Theory vs feel

[Kepa]

I don't know whether this topic has been brought up or not, but I thought this forum could use a bit of controversy and some more traffic and posts.

I will reserve my personal opinion on this matter for now, but this is the discussion topic:

"In a songwriting situation, which do you feel is more necessary to be able to write a good song?"

Please expound upon your position. For now, if you feel they are not mutually exclusive, please just choose a side, or go back and forth, later on we can all agree, for now lets get some debates going!. I'll post a poll as well.

*edit*
Oh, and if nothing gets going, then... bleh

 

[stratosaurus]

I'll start it, even if I've got it wrong....
I don't think theory in songwriting goes any further than laying out a format, ie...verse/chorus...verse/verse/chorus...etc
Good songwriting comes from the heart, to touch a heart....comes from emotion to provoke or evoke an emotion....comes from the mind to engage other minds. A good song will always evoke a response...love,hate, happiness, sorrow,joy....etc. Some songs come from thoughts & provoke other to think.
Any good song(or bad) will produce a response. There is no way to write a song, good or bad without "feel".
I look at theory as just a technicality that actually has nothing to do with "Good" songwriting. It's just a tool for structuring the "formal" layout of a song, but, in the end.....there is no better tool to structure a song with, than the heart.
enough for now....am I talking about the right thing?

 

[Kepa]

That was great, and a good start to the topic, I hope other people will pick up on it

 

[Musician]

Well, no matter what a piece of music is, the theory is just the writing down part, so any written down piece of music has theory, in that it has a key, it has notes, it has clefs, staves, sharps, flats etc etc.

But a GOOD song HAS to have feel.

So, to sum up, there can be no written music without theory but there can be no good music without feel.

 

[Kepa]

Well, no matter what a piece of music is, the theory is just the writing down part, so any written down piece of music has theory, in that it has a key, it has notes, it has clefs, staves, sharps, flats etc etc.

But a GOOD song HAS to have feel.

So, to sum up, there can be no written music without theory but there can be no good music without feel.

ugh, while your post is good, it misses the point of this thread. This is a means to start a friendly debate. Get this forum active.

There are two positions, no inbetween, and are about being in a songwriting position. Do you think it is more necessary to have knowledge of theory (scales, chord construction, cadences, counter point etc etc), or just feel (no knowledge of theory, just playing what ever and it sounding good). Just which is more necessary and then expound.

In my opinion (for sake of playing devils advocate) I think theory is more necessary to write a good song than feel. The main reason for this is because theory tells us what WILL sound good. Knowing what will sound good and what wont sound good allows you to choose notes effectively and gives you a range of compositional skills to take advantage of. Not only can you make a song sound good with theory, you can make it sound interesting. Adding tasteful dissonances here and there, using pitch axis, different inversions of chords. Counterpoint is another compositional tool that can make a simple melody so much more interesting. The ability to use a motif in a song in an interesting way, I say interesting because there are many ways to use a motif, you can flip it, reverse it, take it apart.
Theory provides all these options, and knowledge of how to use them is key to making an good song. Feel only gets you so far.

 

[stratosaurus]

In my opinion (for sake of playing devils advocate) I think theory is more necessary to write a good song than feel. The main reason for this is because theory tells us what WILL sound good. Knowing what will sound good and what wont sound good allows you to choose notes effectively and gives you a range of compositional skills to take advantage of. Not only can you make a song sound good with theory, you can make it sound interesting. Adding tasteful dissonances here and there, using pitch axis, different inversions of chords. Counterpoint is another compositional tool that can make a simple melody so much more interesting. The ability to use a motif in a song in an interesting way, I say interesting because there are many ways to use a motif, you can flip it, reverse it, take it apart.
Theory provides all these options, and knowledge of how to use them is key to making an good song. Feel only gets you so far.

That's all true...too a point. Many players, such as myself, know what sounds good through experience, without any knowledge of theory, composition, counterpoint, pich axis, etc. I think emotion can be a much more overwhelming, Knowledge of theory, composition, scales,arpeggios, etc can be very impressive, but without emotion, it can become a more or less just a mechanical exercise in skill, no matter how you flip it, reverse it, invert it......
Adding a tastefull dissonance here & there is good, but adding a few soulful, heartfelt notes will say a whole lot more
Some Jazz players are the epitamy of theory & knowledge, yet they are the pits when it comes to emotion. I find their skills to be amazing, but it's like something's missing. Two of my favorite guitarist are Eric Johnson & Steve Morse. I love to watch those guys, but don't care for their CD's, but Dave Gilmour or SRV...they got EMOTION. I guess I would define theory as being for the eyes & brain and 'Feel/emotion' as being for the ear, heart, eyes & brain. Emotion can make theory unnecessary, but theory falls short without emotion.
All skill, no feel, just doesn't go far.

 

[Laserman]

Hey all,

Songwriting? It's all feel. Theory is very important AFTER feeling comes in. Music is emotion set to theory. Theory is the vehicle, emotion is the driver. You need both but feeling has to come first and be the most important element. Look at Yngwie Malmsteen. His theory is awesome but his music lacks feeling. It's so technical that only musician's really dig it. The normal guy on the street doesn't care a whole lot for techincal-theorectical expertise if the song does't strike a nerve within his/Her soul.

Barry

 

[Kepa]

Feel, in order to write something with feel, you must first feel something, but with theory, you can create a feel. With theory, you can inspire many different feelings in one song, and know how to recreate them. Theory creates feel. Therefore theory is more important in a songwriting position =]

(is anyone else going to help?)

 

[Wolc]

Feel is more important then theory I'd say..
Theory never gives a song any sould, only feel does..
That's my five cents.. Anyone else?

 

[yod]

Unless your intended audience is musicians only, PASSION is the main ingredient of any song. A song without passion is like a prayer without God.

There have been countless "hit" songs written by people who don't know how to play an instrument...and countless flops by impeccable musicians.

 

[Musician]

ugh, while your post is good, it misses the point of this thread. This is a means to start a friendly debate. Get this forum active.

There are two positions, no inbetween, and are about being in a songwriting position. Do you think it is more necessary to have knowledge of theory (scales, chord construction, cadences, counter point etc etc), or just feel (no knowledge of theory, just playing what ever and it sounding good). Just which is more necessary and then expound.

In my opinion (for sake of playing devils advocate) I think theory is more necessary to write a good song than feel. The main reason for this is because theory tells us what WILL sound good. Knowing what will sound good and what wont sound good allows you to choose notes effectively and gives you a range of compositional skills to take advantage of. Not only can you make a song sound good with theory, you can make it sound interesting. Adding tasteful dissonances here and there, using pitch axis, different inversions of chords. Counterpoint is another compositional tool that can make a simple melody so much more interesting. The ability to use a motif in a song in an interesting way, I say interesting because there are many ways to use a motif, you can flip it, reverse it, take it apart.
Theory provides all these options, and knowledge of how to use them is key to making an good song. Feel only gets you so far.

Well, is it's an either/or debate then I'm afraid I cannot take part.

 

[Kepa]

Well, is it's an either/or debate then I'm afraid I cannot take part.

DUDE! It's for fun!!!!!!!
Simply to get posts!
Don't take it seriously!

AND WHY has no one taken my side!

Oh and the comment about countless hits being made by not very knowledgable musicians and countless flops being made by very knowledgable musicians. It goes vice versa.

When you listen to a song, you are listening to it with your own feel. Thus feel when writing a song is less necessary than theory. A song when reduced to notes is theory, there is no recognizable feel, and thus feel can be reproduced with: theory. Theory creates feel, you want to write a sad song, you choose a minor key. You want a dark presence in the song, use a diminished chord. Happy, major. And everything in between. Theory creates feel.

(let me re-iterate that this is for fun, so feel free to try and prove that theory is more necessary, and I'll switch sides =])

 

[Musician]

DUDE! It's for fun!!!!!!!
Simply to get posts!
Don't take it seriously!

AND WHY has no one taken my side!

Oh and the comment about countless hits being made by not very knowledgable musicians and countless flops being made by very knowledgable musicians. It goes vice versa.

When you listen to a song, you are listening to it with your own feel. Thus feel when writing a song is less necessary than theory. A song when reduced to notes is theory, there is no recognizable feel, and thus feel can be reproduced with: theory. Theory creates feel, you want to write a sad song, you choose a minor key. You want a dark presence in the song, use a diminished chord. Happy, major. And everything in between. Theory creates feel.

(let me re-iterate that this is for fun, so feel free to try and prove that theory is more necessary, and I'll switch sides =])

It's not a case of proving that theory is more necessary, theory just IS!

Let me see if I can think of an analogy.

Um, how about I ask you what is more necessary to make a good person, a brain or a conscience?

Obviously a conscience is necessary to make a good person, but a brain is necessary to make any kind of person, good or bad. Without the brain you have no person, full stop!

Even improvised music has to have theory. Say you improvise a nice little chord sequence with a melody that you're really quite proud of. Someone asks you to play it back to them. As soon as you play it, it has a key, it has a time signature, it has notes and chords. Whether you like it or not, even whether you understand them or not, the piece of music has theory!!

As soon as anyone plays or sings any note, theory exists. A non-musician play a random note on a piano - he doesn't know what he is playing. Some one who knows comes along and says "That's the F above middle C" - this is what we call music theory. Even though the non-musician didn't know it, the theory was still there.

So, as it is impossible to have any kind of music without theory, the debate is illogical.

Sorry.

 

[Deamiter]

Theory is, without a doubt, the most important part of songwriting. And by theory, I would not exclude those with no formal theory. All artists have passion. All artists are trying to express an inner feeling or idea in their art form - be it writing, visual arts, or music. Very few artists go into art for the money (and those that do very rarely succeed). They go into art for the passion, however it is only those that use theory, whether it's learned from listening to other artists (copying chords, riffs, technique etc...) or by going to a theory class.

I contend that theory is not equal (or even comperable) to skill. Of COURSE there are many extremely skilled (and talented) jazz musicians! And OF COURSE the really great ones have skill, theory AND passion. However, there are many MANY more failed musicians who had the passion, but never developed their theory. In some of the jazz festivals in my area (using Jazz as an example as it is so dependant on theory) there are DOZENS of 'bad' musicians who are very passionate AND very skilled at their instruments! It is not the passion that makes a good artist - though of course passion is necessary. It is the theory - the ability to put together the right changes, to solo in the right key, and the wrong key at the right time - that makes a Jazz musician great.

You can go ANYWHERE to find passionate artists. Simply stop at a local club when some unknown band is opening for a more well known artist. Those with theory are the ones who become LOCALLY famous, even if the popular music industry doesn't always pick the good musicians (instead, they go for an image/sound that will make the most money). Those, like Metallica that really do have the theory skills to make them great (VERY few groups have half the theory necessary to play with a full symphony!), are the ones that BECOME great.

 

[yod]

Blues was created by people who broke with "theory" of their day. Same with every new style that has come along throughout time.

Passion! ...that's all that counts.

Yeah, notes must have some kind of relation to each other but that isn't necessarily theory.

Was the question which is most important? Most important for what?


Theory without passion is meaningless

Passion without theory is chaos.

 

[Musician]

Blues was created by people who broke with "theory" of their day. Same with every new style that has come along throughout time.

No no no!! You're confusing theory with tradition. When you create a new style, you simply create new theory to go along with it! Theory is simply how the sounds are explained in such a way that they can be repeated. You make your jazz trumpet make a new sound that no one's ever heard before - that's the music. Then you find a symbol or a word to describe it so that people can reproduce it. That's the theory. It's not static - it evolves.

The shortest note used to be the minim - did you know that? From the same root as the word "minimal". Renaissance musicians had the minim, the semi-breve and the breve as their tools. The crotchet, quaver, semi-quaver, demi-semi-quaver and hemi-demi-semi-quaver have all evolved over the last hundred years as composers required shorter and shorter notes.

Yeah, notes must have some kind of relation to each other but that isn't necessarily theory.

That's exactly what theory is! As soon as a child starts their first piano lesson and learns that this note is middle C and the one above it is D, they are learning music theory.

 

[Kepa]

It's not a case of proving that theory is more necessary, theory just IS!

Let me see if I can think of an analogy.

Um, how about I ask you what is more necessary to make a good person, a brain or a conscience?

Obviously a conscience is necessary to make a good person, but a brain is necessary to make any kind of person, good or bad. Without the brain you have no person, full stop!

Even improvised music has to have theory. Say you improvise a nice little chord sequence with a melody that you're really quite proud of. Someone asks you to play it back to them. As soon as you play it, it has a key, it has a time signature, it has notes and chords. Whether you like it or not, even whether you understand them or not, the piece of music has theory!!

As soon as anyone plays or sings any note, theory exists. A non-musician play a random note on a piano - he doesn't know what he is playing. Some one who knows comes along and says "That's the F above middle C" - this is what we call music theory. Even though the non-musician didn't know it, the theory was still there.

So, as it is impossible to have any kind of music without theory, the debate is illogical.

Sorry.

Yes I know theory just "is", everything musical relates to theory and IS essentially theory. But the original question and point of debate is whether it is more necessary to have a knowledge of theory vs feel. Theory is, theory will always be no matter how you write a song, but knowledge of theory lets you command it. It opens up whole new doors and lets you KNOW, what you're doing. You may have a feeling, but if you don't know how to express that feeling, which a knowledge of theory allows you to do, then what's the point? You can fumble around a progression for weeks at a time, forget what you were writing about, and move on, or you can write what you know you want to write.

 

[Nico]

i think one has to look @ this debate by considering all else equal, except theory and feel. Now, I'm not a muscian, but I am a visual artist, so I'm going to step out and approach the discussion from that angle, since I know it a bit better. If there were 2 painters, assuming skill was =, and one painted from the heart, the other from theory, I would be inclined to say that the one who paints according to how he feels is the "better" artist, the other is simply an artisan. The 2nd painter, the artisan, may be able to identically reproduce a Rembrandt; but that's just mimicry (sp?). The 1st artist able to translate his own personal visions, thoughts, and emotions into a visual language that become unique and creative, therefore creating art. And this does suppose that both are = in talent.

 

[Kepa]

I don't know how to take that post... but I will say that, the point was to take a side and defend as such. But seeing as no one wants to do that, we might as well call it off.

Everyone will agree that a person with a knowledge of theory and compositional skills who has a passion for the song he or she is writing, will fair off better than just one or the other.

 

[JahRawks]

lol, I don't have enough patience to read all the answers, but I think that songwriting should have a little of both, though mostly theory, but a little feel should be thrown in, because feel is what makes things original.