Music Theorem?

I've only been playing guitar for a little over a year, and practicing seriously for only 9 months. Before I started playing guitar, I DJ'd and made (bad) electronic music on my computer and a keyboard.

Even as a bedroom DJ I gained a better appreciation for music. I noticed lots of things that most people didn't, like the way the percussion would change to note the end of a phrase, the way the velocity of the drums was varied to give the beat a different feel, the way the kick drum and bassline fit nice and snugly together but don't bleed into each other's frequencies, etc. Now that I've started playing guitar, it's the same way. I don't just LISTEN to music, I analyze it. I think about the tone, how the notes play off each other, the phrasing, the technique, the chord progressions, etc. Of course you don't have to have ever played an instrument to think about music like that, but I've never met anyone personally who didn't play an instrument and still listened to music in such a critical manner.

In short--yes, musicians listen to music differently.

Aaron Copland wrote about different 'planes' of listening, from the purely sensual experience to the structurally analytical. As musicians, we're aware of these levels, even if we're not really thinking about them or putting labels to them.

We listen harder in a way. I think every instrumentalist does that naturally - you want to figure out what techniques are being used. And the better we get at listening to our instrument, the more we're able to follow the others. It's something that just grows.

My wife is convinced I have some special gift for hearing music, because a student will bring a CD, I'll put it on, and proceed to teach them a tune I've never heard before. She insists that's some ability I must have been born with - 'normal' people can't do that.

But the simple truth is I couldn't always do that, so it must be a learned skill - which means anyone can do it if they put in the time listening critically.

So yeah, we listen differently. And yeah, the average Joe has the capacity to do it too.

So yeah, we listen differently. And yeah, the average Joe has the capacity to do it too.

But to extend on that, the average Joe is generally not going to develop that capacity because one of the things required is specifically an ability to relate what one hears to an instrument. The easiest way to develop that ability is to play an instrument . . . which takes the average Joe and moves him. He is average Joe no more, but now is a musician!

Not only do musicians hear music differently than regular Joes, but the instrument you play effects how you hear music. Piano players hear music differently than guitarists do and neither hears music the same way a drummer does.

That is one of the really unsung benefits of learning different types of instruments is that it changes your ability to access music and musical ideas.

Everybody hears something in a different way. That what makes me laugh when people argue about what's or who's best. Many of the threads here will attest to this. Drummers listen to music TOTALLY different. I listen to many different things. My son said that I like two types of music, 1: if alot is going on at the same time or 2: drones. Nothing in between.

As far as Going To California, I found it was easier to play that song when I realized that the high parts were a mandolin.

Can someone who plays a sport - say football - appreciate the subtle parts of the game that a casual fan might miss? Probably, because he is very familiar with it. But, that doesn't mean that some casual fans can't appreciate them as much (or even more) than a player.

Same for music. At least IMO. :wink:

Can someone who plays a sport - say football - appreciate the subtle parts of the game that a casual fan might miss? Probably, because he is very familiar with it. But, that doesn't mean that some casual fans can't appreciate them as much (or even more) than a player.

Same for music. At least IMO. :wink:

CFB- I totally agree with you. I don't think there is a definitive yes or no answer to this question though. There's no doubt in my mind that a Dream Theater fan is capable of appreciating their work. (your avatar) On the other side of that, I am a huge DT fan and have played their music for my friends. However, DT's body of music is just too much for most of my friends. They just can't seem to handle it. I think after the 3rd change in tempo, most of them get lost. Forget about having them listen to something like Porcupine Tree or any other prog band. Not that I enjoy it more, I just think that musicians/guitarists are wired differently. As NoteBoat pointed out, maybe its an acquired taste. I dunno. All I know is that, for me, its a prety cool thing to explore. Thanks for giving me your input!!!

As far as the football thing goes...I've never had a sport move me, like music can/does. At least not football. Hockey has come close though. :wink: (yes, I do play hockey)

Edit...Sorry CFB...I just took another look at your avatar (young Gilmour..not John Petrucci) Man, they look alike!!!

People who are not musicans are very easily impressed. But, really good musicians can recognize the cliche's and cop outs. Like you listen to a guitarist who isn't very good playing lead. You hear him tap into a melody and develope it for a few seconds, but just when things start to get intresting he will fall back on some safe stock runs hes been doing for years, the good people hear that and are dissapointed, while non-musicians are just amazed that it sounds like music.

The reason most average people can't appriciate really great inventive music is because they want that familiar sound their favorite pop artist (and the 1000 people before him) all give. The simple, safe, and boring music.

If your not a musician you might hear some tension and think that he "made a mistake" and then when it resolves somewhere new you think "oh now hes got it again" not realizing that the awsome resolution would not have been possible without the tension.

I know as a guitarist that I listen to music differently. When I first started I spent years copying my favorite songs. I didn't learn by tab or books, I just played songs over and over (and over) again. I would try to copy the tiniest nuance to a guitar solo.

The funny part is, I learned to play hundreds of songs but did not know the lyrics to any of them. :roll:

That kinda bothered me. I realized I was too focused on the guitar only. I think I can isolate the guitar and only hear it from copying guitar so much. But when I realized this I tried to step back and hear the whole song. It is difficult for me to do this, seems like I am almost programmed to hear the guitar.

But musicians are better listeners for sure.

We definitly hear things differently than others.

Give you an example, I'm a huge, massive, Billy Joel fan. I started listening to him when I was nine, started playing guitar when I was 15 or so. When I went back and listened to him after a year or so of playing, I realized how much cool guitar music is in his songs, stuff I'd never noticed before. I still have that happen to me, I'll put on something I havn't heard in years and I'll start noticing all the guitar parts I never did before.

Definilty agree with you Dneck. A lot of my friends tell me how much they love the song Freebird. And I love the song, but hate the solo at the end. It's extremly repetitive and boring to me, and I know that he is just using the common licks and doing them over and over - my friends don't know that, they think its great improvisation.

Definilty agree with you Dneck. A lot of my friends tell me how much they love the song Freebird. And I love the song, but hate the solo at the end. It's extremly repetitive and boring to me, and I know that he is just using the common licks and doing them over and over - my friends don't know that, they think its great improvisation.

That could mean you listen better. Or it could mean you like different solos better. I think some dudes in the Beatles played some guitar themselves and obviously they liked it. Personally I'm not sure if I listen differently, as long as it sounds like a Fjord I'm happy.

Arjen I think you definetly listen differently, most people can't even handle listening to a song without words, because that is the only thing they listen too. You hear a 12 bar blue's and think "oh a 12 bar blues" but non-musicains just hear music. I think everyone is allowed to have a favorite band and no-one can tell you what you enjoy listening to.

But that doesn't mean their can't be "bad" muisic. It's like a painting how can you compare an impressionist painting to abstract art. Well you can't but that doesn't mean you can't look at the drawing of a 4th grader and think "hmm needs a little work."

Also George Harrison's lead guitar is nothing like the free bird solo, he never messed around and took long solo's. He always played the exact right thing to play at that time, nothing more.

We definitly hear things differently than others.

Give you an example, I'm a huge, massive, Billy Joel fan. I started listening to him when I was nine, started playing guitar when I was 15 or so. When I went back and listened to him after a year or so of playing, I realized how much cool guitar music is in his songs, stuff I'd never noticed before. I still have that happen to me, I'll put on something I havn't heard in years and I'll start noticing all the guitar parts I never did before.

Definilty agree with you Dneck. A lot of my friends tell me how much they love the song Freebird. And I love the song, but hate the solo at the end. It's extremly repetitive and boring to me, and I know that he is just using the common licks and doing them over and over - my friends don't know that, they think its great improvisation.

You don't have to like "Freebird" , plenty of others do . If you think the solos are cliches then it might be because they have been listened to for 30+ years . At the time of its release Freebird was a bit of an anomaly . It didn't fit the 3 minute time limit that record companies liked to see and Lynyrd Skynyrd's members had to fight to keep it at its length . Some ideas take more than 3 minutes . I read your opinion , this is mine .

Err no offense but there are not 8 minutes worth of "ideas" in freebird, it defiently repeats itself. Don't get me wrong I think its pretty cool, but you could fit more "ideas" into a 3 minute song then the longest reocorded version of freebird.

Only reason I responded is becasuse you said "ideas"

No offense taken , but even 3 minute songs repeat themselves - that's music . How many songs do you know that don't repeat the same melody for verse 1 , 2 , 3 etc. ... and then there's the chorus . Alot of songs , blues songs especially , will repeat the same exact lyric twice in a row in every verse . I don't know what type of music you prefer , but I guarantee it has repetition . The bottom line is some of us like to listen to long guitar solos and yes , even play them from time to time . If that's not your bag , so be it .