Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

Harvard Drops Music Theory Requirements


Recommended Posts

 Find 660 of my jazz piano arrangements of standards for educational purposes and tutorials at www.Patreon.com/HarryLikas Harry was the Technical Editor of Mark Levine's "The Jazz Theory Book" and helped develop "The Jazz Piano Book."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 35
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Sounds good to me almost like when I first got serious and took workshops at Grove School of Music I could take what workshops interested me or were prerequisites for a higher class I wanted to take. If unsure what to take then office staff or Dick Grove himself would talk to you and suggest which classes according to you goals. Also when I got into computers UCLA had a whole lot of required CompSci classes, but over the years started switching required classes to elective for similar reason the Harvard music program did.

 

Plus so many school public and private all those required courses are just to drain your wallet. So a looser program makes sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a whole world outside the birders of the USA that have very different educational systems.

 

One thing that does seem to be common is the reclassification of the Arts as a whole and not just Music.

 

Whilst part of the National curriculum the standard here in the UK is for each child in education to receive tuition in playing the same musical instrument for a minimum of one term throughout the whole of their school lives. One term can be as little as two months, so yeah a lot of potential for no achievement there.

 

 

Col

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except our music hasn"t changed - the body of knowledge is built upon or torn down. Even when we try to ignore it we are referencing what we already know. More sophisticated music embellishes or looks for alternative places to go from established foundational melodic and harmonic structures. And music for the masses sticks to well worn formulas - exploring rhythmic variations and synthetic timbres instead of older acoustic technologies. There"s certainly nothing wrong with students taking a foundational class.

Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt that one can get to the place of keyboard proficiency without learning a lot of western music theory.

 

In my opinion, knowledge of music theory gives the improvisor a large advantage; if one is going to only recite notes written on a page, then knowledge of music theory is less important.

 

But if one is going to be a teacher of music, knowledge of music theory is of critical importance. And most music majors in college go on to do at least some teaching of music.

 

I would recommend any serious student of music should learn western music theory - most especially if the student might have a future job as a music teacher.

 

J.S. Bach Well Tempered Klavier

The collected works of Scott Joplin

Ray Charles Genius plus Soul

Charlie Parker Omnibook

Stevie Wonder Songs in the Key of Life

Weather Report Mr. Gone

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Good article; I missed this one in 2017, and am glad I caught it now.

 

Having coursework in western history and theory is essential for western music majors, but how much? I'd too have questioned a curricula that was heavy on elementary and advanced music theory and music history classes, then allowed very little individual choice for electives. While I had some exposure to the wider world of music at Columbia College, my coursework at two previous schools was very rigid and western music focused - to my detriment, as discovered over the past 30 years.

 

I like the change from having a strict course outline to close academic guidance instead. While I do benefit from having western music theory background, it would have been better to complete my basic history and theory coverage in three classes, instead of seven. I could have used the elective time then available to study the much wider, literal world of music.

'Someday, we'll look back on these days and laugh; likely a maniacal laugh from our padded cells, but a laugh nonetheless' - Mr. Boffo.

 

We need a barfing cat emoticon!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I work in a University. I guarantee a small amount of students bitched about Western Instruction and Theory so the faculty caved and changed it. No wonder it's heated. University's are so worried about being sued or being shown in a bad light.

"Danny, ci manchi a tutti. La E-Street Band non e' la stessa senza di te. Riposa in pace, fratello"

 

 

noblevibes.com

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember this being discussed here back then. Whether or not people like to know it, the Western harmonic system was founded on the Europeans' belief that the ability to produce pure pitch brought them closer to the angels than the "lowlier" people they were colonizing at the time. It was a descendant of the natural resonance of cathedrals and monasteries, where, once such places became expansive enough, the monks producing monophonic sounds, started naturally hearing the strongest non-fundamental overtone (the 5), and intuiting a "home" tone and a harmonic complement to it. The "pull to the I" that our harmony is based around, was an expansion of the desire for maximal consonance, since the cultural belief was that consonance was both more "sophisticated" and more respectful to God, than the non-tonic and less obviously pitched practices they encountered elsewhere.

 

While theory is certainly inseparable from the "sweet spot" of Western composition, there has also been a century's worth of non-tonic writing in the meantime, and many music programs are simply acknowledging that the world they occupy has expanded since the glory days of European self-satisfaction--as stunning and enduring as many of its products were and still are.

 

Obviously theory is still the organizing factor for most of what we hear all day, and it's not going to be forbidden. It's just that many programs are moving to expand beyond the old European conservatory model, as a nod to the size of the soundworld they occupy.

Now out! "Mind the Gap," a 24-song album of new material.
www.joshweinstein.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While it's useful to know about folk music, and the thinking that goes along with it, from different parts of the world, not much is comparable to what we have achieved with Western classical and jazz theory, and all the research that has been going on at departments of musicology around the world. It's a bit like comparing traditional Chinese medicine to what they are actually doing in Chinese hospitals today. We acquire new knowledge, then we build on that. Education in folk music is mostly for preserving national traditions, at least here in Europe. If people want to pay to get a music education, and then make EDM, fine. But that doesn't sound like something that belongs at a university to me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While it's useful to know about folk music, and the thinking that goes along with it, from different parts of the world, not much is comparable to what we have achieved with Western classical and jazz theory, and all the research that has been going on at departments of musicology around the world. It's a bit like comparing traditional Chinese medicine to what they are actually doing in Chinese hospitals today. We acquire new knowledge, then we build on that. Education in folk music is mostly for preserving national traditions, at least here in Europe. If people want to pay to get a music education, and then make EDM, fine. But that doesn't sound like something that belongs at a university to me.

 

^ This.

 

Music theory doesn't just explain western classical music. At its core it's about biological acoustics and can be used to describe all forms of human music. Sure, learning counterpoint is very euro-centric, but the base concepts of theory classes are universal.

Puck Funk! :)

 

Equipment: Laptop running lots of nerdy software, some keyboards, noise makersâ¦yada yada yadaâ¦maybe a cat?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Music theory doesn't just explain western classical music. At its core it's about biological acoustics and can be used to describe all forms of human music. Sure, learning counterpoint is very euro-centric, but the base concepts of theory classes are universal.

 

This is not in fact the case. There is nothing even universal about the concept of music itself; for most human existence throughout time, it would have been impossible to slice off the 'sounding' part of a practice and give it a separate name from the rest of the practice. Music theory is specifically a European custom that both informs and analyzes Western folk and art-music traditions. You can *use* the elements it foregrounds to analyze non-Western practices, but those are not necessarily the inherent components of those practices. Theory simply gives a vocabulary for discussing what we hear, when we hear the things we in the West call music.

Now out! "Mind the Gap," a 24-song album of new material.
www.joshweinstein.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could not have survived three decades as a high school music teacher without a strong and deep understanding of music theory.

 

There were certainly times in college and grad school when I was pulling my hair out over a theory problem, but I never questioned the value of Music Theory.

Muzikteechur is Lonnie, in Kittery, Maine.

 

HS music teacher: Concert Band, Marching Band, Jazz Band, Chorus, Music Theory, AP Music Theory, History of Rock, Musical Theatre, Piano, Guitar, Drama.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt that one can get to the place of keyboard proficiency without learning a lot of western music theory.

 

In my opinion, knowledge of music theory gives the improvisor a large advantage; if one is going to only recite notes written on a page, then knowledge of music theory is less important.

 

But if one is going to be a teacher of music, knowledge of music theory is of critical importance. And most music majors in college go on to do at least some teaching of music.

 

I would recommend any serious student of music should learn western music theory - most especially if the student might have a future job as a music teacher.

 

So, as someone who is not educated in music theory beyond the most basic, what is a serious student of keyboard performance, not teaching, likely to be missing out on? What is the arguement for the student of keyboard to learn music theory, and just as importantly, how far does that education need to go to have an impact?

 

While I wish I had music theory under my belt, to me it seems like grammar- I don't know many rules of grammar, but I don't need them in order to speak fluently.

Numa Piano X73 /// Kawai ES920 /// Casio CT-X5000 /// Yamaha EW425

Yamaha Melodica and Alto Recorder

QSC K8.2 // JBL Eon One Compact // Soundcore Motion Boom Plus 

Win10 laptop i7 8GB // iPad Pro 9.7" 32GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So, as someone who is not educated in music theory beyond the most basic, what is a serious student of keyboard performance, not teaching, likely to be missing out on? What is the argument for the student of keyboard to learn music theory, and just as importantly, how far does that education need to go to have an impact?

 

While I wish I had music theory under my belt, to me it seems like grammar- I don't know many rules of grammar, but I don't need them in order to speak fluently.

I would say that as "a serious student of keyboard performance" you already do have a considerable amount of music theory under your belt (albeit of your own making) just not from standardized formal education. I had a lot of formal theory as (originally) a music major in college. I could diagram the harmonic motion in a four part Bach Chorale with the best of them, but I still developed and devised my own understanding of useful, practical music theory through an ongoing combination of ear training, math, physics, gigging, experimentation, trial and error, and what have you. I think it would be arrogant and self-limiting to presume that there is only one path to understanding music.

 

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.

-Mark Twain

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is maybe a bit in the weeds, but we actually do develop an inherent neurological bias for and understanding of the Western 12-tone scale, and also the various relationships to the "1." We develop 12 distinct response regions in the brain for the 12 half steps, and we even correct for those pitches on either side of exactness, nudging them into one of those 12 slots. So simply by being exposed to music in the Western harmonic tradition, we have an innate understanding of the ingredients and the pull to a home key.

 

Obviously those who grow up with different scale systems and musical constructs, develop different "slots" that process the sounds and relationships they hear most.

 

When people in the western tradition complain of pitchiness, it's partially a cultural remnant of the European preference for purity of pitch, but also at this point literally a physical discomfort at having to process unfamiliar or inexact sensory input, which makes us go into minor fight-or-flight, and we usually do both. "This is awful! I hate it! Turn it off!!!!"

 

But the point is more that if you play music at all, you likely have more understanding of the underlying theory, than you might realize or have names for. Just play the first 7 notes of a major scale for someone, leaving the last octave note off, and watch them be both completely aware that a note is missing, and also able to generate the note themselves (or try), even if they've never played a single lick of music.

Now out! "Mind the Gap," a 24-song album of new material.
www.joshweinstein.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is maybe a bit in the weeds, but we actually do develop an inherent neurological bias for and understanding of the Western 12-tone scale, and also the various relationships to the "1." We develop 12 distinct response regions in the brain for the 12 half steps, and we even correct for those pitches on either side of exactness, nudging them into one of those 12 slots. So simply by being exposed to music in the Western harmonic tradition, we have an innate understanding of the ingredients and the pull to a home key.

 

Obviously those who grow up with different scale systems and musical constructs, develop different "slots" that process the sounds and relationships they hear most.

 

When people in the western tradition complain of pitchiness, it's partially a cultural remnant of the European preference for purity of pitch, but also at this point literally a physical discomfort at having to process unfamiliar or inexact sensory input, which makes us go into minor fight-or-flight, and we usually do both. "This is awful! I hate it! Turn it off!!!!"

 

But the point is more that if you play music at all, you likely have more understanding of the underlying theory, than you might realize or have names for. Just play the first 7 notes of a major scale for someone, leaving the last octave note off, and watch them be both completely aware that a note is missing, and also able to generate the note themselves (or try), even if they've never played a single lick of music.

 

Perfectly illustrated in this clip:

 

[video:youtube]

Moe

---

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it boils down to how you view music theory, do you thinks it rules for composing an playing, or labels for sounds so you can communicate with other musicians. I see music theory as label that get put on music after someone without rules created the music be it Bach or Monk. Everyone has heard how the old Jazz masters if asked questions would play you an answer and they didn't sit around talking theory. Well getting to hang with one of them it was explained to me that people come from different backgrounds, ear players, different schools of theory, so if you just play an answer to a question everyone can hang what ever labels they are comfortable with. Like when the great guitar legend Wes Montgomery was asked by another guitars about how he approaches II-V's Wes' response was "I don't know what that is?". The guy said you know like D- to G7 and then asked Wes what do you call that, Wes said "its a sound". The guy played something else and Wes said "that's just another sound". Guitarist Bruce Forman was in Ray Brown's band and asked about a tune Ray just called, Ray response was "it's just cadences". I like how those old masters everything was first and foremost a sound, the labels didn't matter. So to me music theory is just commonly used labels for sounds and sounds should always be taught first.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So, as someone who is not educated in music theory beyond the most basic, what is a serious student of keyboard performance, not teaching, likely to be missing out on? What is the argument for the student of keyboard to learn music theory, and just as importantly, how far does that education need to go to have an impact?

 

While I wish I had music theory under my belt, to me it seems like grammar- I don't know many rules of grammar, but I don't need them in order to speak fluently.

 

I would say that as "a serious student of keyboard performance" you already do have a considerable amount of music theory under your belt (albeit of your own making) just not from standardized formal education. I had a lot of formal theory as (originally) a music major in college. I could diagram the harmonic motion in a four part Bach Chorale with the best of them, but I still developed and devised my own understanding of useful, practical music theory through an ongoing combination of ear training, math, physics, gigging, experimentation, trial and error, and what have you. I think it would be arrogant and self-limiting to presume that there is only one path to understanding music.

 

As you say, "useful, practical music theory". As someone who jams alot, I've often wondered what part of music theory would benefit me. I'm not going to learn music theory just because, I'd learn it to improve my jamming skills and be an overall better performance musician.

Numa Piano X73 /// Kawai ES920 /// Casio CT-X5000 /// Yamaha EW425

Yamaha Melodica and Alto Recorder

QSC K8.2 // JBL Eon One Compact // Soundcore Motion Boom Plus 

Win10 laptop i7 8GB // iPad Pro 9.7" 32GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you say, "useful, practical music theory". As someone who jams alot, I've often wondered what part of music theory would benefit me. I'm not going to learn music theory just because, I'd learn it to improve my jamming skills and be an overall better performance musician.

 

Jamming as in sitting in at jam sessions, or jamming as in playing with form and developing a song over long stretches of time?

Now out! "Mind the Gap," a 24-song album of new material.
www.joshweinstein.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Music theory lays out the shapes, patterns, and structures of most Western music. This insight helps my brain to quickly recognize in real time and comprehend how various music is organized.

 Find 660 of my jazz piano arrangements of standards for educational purposes and tutorials at www.Patreon.com/HarryLikas Harry was the Technical Editor of Mark Levine's "The Jazz Theory Book" and helped develop "The Jazz Piano Book."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fall into the "Theory is necessary" crowd. ii-V-I is a lot more useful for jamming than trying to explain that F#m -> B -> E is the same as Dm -> G -> C, let alone convincing the guitarist to play that Dm over the bassist's F. Same works for transposable melodies. (I admit I'm partial to tertian harmonies -- oh no, I just used a theory term!)

 

Regarding the western-centricism of university music theory, I say "Hell yes -- this stuff has worked rather well for 400 years."

 

By the way, I have the full "Harvard Classics 5-foot shelf of books." So stay off my lawn.

-Tom Williams

{First Name} {at} AirNetworking {dot} com

PC4-7, PX-5S, AX-Edge, PC361

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just curious. How many years of Harvard is required to learn what bass notes work with a Dm? I usually get things like that by guessing but if I could learn that in a couple years at Harvard count me in.

 

 

Reply from Harvard....

 

We can teach you that in about five minutes, but first have to pay your $100,000 for two years tuition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...