Theory...

[llew]

Is it as difficult as it seems? For a guy who doesn't read music? I clicked on Rick Beato's "a semester of music theory in an hour" YT video. I understood a fair amount of it but at about 15 minutes in he lost me. I guess he expects you to have a basic working knowledge of it.
So my question is this: Can a guy like me who doesn't read music (treble/bass clef) learn music theory or is reading music a pre requisite? I keep waiting for the light to come on...

[jazzereh]

Music theory can be a rabbit hole. And you'll get any number of people offering differing opinions about some things. Yes, is can be important to know theory but not vital to enjoy playing guitar. Chords, structure, harmony and voicing can lead you down far too many roads.

Figure out what you want to know and there are lots of on line resources to answer questions, including here.

Is there something you find particularly puzzling?

[Wade Hampton]

I think reading music is helpful when understanding music theory but not absolutely necessary. I’ve got a good grasp of basic theory but my music reading skills are rudimentary at best.


whm

[Wardo]

Originally Posted by Wade Hampton

I think reading music is helpful when understanding music theory but not absolutely necessary. I’ve got a good grasp of basic theory but my music reading skills are rudimentary at best.

Same here.

[Mandobart]

I'm sure there are players here who know theory but don't know they know it.

When we talk about I, IV, V, ii, vi chords - that's under the music theory (fact?) umbrella.

When you know you can transpose a song from G to A playing the same chord shapes capo'ed at the 2nd fret - you're using what many call music theory.

When you recognize walkdowns from a major chord to its relative minor - G to Em, C to Am, F to Dm guess what that is?

There are many other available examples. What we call "music theory" is simply terminology that tries to organize and communicate this information. And you don't have to be able to read tab or notation to understand it.

[Mark L]

Consider this: how well can you fix a car without knowing how it works? Otoh, how well can you drive a car without knowing how it works? And, which of those 2 scenarios of being suits you better?

I prefer to use the term “Music Principles” over “Music Theory”. I’ve found it expresses the idea better.

Your local community college will likely have a one or 2 semester course on “music theory” which you can likely take under continuing education rather than for credit. It will usually include an intro to the piano keyboard, which is laid out a lot more accessibly than a guitar or other stringed instrument.

Guitar is a really, really difficult instrument to learn about music on. It’s hard to play too. Two different things.

If you take the class I suggest over a semester or 2, you’re going to wind up going “oh. Oh. OOOOHHH!!!” before you know it. Music is a deep and broad topic. Stuff like Beato’s 1 hour lesson don’t give it time to sink in. Like a lot of information chains, if you miss a link you drop a huge part of the connection.

Funny, in a way the whole “music theory” thing comes down to do re mi/1 2 3….🤔 😊

Good luck. Pm me if you want to discuss some ideas in private.

[musicman1951]

While not really answering your question, I'd like to suggest that reading music isn't really that hard. If you got any book one and did the first half of the book by dedicating about 10 minutes of your daily practice you'd have a good grasp of it in a matter of weeks.

[birdsong]

If by reading you mean to read and play "at speed", then no, you do not need to read music in order to learn and understand theory. To me they are very different skill sets. And as has been noted about there are some good ways to learn bits of theory without the need to read it. And as another post pointed out, you already know a bunch of theory.......

And I agree that just by learning some written theory one begins to read it.

I've been way down the theory rabbit hole - and not just the rabbit. Gopher, groundhog, badger, wolverine, and a couple burrowing owls - I've learned a ton of theory. But I can barely "read" sheet music. I say "barely" - again my idea of reading it is to read and play. I can read it and interpret it slowly but I cannot play it up to speed or close. I say I read "about a 3rd grade level".

I can follow even more complex chord charts pretty well with tab or diagrams. I'm not good at the standard notation.

Still, I've enjoyed learning all manner of theory and incorporating some of it into my playing. I've learned way more than I need but I don't mind learning for the sake of learning. And there are many entertaining (and informative) You Tuber's out there explaining various elements of music theory.

As for playing/learning new material - I mostly do this mostly by ear. But the theory certainly helps because with that in mind, I can better understand what I'm hearing and even anticipate things in many cases. And when the time comes, make any changes that fit my fancy.

[Rev Roy]

Tony Polocastro has a course he used to offer a couple time a years called “Fretboard Wizard.” Hopefully it’s still available. It’s music theory stripped down to the bare essentials for guitar players. I took it a few years ago and it cracked the code for me. Can’t call myself a wizard by any means…but I finally started seeing the forest instead of just the trees. Very basic. But maybe you’ll find it helpful, Jim.

[RLetson]

There are a lot of click-stops on the "theory/reading music" dial--in fact, there are several dials. "Reading" can range from "sight-reading" to "painfully decoding the dots," and as useful as the middle settings on that dial can be, that skill is not necessary for playing. I can name most of the features on the treble clef, but I can't read a sheet of music even as well as a first-year piano student. And I've been playing for more than 60 years--and sit in with guys whose playlist runs heavily to bop tunes in horn keys. I can follow the chords in a Real Book chart, and sometimes I can see the shape of the tune in the notes, but I'm not "reading music"--I'm following a roadmap while I listen very hard.

The useful parts of "theory" for most guitarists are pretty basic: understanding what a key center is, what chords belong to it, what their usual relationships are (the "Nashville" numbering system is pretty adequate), and how chords are "spelled" and named. Most of that stuff is "knowing that" and "knowing why" and is distinct from "knowing how," which includes things like chord shapes or grips or fingerings and interesting tidbits such as the fact that there are two sets of fingerings that will produce minor-six and nine chords, depending on where they are on the neck. There's an explanation for it, but all you really need to know is the shapes and where to put them.

Freshman year of college, a musically literate classmate wrote down most of the basics listed above--I still have the page. That was enough for a long, long time. Eventually I learned about various common patterns, so when someone said, "It's just a two-five-one pattern" or "it's a I-VI-ii-V turnaround" or "it starts on the four chord," I knew what they were talking about. That's "theory," and it makes playing with others easier.

It also provides a framework on which to build the "knowing how" of playing, since it can point you to things-that-work. I know just enough chord construction to do some reharmonizing of a tune--that is, to figure chord substitutions and maybe some passing chords. It's not musical rocket science, but it means I'm not tied to exactly what's on a chart--and I can explain (haltingly) to my musical partners what I'm doing. And a lot of the knowledge just accreted as I learned new repertory and played with more sophisticated people--and even took workshops where the theoretical stuff didn't take hold until I encountered some problem it solved way down the line.

[menhir]

My thoughts (worth 2 cents, adjusted for inflation) ...
If you want to learn theory, it's a good idea to learn to read music, too.

Written music is the language that theory expresses itself in.
You would be hard pressed to find a book on theory that didn't express it's lessons in notation.

Take your time. Even though you are a guitarist, I recommend getting a little keyboard of some sort, as a keyboard layout is a good way to visualize chord structure while you're learning.
Back in high school, we had a music class where everyone had to buy a very basic Melodica...Often referred to today as a "hooter."
That was about a hundred years ago...Nowadays, simple little electronic keyboards are widely available and are a good tool to be had at inexpensive prices. It's all you need.

But, remember: Take your time.

[thniels]

Originally Posted by Mark L

Stuff like Beato’s 1 hour lesson don’t give it time to sink in. Like a lot of information chains, if you miss a link you drop a huge part of the connection.

I think that's a key learning right there. Instead of trying to pick it up in an hour, however alluring the thought may seem, set aside a bit of time every day and be a bit systematic and above all, keep a pace that lets it sink in. For some people the pace will be faster than for others.

[Andyrondack]

Originally Posted by llew

Is it as difficult as it seems? For a guy who doesn't read music? I clicked on Rick Beato's "a semester of music theory in an hour" YT video. I understood a fair amount of it but at about 15 minutes in he lost me. I guess he expects you to have a basic working knowledge of it.
So my question is this: Can a guy like me who doesn't read music (treble/bass clef) learn music theory or is reading music a pre requisite? I keep waiting for the light to come on...

The term 'music' theory covers an awfull lot of stuff some of which can be better understood by being able to read music, something that's helped me understand how pro guitarists are thinking is going through a transcription of a fingerstyle arrangement and writing out in pencil above all the harmonised notes the intervals and chords used below the melody so knowledge of music theory is needed to do that, but then I could have done the same from tab I guess.
Understanding rythmn , different time signatures and stuff like pick up notes and syncopation is as important as understanding melody and harmony you should be able to get that by tapping your foot to recordings for which you can view a tab which shows relative note duration, some do some don't, pieces that use the Soundslice tool are very usefull for understanding rythmn in real time as the music plays.
As far as understanding melody and harmony is concerened then the numbers of the intervals are what matters, many great jazz musicians couldn't read music but they knew how chords were constructed and could change them to suit and they knew and understood the intervals they played, it's really like a matrix of numbered scale intervals.
So no reading music is not needed but it can help with understanding but only if you ask the right questions, but really you can only understand the point of music theory by using it to make music, if you can't see how you can do that now then learning to read music is not going to change that.

[Nymuso]

I see reading music as nothing more than a communication device that tells you what to play. If someone finds it helpful in their understanding of music, that’s great. For me however, it’s always been an adjunct to rather than an integral part of music theory.

[stanron]

There's 'Theory' and there's 'Skill'.

In the UK there is an Association called the ABRSM. That stands for the Associated Board Of The Royal School Of Music. This lot have run Music Theory teaching and examining over here for over a century. There are eight grades. Grades one to five cover basic music theory and are a prerequisite for many Popular Music Degree Courses at University.

These first five grades mainly cover the concepts, symbols and vocabulary within music notation. They are not instrument specific and at no point is your skill at any instrument tested. There are parallel but separate exams in playing.

You can pass all of these theory exams without being able to play a note.

A child following formal music routes would learn to play their instrument and to read music at the same time. Both playing and reading would start at a very simple level and the level of playing and reading would match as the student progressed.

Today someone learning to play guitar can reach a very high level of playing skill without being able to read a note.

For that person to then learn reading notation, well it's tough. It's a whole new skill set that has to be learned. Note by tedious note. You have to associate the symbols on the score with things you do with your hands on the instrument, and you have to do this a lot before what you hear actually adds up to music, and even then the music you get is far, far below the level of the music you can already play.

I think it's worth adding the skill of reading to the skill of playing, not least because once you can read then you can write and that can open up a whole new world.

Above grade five there are different curriculems for different genres. Jazz is well different to classical and no doubt there are others too, but grades one to five are mostly about notation.