| Author |
Subject |
IUcello
Registered User
(8/14/00 12:35:57 am)
|
Theory
I just wanted to get feedback on
people's perception of theory. Do college's put too much emphasis on
it?? Do you guys enjoy theory or do you feel overwhelmed with
theory, practicing and other classes?
Thanks a
bunch
Jocelyn
|
Laura
Wichers
Registered
User
(8/14/00 11:15:32 am)
|
Re:
Theory
I think it is crucial to have a good
theory background. You should read Tim Janof's interview with Carter
Brey; they talk quite a bit about how theory influences performance,
what musicians should know, etc.
For me, being able to look
at a score and know WHAT I'm looking at makes a big difference in
how I play that piece. It's difficult to describe. Sometimes the
solo line or the cello section will be playing wacky lines against
some even wackier chord progression somewhere else in the orchestra,
and the solo/section makes much more sense when I can see what is
going on in the other parts.
I've only had a year of theory
(we have to do three years total) so everything is still pretty
basic and simple. Maybe my opinions will change about how much
theory we have to learn after I'm in counterpoint and all that other
lovely stuff.
-Laura
|
sarah00
Registered User
(8/15/00 8:09:03 am)
|
theory
i agree with laura that the
importance of theory is extreme. i've often compared music/theory to
literature. A person can read a poem, essay, or story, and think,
"wow, that was good; it touched me," but to go beyond that and
appreciate it more is to recognize form, diction, and techniques
used throughout the prose. it allows for a more complete
understanding of the work. i think that is parallel to music.
however, in both cases, it is crucial not to lose sight of the piece
itself. i therefore don't think that theory is overemphasized, but
actually in younger people is underemphasized. this is, of course,
just my own experience of what i saw around me. i do have to
iterate, however, that i feel that a lot of theory teachers are poor
teachers. this therefore diminishes the possible value of the theory
education.
|
Laura
Wichers
Registered
User
(8/15/00 9:05:01 am)
|
Re:
Theory
Another thought: Are you including
ear training? If you are, I don't think ear training is emphasized
anywhere near enough, especially before college-level studies. When
someone throws some messed up Popper etude in front of you, yes you
can use thumb/3 for anchors and think of positions and all that
other good stuff, but if you can look at the intervals and know
exactly what they should sound like... THAT is a great thing. I've
always thought that ear training should start as soon as you pick up
an instrument. Maybe some of you have teachers who did start you on
solfeggio when you were just learning open strings, but mine did not
and none that I know of do.
-Laura
|
Daniel
Ortbals 
Registered User
(8/15/00 1:18:24 pm)
|
Re:
Theory
I'm with everyone on this. Theory
alters our perception of music (hopefully for the better!), and
therefore affects our playing. Lots of people love to say "I don't
need to know all that," but if they don't know it, how can they
accurately come to that conclusion? Plus, in my experience, the
people who make those kinds of statements usually have some
limitations in their playing that stem from a poor understanding of
the music. Their technique is fine (so you can't see anything
wrong), but their sound isn't consistent, or the phrases don't go
anywhere, etc. A solid understanding of music theory will work
wonders for the player.
My old teacher (with whom I studied for
six years before coming to college) threw a little theory at me here
and there, but nothing really stuck with me at the time. She once
suggested I take an ear training course, but I couldn't afford it
and also did not see the importance of it at the time. Now, after
four semesters of it, all I can say is WOW!
|
Corrina
Connor
Registered
User
(8/15/00 10:36:13 pm)
|
What is
meant by "Theory"
I was merely curious as to what
level theory you do at college?
Here we don't have "theory"
as suck at University - it is Materials of Music, Harmony and
Counterpoint and KAT (keyboard aural theory) - which is basically
score reading, associating what you hear with what see with what you
play - like analysis I think.
To get into a performance
course you have to pass a theory test - writing figured basses to a
Baroque melody, writing SATB in the style of a Bach Chorale (either
bass or soprano supplied), a little analysis and transposition
(generally writing out some Mozart wind piece at concert
pitch!)
Could somebody tell me what your First Year theory is
like?
|
Laura
Wichers
Registered
User
(8/15/00 10:54:42 pm)
|
Re:
What is meant by "Theory"
Our first-year theory is mainly
analysis, chord writing/recognition, some composition, and a whole
lot more analyzing. It's pretty easy, as theory goes. We also have a
semester of music history (intro from early baroque thru early
romantic), and a first-year course of aural comprehension (ear
training). We are also required to take at least two semesters of
keyboarding. This is all required in the first 1.5yrs of
study.
Out of curiosity, do you have to take this theory test
prior to ANY university level music studies, or do you audition and
test into the performance program after a few semesters? That's how
our program is; two years of univ-level training, then you have to
audition and test into the performance
program.
-Laura
|
IUcello
Registered User
(8/16/00 8:37:30 am)
|
Theory
in school
At my school we have to take a
theory test prior to getting in. It's not given to determine whether
you make it into the school or not but to see what theory you will
be placed in.
My first year was based on score analysis, chord
analysis, counterpoint, harmonization,...anything you can imagine 
Our ear
training class worked on intervals, sonorities, two-part harmonies,
and a lot more. We had transcrpition projects at the end of the year
also.
I'm still not convinced that theory is THAT crucial to
playing an instrument well. I know I'm committing treason but I'm
ready to back it up.
I learned a lot of theory my first year in
school and I learned it well so I'm not saying that theory isn't
important because I haven't learned any.
If one can play with
feeling and passion and capture the audiences with their technical
ability.....how can theory help.
At my school theory is strongly
emphasized which I have know problem with. It does make you
understand the music and appreciate it more and it gives you more
knowledge about the piece you're playing or studying.
When I look
at pieces after studying theory this past year I do catch myself
analyzing chords or determining the intervals so my left hand can
become more comfortable.
My problem with theory is that we put
too much emphasis in it as a whole.
You're not going to hold
someone back that is an excellent musician because "Oh...they didn't
know how to analyze this"
With a great teacher and a great
student, one can determine the lengths of phrases and the harmony
changes just by practicing them or by sheer knowledge.
I
don't think 3 and a half years of drilling theory into your brains
will help when you try out for a position in an orchestra somewhere,
because they're not going to ask you to harmonize a melody line
before playing a part from Don Juan.
Now on the
otherhand....I believe ear training is a very valuable course. I
catch myself singing back melodies or singing back intervals to get
in tune or to understand the phrasing.
I still refuse to
believe, however, that just because you can do all of this theory
and sound intelligent when you talk about music, that you can play
any better than a person with a theory background that's not as
deep.
I know you all will probably want to hang me and put my
head up for display to others who go against holy
theory........that's why it's nice you all don't know who I am But.....just
think about it...
|
Laura
Wichers
Registered
User
(8/16/00 9:53:38 am)
|
Re:
Theory in school
I think I *sort of* agree with you.
Theory probably won't take you from being a so-so cellist to being
another Feuermann or anything. But as you yourself mentioned, it
does help somewhat and you find yourself using it when you are
learning pieces.
Depending on the classes, maybe theory is
overemphasized to those of us who are performance majors. I can
understand theory/history majors needing to know more theory in
order to be successful in their other classes and future profession.
Performance majors, however, as you mentioned, don't need to be able
to take a dictation or write a few lines of a counterpoint melody
before they audition for an orchestra. Here's another idea:
Performance DO often end up teaching at universities/colleges/prep
schools. Often, these same people will teach a few theory or aural
comp courses. Maybe they won't be teaching grad-level theory, but
they will need to know the basics and little more.
I agree
with you about ear training being an essential part of our
education. I only wish I had learned solfeggio sooner. My stand
partner from Turkey learned solfeggio since she learned which hand
holds the bow; I've thrown Popper etudes in front of her and she can
whip off the solfeggio and sing all the correct pitches in about two
seconds. It's disgusting!! :-)
-Laura
|
Daniel
Ortbals
Registered User
(8/16/00 12:05:56 pm)
|
Re:
Theory in school
I understand your logic about not
needing to analyze every single chord in a piece in order to be able
to play it well. Also, theory does not turn people into brilliant
players. However, the point of studying theory is to allow the
player to have such a strong understanding of the music that it
takes no effort to "analyze" it. While playing a string quartet, I
don't consciously spell out every single chord, but I do understand
the function of all the chords, and my role in the music.
Understanding what pitches to bring out, what chords lead to what,
all becomes automatic. THAT'S the whole point. Theory is just a way
of explaining it in words, rather than simply playing and saying
"Don't you see?"
Also, I don't appreciate great technique as
much as I appreciate great musicality and passionate playing. It's
like looking at a drawing that is flawlessly composed, yet is
boring. "Hmm, perfect lines and absolutely flawless, but it just
doesn't do anything for me."
Anyway, that's my take on it. Feel
free to disagree.
|
IUcello
Registered User
(8/16/00 3:36:42 pm)
|
more
Theory :)
I totally agree when you say
performance majors may need theory knowledge in the future if we
pursue a teaching career. My teacher at school always likes to throw
a couple of theory questions at me when discussing the accompaniment
or something. It's very helpful to understand and be able to answer
these questions.
I also agree that technique is not the most
important thing about playing the cello. It sure helps but that's
not what keeps the audience involved. I know I've been caught
snoozing while hearing a flawless but dry performance. And it
disgusts me when people are always talking about technique but in
the long run musicality is what matters when performing.
I think
in ensemble rehearsals it's helpful to understand chord
progressions.
Oh yeah...Laura.....I understand your pain with
the the ear training "brains".
We do scale degrees at my school.
Whelp...some more thoughts....thanks for the
responses
|
Corrina
Connor
Registered
User
(8/16/00 11:37:22 pm)
|
Performance programmes
It all depends. Our school year is
February - December, or March - November for Uni students. In our
last year at school we do Exams called U.E or Bursary, for which the
results come out in Janurary. Therefore if you want to go to Law
School, Med School, Architecture or Engineering, you cannot apply
until February, because without an "A" Bursary - over 400 marks out
of 500 - you can't get in.
However, for performance the
audition/theory test for Performance is held in October, and you
find out if you've been accepted in November, and if you've been
rejected you have to think of something else to do.
Often
people who don't get in, do their first year of a B.Mus in History
and Lit. or Composition, then audition the next year, and start
again.
So, to summerise, yes, we have to audition and test
before we can start any music programme at University, and we start
performance right away. . .
The compulsory papers for Year 1
Performance are:
Musi102 - Performance, which is Instrument Class
(string/ wind/ brass/ perc/ voice/ keyboard/piano), Perf.
Workshop,
Orchestra,lessons and practice.
Musi107 - aurel
perception, score reading, keyboard facility/
Musi108 -
practical exercises in Western harmony and counterpoint and basic
analytical techiques.
Musi141 - The history of Western music,
developement, historical context etc. . .
and either Western
Music since 1950 or Music in New Zealand.
We also can take
Accompanying, Orchestral Studies, Chamber Studies or Second
Instrument.
The Actual Musi102 is assessed 50% Course
Work and 50% on the end of year recital, which has to be 45 minutes
in length.
The other courses are assesed in little tests
during the year. B- is a fail, and if you fail Musi102 you have to
do another audition, or a reassment in Janurary.
| |
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands (Moderator only)