of relating how important I think theory is.

Keypeg got it...

[coffee_guy]

I think many people make theory out to be far more scary than it actually is. yes, you do have to do some reading, studying, and practical application, but it is not as difficult as many make it out to be.

I was a pretty good guitar player before I knew any theory. When I studied theory, I learned the formula behind many genres of music. it helped my guitar playing a great deal. A combination of theory and practical application is a powerful force.

[arturgajewski]

Theory is important if you want to know which notes are sharp/flat in which key signature and once you master this, it is a whole lot easier to transpose any song. Sure there is a transpose function on the digital pianos, but what will you do if they ask you to play a song on acoustic piano in a key you have not played before?

In my opinion, you can do OK without theory, but once you understand how music works it is much more enjoyable.

[jono1]

I agree that you have to know where the sharps & flats are within any given key. Before starting on a new piece I practice the scales & arpegios of that key for at least 10 minutes before starting every practise session. Thats seems to work for me.  Its obvious from the various posts that everyone has different ideas about theory.  Of course you need to know the major minor scales, intervals, tempo etc.,  My original post was more to do with the dynamics of chord progressions, harmonies, composition and so on.  I have always greatly admired jazz pianists who can do this.  I imagine that a few do it purely on instinct but the majority have to work really hard to understand all this stuff and how it hangs together.

[keypeg]

Theory also works the other way around.  When you play a lot of music, you start absorbing the stuff of theory without even knowing it.

[jono1]

A bit like a child who learns to speak before he learns any formal grammer then!

[dcstudio]

My analogy was meant as an abstract way of thinking. Not meant to be so literal. I'm sorry but I was trying to use some imaginative way of relating how important I think theory is.

Keypeg got it...

Keypeg usually does...

[fleetfingers]

Theory also works the other way around.  When you play a lot of music, you start absorbing the stuff of theory without even knowing it.

This is how it is for me. I never learned much theory so have recently been reading up on the subject, trying to learn some basic things that I never understood. Well, come to find out, I do understand it - quite well - it's just been a matter putting labels that everyone else uses to concepts I'm already familiar with. Sometimes, I disagree with how it's been organized and labeled . . . it's hard for me to think of music in someone else's terms, if that makes sense. We are all unique in how we think and process information, but I think it's important to learn theory as it is organized if you want to collaborate with other musicians or teach music.

[dcstudio]

What if theory is not a "foundation" as in the sense of a house sitting on something - but elementary?

yes...elementary --   I use it primarily to communicate concepts and ideas to those I am blessed to play with or teach.  it's hard to explain things fully when time is short...and who-- ever has enough time to rehearse?

thanks Keypeg--I get a little self-righteous - but I mean well...

[keypeg]

yes...elementary --   I use it primarily to communicate concepts and ideas to those I am blessed to play with or teach.  it's hard to explain things fully when time is short...and who-- ever has enough time to rehearse?

thanks Keypeg--I get a little self-righteous - but I mean well...

You made me think, because I have been thinking in terms of foundations about a lot of things.  But when you did this square floor metaphor, that didn't really fit with how music works, and then the idea of element came.

But now I know what I was actually thinking of (couldn't remember the name) _ geodesic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodesic_dome
It came up in a fascinating book about posture as a dynamic thing, and Mary Bond challenged the idea of us being propped on this pile of upright bones.  She discussed the geodesic design where each thing pushes and pulls on the other with give and take and elasticity - interrelationships rather than this rigid foundation and struts idea.  Well, can we stretch your building model into that?  Just for a wild fun of it?

[nyiregyhazi]

But now I know what I was actually thinking of (couldn't remember the name) _ geodesic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodesic_dome
It came up in a fascinating book about posture as a dynamic thing, and Mary Bond challenged the idea of us being propped on this pile of upright bones.  She discussed the geodesic design where each thing pushes and pulls on the other with give and take and elasticity - interrelationships rather than this rigid foundation and struts idea.  Well, can we stretch your building model into that?  Just for a wild fun of it?

? There's nothing dynamic about about a dome. It's based on a solid foundation and structure as much as anything else, but simply happens to resist collapsing under gravity via a less conventional shape. It doesn't have to resist forces as big as some layouts might, but that doesn't mean it doesn't require solid struts to stay together. The way in which it does hold together has no relation at all to the human body- seeing as we start at one end and finish at the other. We don't exist as a circular structure that holds itself together. I'm all for the idea of dynamic posture, but this is a rather poor example, if she used it to reflect on that.

[keypeg]

You'd have to study the book.  I can't explain it here.  I did a truncated version as a metaphor to theory which I think will say something to the person I addressed.  It was not meant to explain technique.

[dcstudio]

I have recently tried to reject all my training because I didn't want to face the fact that after all this time--I am completely and totally responsible for everything I learned--and I failed to learn quite a bit--but I'm trying to figure it out.   I like the bone thing--I have often described my lifelong musical journey as scaling a mountain littered with the bones of those who attempted to do it before me.   I got to a high place where I looked down and saw a highway with a ferrari that led to the same place.  No bones on the highway...   I don't know anymore if that highway and the ferrari really exist.  There really is no quick way there...I think some people just make it easier on themselves and have a better time at it.  This is a bit existential...but I know some will get it...

[jimbo320]

You guys are making me regret starting this whole foundation thing.....lol.

[cjp_piano]

"How important is theory?" This should not even be a question, haha!

Of course you want to understand how something works if you want to be good at it. I love analogies/metaphors too, and I like to compare music to cooking sometimes. Sure, you can follow recipes and do pretty darn well, but how much better can you be if you understand how different ingredients work together to produce certain flavors?!

[danhuyle]

You're passionate about playing Chopin and in Chopin, there's chromatic harmony in all of them.

You should have a look at Chopin Fantasie Op49, even if you're not ready to play it, look at the theory side of it. Loads of modulations and how I learned it is through knowing the keys that this piece modulates to since it's so frequent. I can tell you that without the theory, I'd have a much harder time memorizing this piece.

Then there's Chopin Ballade no4. I haven't played it, however I have read the music and again, the theory just helps you identify stuff like modulations, chord progressions, cadences, form and so forth.

The theory just helps you to understand how music is written, what the great composers used to write their music and what makes it what it is.