A Music Theory Study Group!

[lojay]

Week 1
Week 2


The Purpose:
A thorough understanding of the fundamentals of music theory through readings, weekly submissions, and active discussion.  Active participants are expected to post weekly submissions. The study group will start from the most rudimentary music theory at a somewhat relaxed pace.  This group is for anyone who is motivated and mature enough to study by themselves.


So, What is a Study Group?
I think some forum members are confused of the notion of a study group.  "Study group" is somewhat of a misnomer in the sense that we don't actually do most of the studying and the initial learning together.

At least for me, study groups are meetings where the members review the material they've already learned.  The most effective study group I participated in had a format where we all took turns lecturing on the topics.  If something incorrect was stated or if someone wasn't understanding something, we'd address these issues on the spot.  Everyone who stuck it out with the group ended up getting really good grades in the class (the class was orgo II, usually considered the most difficult pre-med requirement).  I'm hoping we can take a similar approach, except we're essentially all "lecturing" with our submissions (this clearly won't be practical for larger groups, but I'm certain most people will drop out once they see the work involved).   The idea is to do the work, post it, and discuss what we've posted.

If you just want to observe, that's completely fine, but if you really want to learn the material I urge you to participate.


The Resources:
Required:
1) A pdf file of Basic Music Theory.  We start with this book.  Although the book is aimed at a younger audience, it's extremely effective at teacher the fundamentals.  This is a very easy read.

3) The Complete Musician.  We should be starting this no later than Week 7.  I will be using the 3rd edition, which can be purchased on Amazon.  Here is an older edition.

Optional/Supplementary:
2) Harmony and Theory: A Comprehensive Source for All Musicians.  This workbook is a great complement to Basic Music Theory because it contains exercises to test your theoretical knowledge that you've learned from the textbook.

4) The Complete Musician Workbooks 1 and 2.  Tons of exercises to go through. Highly recommended and in my opinion is essential if you want to really test your knowledge.

5) Schoenberg's Theory of Harmony.  This is an older book that would be great as an optional read once we start using a college level theory book.  I probably won't open this again until I'm halfway done with The Complete Musician.  Here is an older edition.


Discussion Schedule
This is tentative.  I will modify this according to the group.
Week 1: Basic Music Theory, Ch. 1-9 and Harmony & Theory, Ch. 1
Week 2: Basic Music Theory, Ch. 10-17 and Harmony & Theory, Ch. 6, 7
Week 3: Basic Music Theory, Ch. 18-22 and Harmony & Theory, Ch. 2, 3
Week 4: Basic Music Theory, Ch. 23-26 and Harmony & Theory, Ch. 4, 8, 9, 14, 18
Week 5: Basic Music Theory, Ch. 27-31 and Harmony & Theory, Ch. 5, 10-13, 15-17
Week 6: Basic Music Theory, Ch. 32-35


Weekly Submissions:
Since Basic Music Theory is extremely rudimentary, detailed posts are not necessary; however, if you are a beginner I urge you to be detailed.  Once we start The Complete Musician, all weeks submissions should be thorough.  I will personally include:
1) A summary and notes for each chapter
2) My responses to the review questions
3) Any comments related to the reading
4) Any additional resources pertaining to our reading I may have stumbled across
I'd suggest you guys do at least this much.

Post your weekly submissions by Saturday, 12PM (noon), EST.  The reason for this seemingly odd time is that I'm assuming the fact that we have people all over the world contributing.  This will give everyone at least Sunday to review each other's work before working on new material.


Weekly Discussion:
Once we start TCM (around Week 7), I'd encourage all active participants to join me on Skype for weekly discussions.  If you are interested in joining these discussions, message me saying that you'd like to participate in the Skype discussions so we can share contact information.  We still have to decide on a time.  The idea is that we should decide on a consistent weekly meeting time based on our availability.


If You're Interested in Actively Contributing
Reply with the following:
1) A message introducing yourself and stating that you are interested in joining.
2) How much knowledge you have with music theory.
3) What your goals are.

[gn622]

I may not participate a lot, but i will tr and follow this thread 

[mikeowski]

"The complete musician" links to "https:///", just saying.

[theholygideons]

I'm currently studying from arnold schoenberg's theory of harmony
without knowing much about music theory beforehand. 
it's quite a dense read, more like a novel than a textbook.
I'm not sure if i'll be commited to joining this group though..
i might keep an eye out for this thread in case there's anything of interest.

[lojay]

"The complete musician" links to "https:///", just saying.

Corrected, thank you.

I'm currently studying from arnold schoenberg's theory of harmony
without knowing much about music theory beforehand. 
...
it's quite a dense read, more like a novel than a textbook.

I forgot to finish typing up this response because I started reading a pdf of the Schoenberg and couldn't put it down. I actually find his writing style extremely wordy (but interesting!), but I do agree with you that it reads like a novel. As of this post, I've only read the first 2 chapters and glanced through the rest.

My concern of The Theory of Harmony is the scope (how much it covers) and the exact relevance to modern music theory.  From what I've read and glanced over, I have a feeling that the book is about music theory (as opposed to a book that teaches music theory).  Don't get me wrong, I think this would make an excellent supplement to something like The Complete Musician but I don't think it's a great primary source to learn music theory from.

I must emphasize that I'm uneducated in music theory so my opinion is far from qualified.  If I stick through with this study group, in about 6 months to a year, I'll let you know what I think!

[mussels_with_nutella]

I would be SO GLAD to join this group!!! 

I have played many pieces from Romanticism (my favourite, and unique, movement), but for sure less than you have played. One of Dvorak, two or three of Chopin, two and an exact half (2nd concert) from Rachmaninov, two of Brahms... I love harmonies, strange and exotic harmonies from far East Russia and Arabia, unmeasured rhythm interlaced with rubatto melodies...
And I love to improvise, so I truly need harmony theory fuel for the aim of improvising... and composing if my will enlarges that so.

I am member of a Mathematics forum made by the same guys (Simple machines, SMF) who made this web page and forum design. The courses are structured so that there are 3 pages:

1) One page for comments concerning people who want to join, or reviews and suggestions for improving the current course.

2) One page for the course itself: A nutshell of what every chapter (following a book) says and some encouraging exercise solved... and let the students solve other which are fully educational... or challenging.

3) One page for doubts.

So, unless anyone suggests a better way to do that, and if administrators let us create 3 different pages (with 3 different purposes) for the same "theme", we will galop in three movements until the very end cadenzza

Do you agree?

[mikeowski]

I'm currently studying from arnold schoenberg's theory of harmony
without knowing much about music theory beforehand.

Oh, you too? Yeah, it's so hard to wrap your head around all that information without prior knowledge. My aim is to one day get to the end and understand the whole thing, but that might never happen. Around the part with resolving augmented chords in the minor scale and such my head just exploded.

[lojay]

I would be SO GLAD to join this group!!! 

Glad to have you on board!  I do think you're advanced enough to skip the first few weeks of materials I plan to make threads on.  If you want to be super thorough and review the basics (e.g. What is a bar?), the more the better!

I do have to make it clear though.  I'm not qualified in any sense to run a course, this is a study group!  I'm mainly here to organize everything.  I'm doing this mostly to get myself motivated to get through these books.

Do you agree?

My plan was to:
1) Use this thread as a hub.  I will revise my first post to link to all subsequent threads.  This is where people who want to join can post.  Any input about the study group itself would be great.

2) Make a weekly (or more often depending on the group) thread for the readings scheduled to be due for that week.  We should only keep discussion related to that week's readings.  I was hoping every active participant would spend the time to at least make a weekly post containing:
-A summary (this can be as brief or long as you want as long as it's well thought out)
-Any questions pertaining to the readings
-Any comments about the readings

The reason for this is so we can make sure none of us are learning things incorrectly.

I think 1 thread for the all readings would be a pain in the ass to search through.  My main concern is that it would be awkward for new people to join in about what they're studying 3 months down the line when we're studying binary forms for example.

I am very fascinated about the "doubts" page.  Is that self-doubt?  Or doubt about the study group itself?

[marielofredwall]

This is a really interesting idea and thread.

I'm not sure if I should join, since I'm a beginner compared to most of you, but I'll definitely follow it!

[lojay]

This is a really interesting idea and thread.

I'm not sure if I should join, since I'm a beginner compared to most of you, but I'll definitely follow it!

Did you download the pdf?  The first 30 chapters are extremely basic and I plan to go through every single one.  I mean even complete beginners will probably know a lot of the material.  Remember, I will try to post discussion threads based on the group.  But, expect to do at least 1-2 hours of studying a day!

To accommodate you, we'll probably do something like 5 chapters a week.

[chauchalink]

I'll book mark this page and try to stay active, I think this will definitely help me. Although I have already studied Music theory for a year I am starting my second year of music theory study at the university I am attending and I am sure this will be a great supplement.  And since I just learned some of this stuff, maybe I'll have some good input for beginners having just learned it a year ago. 

[mussels_with_nutella]

My plan was to:
1) Use this thread as a hub.  I will revise my first post to link to all subsequent threads.  This is where people who want to join can post.  Any input about the study group itself would be great.

2) Make a weekly (or more often depending on the group) thread for the readings scheduled to be due for that week.  We should only keep discussion related to that week's readings.  I was hoping every active participant would spend the time to at least make a weekly post containing:
-A summary (this can be as brief or long as you want as long as it's well thought out)
-Any questions pertaining to the readings
-Any comments about the readings

The reason for this is so we can make sure none of us are learning things incorrectly.

I thorouhgly agree!!!!!!!!

I think 1 thread for the all readings would be a pain in the ass to search through.  My main concern is that it would be awkward for new people to join in about what they're studying 3 months down the line when we're studying binary forms for example.

I am very fascinated about the "doubts" page.  Is that self-doubt?  Or doubt about the study group itself?

The thing is, i have no news there are more "courses/study groups" in pianostreet, but in that forum (https://rinconmatematico.com/foros/) there were several. I think they didn't want to make hundreds of pages from a same course. However, I rather prefer your method a lot: several pages, for so different parts, but the same issue: music theory and harmony. If any help is required, send me a message
Doubts about the study group itself, I think they should be here in this thread (THIS post is itself a doubt about the study group xD)

In short, i agree with you completely.

About the books... I don't know if the books are the best recommended for speed learning and best understanding, in theorical and practical way, and i don't know because I do know notation, etc. and basics from harmony... but no book followed :S I don't know where you found those books, but I rely on you at the moment I have no choice!
I want to intend that we should call a honest professional, with vast harmony and musical theory knowledge, who showed us the most recommended and fastest way to achieve what he has achieved in his entire life.
After living, and looking backwards, one see things different and lot easier in its way of achievement That's why.


One last note, for everyone: The first book is indeed essential. If a person doesn't know anything, it's a MUST READ (at least the part concerning their lack).
About the other books, I haven't got them... Does anyone know an obscure way to get them? xD if do so, please send me a message, so that I can tell my opinion about them. Many thanks.

P.S.: Once upon a time I wrote to a composer, called Alan Belkin, because I wanted to xD
I read his essais about harmony and, specially, piano technique. I recommend them. Here the link: https://alanbelkinmusic.com/Piano/PianoTechnique.html
P.P.S.: I was so grateful to him that I translated his english-written-piano-technique-essay into spanish, my mother tongue. There is my translation as well xD

[keypeg]

Reading the thread, here's where I am on this.

I pursued music on my own (self-taught) for decades, and my only reference was singing to a solfege board in a primary grade one year.  I had a piano for a few years as a teen, and then took up violin in my late 40's along RCM.    Near the end of that I expressed an interest in theory, learned my notes on the staff properly for the first time, and did all three levels of theory rudiments including the higher two exams, all in 5 months.  Then moved on to harmony theory - soon being on my own again for a while (lessons had to stop).

In my first stint of studying rudiments, I realized that I had absorbed the structure of Common Practice music since childhood like a child gets the structure of grammar by hearing and speaking the language.  My piano pieces while a self-taught teen were sonatinas, because that's what was available.  Immediately you get "sonata form", modulating to the 5th, phrases etc.  The music theory that I studied put into words what I had sensed in music, and got me to see further.  The link between actual music and theory was there.  Later when I read forums, I realized that for many, theory is a dry, abstract thing that gets memorized.  In fact, I almost moved in that direction.  I got good at shoving notes around the page like X and Y axes in math.

As I continued in harmony theory, I met my present teacher who warned me that while these things were tools, they also put music into a box and real music isn't in that box.  For a while we went through the theory books together, considering the exercises more as musicians (could a singer actually do this?  would this expanse sound good even if it is allowed?).  Finally we moved to going at MUSIC first, and deriving the theory from it, sometimes seeing it in the raw and from alternate angles.

So that's where I am now.

When I started reading this thread, I thought you were planning to look at music (pieces) and derive theory from it, see the sense and meaning in it.  But it appears that you will be studying the formal theory (so that one will be able to do that).

I think I will be looking in.  I skimmed through the one free PDF file and it looks mostly familiar.  I do not want to purchase two more theory books.  I already have six (four at level 1 of harmony theory, two at level 2).  I will have to see how much I can participate in this, especially not having the books you will be using.

[lojay]

@mussels_with_nutella:  The way I see it, we should just find something that's free and easy to obtain to replace The Complete Musician.  Ideally this would be more recent than Schoenberg's book (which is easily found on the web).

Also to alleviate your concerns about the pacing I proposed, I think a chapter a day is extremely reasonable for Basic Music Theory.  This is like 5 pages a day of a middle school level text book.  Even people who have zero understanding of music theory can easily do this.  I am planning on doing 5-6 chapters DAILY, but I'm going to make discussion threads according to the pace we agree upon.  This is definitely still up for debate.  I'd like more input on the pacing!

What is important for me, however, is that participants study daily and review accordingly!


@keypeg: Your idea to look at pieces and derive theory from it is fantastic.  Perhaps we can all pick pieces and cite examples in our summaries.

Harmony and Theory: A Comprehensive Source for All Musicians(2), isn't absolutely essential.  Basically, it's there mainly to provide additional exercises although there are several topics covered in (2) that isn't addressed by Basic Music Theory.
I will change my post and list (2) as an optional supplement.

I do understand (and mussels_with_nutella) concerns.  I am definitely open to switching The Complete Musician to something that we can easily get for free on the web.  It must be thorough though.

So, as it currently stands we're definitely going to go through all of (1).

[lojay]

I've gotten a hold of a pdf of the 2nd Edition of The Complete Musician online through Scribd.  Can anyone offer suggestions on how to share a 46MB file?

[mussels_with_nutella]

@keypeg: Your idea to look at pieces and derive theory from it is fantastic.  Perhaps we can all pick pieces and cite examples in our summaries.

Definitely. I cannot be in more agreement. Indeed, that was what I thought (but forgot, thanks for reminding it to me) when I saw Debussy's Claire de Lune at Google's main page. It made me remember that Debussy made an intense study of "other famous and not so famous works' harmonies" to improve his harmonic style. Ravel, 'Debussy's sucessor', was unsure about his own style and began exploring others' styles (Gershwin) (however, he told him not to do that, as Ravel's personality was already in apotheosis for him ).

I suggest continuing with the previous idea of Study Group, with an easily accesible book (like the first) and strongly recommended, of harmony, forms and those "dry" things, and a month later, more or less, make a twice a week (or weekly, we will debate it when it's time) a music proposal: A complete, as much as we can, analysis of harmonies, of "why did he do that", and "why makes me feel so sad/impatient/furious/anxious/happy/glorius... that passage" to "fathom" the music of each piece

I do understand (and mussels_with_nutella) concerns.  I am definitely open to switching The Complete Musician to something that we can easily get for free on the web.  It must be thorough though.

Agree. But it may not be "thorough". Maybe we can find a good harmony book, and a good... "other things" book hahaha (I don't know the distinct "departments" of music theory ). But yes, easily get for free on the web. If we just don't find things easy to find, then we will have arrived to a high level of music (And I say it with total confidence. I am right now studying engineering, and I can see that advanced things doesn't EVEN appear in google. But others do appear, at least quoted. I am reading quantum mechanics, and everything I read... appears in detail... therefore, I know that my level at quantum mechanics hasn't reached even essentials hahaha So let's take advantage of every free, recommended and good books until we reach a high level )

I've gotten a hold of a pdf of the 2nd Edition of The Complete Musician online through Scribd.  Can anyone offer suggestions on how to share a 46MB file?

Do you know dropbox?

[lojay]

Personally, I'm not going to include analysis in my summaries until several weeks in.  The first few weeks are going to be extremely rudimentary.

Look under The Resources in my original post;  I've posted links to complete pdfs of older editions of The Complete Musician and The Theory of Harmony.  I originally attempted to split The Complete Musician into 2 files and upload them on the forums, but there is a total file size limit of 45 MB per post and I'm unable to take the split file down in my original post down. Anyway, I ended up uploading the entire book to a random file hosting site I found.

I challenge you to find something more thorough and we can swap to that.  This was the most thorough resource I found. I didn't really spend too much time picking out an ideal book, I only spent about an hour skimming through music theory texts at a bookstore in addition to searching amazon.  If there is something better, I'd want to use it.

[keypeg]

Anything where I can access the book without having to purchase it, I'm probably in.  Any general discussion where I don't have the book but can participate anyway, ditto.

[lojay]

So far we have:
-lojay
-mussels_with_nutella
-keypeg
-mikeowski

People who expressed interest:
-chauchalink
-marielofredwall

I'm still going make discussion posts on the absolute basic fundamentals to be thorough.  If there are any beginners that want to actively participate, speak up so we don't end up introducing 26 chapters of discussion the first week.

By the way, I've divided up Basic Music Theory as follows:
1) Basic Music Theory, Ch. 1-9
2) Basic Music Theory, Ch. 10-17
3) Basic Music Theory, Ch. 18-22
4) Basic Music Theory, Ch. 23-26
5) Basic Music Theory, Ch. 27-31
6) Basic Music Theory, Ch. 32-35

[mikeowski]

For your resources, check out this great youtube channel: artofcounterpoint
He has lessons on both counterpoint and harmony.

Also, I'd like to join too. However, I can dedicate at maximum 1 hour of time each day since I have a huge chemistry test (have to learn 6-8 hrs/day for it ) coming up in about a month.
About me: I have attempted to study music theory twice, both times starting with theory of harmony by Schönberg, and twice getting to about the part with the augmented chords before, as previously stated, my head exploded. (Surgery was expensive and I do not want to have that happen again )
My knowledge on theory is, I would say, mid-level beginner, and I have also been composing (without a teacher, though) for about a year. My aim is to first get the fundamentals solid and then thoroughly (aiming for understanding-everything-level) work through the complete musician and then later the Schönberg and my two books on counterpoint (by Kent Kennan and Diether de la Motte).

[lojay]

I've edited the main post to link to the thread for the first week of submissions and discussions.

Readings:
BMT: Chapters 1-9
H&T: Chapter 1

If everyone who is listed as an active participant agrees, we can increase the number of chapters.  Just speak up in this thread if you think the current rate of discussion is too slow.

[keypeg]

I've edited the main post to link to the thread for the first week of submissions and discussions.

Readings:
BMT: Chapters 1-9
H&T: Chapter 1

If everyone who is listed as an active participant agrees, we can increase the number of chapters.  Just speak up in this thread if you think the current rate of discussion is too slow.

I can only read BMT since I won't be purchasing H&T.

[yale_music]

This is an interesting idea, but it seems like you'd benefit a great deal if you had someone to guide your group. The sheer quantity of material is also very ambitious. Wouldn't it be better to focus on one thing at a time instead of promising yourself a million things and accomplishing very little?

[malcolmwiss]

1. Hey, Im malcolm and im interested.
2. The basics i think, dont quite know how to answer that question
3. To reach a high level of knowledge, so i can feel more comfortable understanding music.

[lojay]

This is an interesting idea, but it seems like you'd benefit a great deal if you had someone to guide your group.

Are you volunteering?

The initial post you saw was basically an amalgam of multiple edits and different posts with many different purposes.  I've revamped the main page to properly reflect what this study group is about.  At the time you posted, the Week 1 thread did properly reflect what we're doing, did you happen to see the Week 1 thread when you posted?  Anyway, what would you suggest I change?

The sheer quantity of material is also very ambitious. Wouldn't it be better to focus on one thing at a time instead of promising yourself a million things and accomplishing very little?

Huh? Promising myself a million things?  Perhaps this is a response to my initial comments where I clearly lacked motivation, but now that I've started a regularly schedule, I'm unlikely to stop.

Anyway, if your comment is about the weekly reading schedule I posted, have you gone through Basic Music Theory and the Harmony & Theory workbook?  9 Chapters may sound intimidating, but is actually very little material. Harmony & Theory contains tons of exercises and a really good complement to Basic Music Theory.

If your comment is about the fact that I've listed 6 resources (2 The Complete Musician Workbooks), you have to realize that 2 of the books are extremely rudimentary.  I guess there was some confusion since my initial post became really wordy and confusing as I added more and more (and didn't really remove anything), but I did explicitly mention that I'm mainly going through Basic Music Theory to accommodate beginners in addition to reviewing the fundamentals for myself.

Another note: I probably won't be touching the Schoenberg until I'm a good ways through The Complete Musician (I'm only on Chapter 3), but if I find other modern resources I would probably spend some time with them to test my understanding.  I think the more resources, the better.

[yale_music]

Haha! Volunteering? I'm definitely qualified, but that would be a LOT of work. I'd be happy to help, but probably in a more limited capacity.

As for being ambitious, it's my mistake for not reading your earlier posts. Your plan is actually entirely feasible and worth striving for. I wish you success!

[lojay]

I'm definitely qualified, but that would be a LOT of work. I'd be happy to help, but probably in a more limited capacity.

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

[yale_music]

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Alright, how about this: I'll help out, but you need to be clear as to exactly what you want me to do.

[lojay]

I was planning to use you as the "go to" person if we run into questions or disputes that can't be resolved with a close reading of the text.  If we run into such questions, I will most likely make a new thread with the exact question, quotes of the relevant discussion, and relevant passages from the texts and message you with a link to the thread.

I don't expect these disputes until several chapters into The Complete Musician, so it may be months until you hear from us, if at all.

If you want to be more active, just lurk the threads and point out any misconceptions that are uncorrected after every Tuesday (active discussion should have died down by this day).

[yale_music]

Nope. That sounds perfect, lojay. Just alert me to questions if I don't seem to notice they're being posed.

[lojay]

Has anyone besides me actually purchased the workbooks?

[keypeg]

I have stated before that I am not purchasing any material because I already have 5 texts.  If discussion comes up to which I can contribute, either by asking questions or helping out, I shall do so.

[mussels_with_nutella]

I've just come back from a long journey  I see this group won't go any further, isn't it?

[momopi]

I'll be watching this group.