Page 1 of 2
#1
Ive lacked studying theory and i can tell its hampering my songwriting abilities, i was just wondering, quite simply, that the next step ive decided to take is learning the notes across the fretboard....

can anyone enlighten me as to whether this actually helped them personally, i think it will and im going with it anyway, just want to know what learning this opens up?
#3
i want to write prog, blues, rock, a touch of gilmour a touch of page a touch of may. shredding may have been cool in '84 but doesnt interest me a jot......

melodic solo's with some fast runs between. im learning scales i just thought knowing the note all over would be a good help.
#5
Does learning the alphabet help you learn English?

The thing you need to do to out this into perspective is to simply forget about the guitar for a moment and think about what your core goal is, which is to make music. Music is a language, it just uses sounds instead of letters...those notes are your alphabet.

It's perfectly possible to learn large portions of a language by rote memorisation. We can learn phrases and words parrot fashion and whilst we may know the ultimate meaning we won't necessarily understand why the phrase means what it does, or how to use the words it contains in a different context. That's the language equivalent of learning from tabs and only paying attention to the mechanics of playing the guitar, the physical actions.

Theory is how we understand music, it's your grammar...but you can't do anything with it until you first know the alphabet.
Actually called Mark!

Quote by TNfootballfan62
People with a duck for their avatar always give good advice.

...it's a seagull

Quote by Dave_Mc
i wanna see a clip of a recto buying some groceries.


stuffmycatswatchontv.tumblr.com
#6
Quote by steven seagull
Does learning the alphabet help you learn English?

The thing you need to do to out this into perspective is to simply forget about the guitar for a moment and think about what your core goal is, which is to make music. Music is a language, it just uses sounds instead of letters...those notes are your alphabet.

It's perfectly possible to learn large portions of a language by rote memorisation. We can learn phrases and words parrot fashion and whilst we may know the ultimate meaning we won't necessarily understand why the phrase means what it does, or how to use the words it contains in a different context. That's the language equivalent of learning from tabs and only paying attention to the mechanics of playing the guitar, the physical actions.

Theory is how we understand music, it's your grammar...but you can't do anything with it until you first know the alphabet.


Ae fjfsd gaweaoa nadago gskff ohsdfos.

Oh, I was improvising - I guess it doesn't work out as well as when I do it on an actual instrument, taking into account the complete lack of education in musical theory. I do not understand why you think language is analogous to music.
#7
YES.

Don't try to just memorize the notes on the fretboard... it will seem pointless. Learn your scales and modes but put them to practical use as you're learning. Practice the C Major scale then write some riffs and leads using that scale. Practice another scale and do the same thing. Over time you'll have more and more tools to use. Just memorizing things and letting them collect dust in your brain until you forget them won't be useful.
#8
Quote by Vanhalaf
Ae fjfsd gaweaoa nadago gskff ohsdfos.

Oh, I was improvising

Question: when you type or talk, do you have to stop every so often to think about the next word? I doubt it. You know the words of the English language well enough to communicate without thinking about it.

It's the same thing here. You need to know music, specifically the notes of the guitar fretboard and the sound of the intervals, well enough to communicate in music without thinking.

I guess it doesn't work out as well as when I do it on an actual instrument, taking into account the complete lack of education in musical theory. I do not understand why you think language is analogous to music.

Because music is a language! It's the language of sound!
#10
Yes. It helps unbelievably. But dont just sit and memorize the fret board. Learn what notes make up all the chords and scales you play, and through this process you will not only learn all the notes on your instrument but also how they relate to on another. I believe someone else said this but im reiterating because its important
#12
See, i've never learned the intracacies of music theory and I can jam perfectly with my friend who has taken lessons and theory for fifteen years. I'm not saying that its helped or hindered me. I just think it'd be interesting to compare the two in their abilities.
#13
I've tried to learn the fretboard for years, but for some reason the names of notes and frets just doesn't stick. Any tips for how to memorize the fretboard?
#14
Quote by grim1
I've tried to learn the fretboard for years, but for some reason the names of notes and frets just doesn't stick. Any tips for how to memorize the fretboard?

Make yourself need the knowledge. Maybe learn stuff from sheet music?

But if you don't need it, you don't need it. At some point, though, you might need it and then you will regret never learning it.

Maybe you just don't practice hard enough. Spend more time on each note/group of notes/string/whatever.
Last edited by Elintasokas at Sep 11, 2014,
#15
I would say knowing scales is more important than the name of the note. I very rarely know the name of the note I play. But, I do know that it is, for example, the 4th of a Bmaj scale. That gets me where I need to be.
If you learn where the intervals in your scale are, they transfer all over the neck. Note names do not.
#16
You actually need to know the name of the note you're playing when you're trying to communicate to other people what you're playing. It's easier to share what you're playing by saying I'm playing -blah blah- than for you to just play it.
#17
I find the low E, or both Es I guess, and the A string, are very important, because that's two main chord grip root strings. The B I find is next most important, because that is also a root for a grip position, and lastly the D string, because that's the root for that grip position for Maj7 and m7 grips.

So, that's helpful for switching between grips, and also knowing what chord is what chord. I mean if someone says play A - D - E, it's good to be able to do that, but it's also good to be able to be playing an open A chord, and then go up and play the high A grip, up around the 10th fret. So, for me, it is useful for the big jumps. Most of the time, I can never think what the note names are, and it never enters my mind, and if I want to tell someone what chord I'm playing, I have to look at it and figure it out still. It's not present in my mind when I play, but every once in a while, I do use it.

I still don't know the whole fretboard off by heart, but I can always find any note name quickly enough off of a reference of the ones I do know perfectly well. I think if I knew them better, it might be a bit more of an advantage, but it's not much of a big deal to me.

You might as well learn them though. It certainly can't hurt.
#18
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Question: when you type or talk, do you have to stop every so often to think about the next word? I doubt it. You know the words of the English language well enough to communicate without thinking about it.

It's the same thing here. You need to know music, specifically the notes of the guitar fretboard and the sound of the intervals, well enough to communicate in music without thinking.


Because music is a language! It's the language of sound!


Language has no merit and utility if not understood, meaning has to be assigned. Music is easily appreciated without. Similarly, no education is of necessity to create music - you can argue for familiarity at best.
#19
Quote by Elintasokas
But to be honest, there's more to sound than just music.

Music is defined as organized sound. So, non-organized sound would be non-musical.

Quote by Vanhalaf
Language has no merit and utility if not understood, meaning has to be assigned. Music is easily appreciated without. Similarly, no education is of necessity to create music - you can argue for familiarity at best.

Ok. /sigh


Here's the point.


Here's your head (down here).


The point went over your head.
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Sep 11, 2014,
#23
knowing the fretboard is only important if you WANT to know what your doing..there are many guitar players that have no idea what they are doing .. but they can play - BUT - within those limits..if at some point you find yourself with musicians that know theory/harmony etc and you want to communicate with them musically.."ok guys..it sounds like this..from the 6th fret I think." or you could say - ok its Bbmaj7 to Gmi9 with a V9 bII13 turnaround..

now time is going to pass -- so if you learn the fretboard and perhaps some theory- next year at this time you may REALLY understand the notes and positions of Bbma7..OR you will be just about where you are...which at some point becomes very frustrating and limited..

play well

wolf
#24
Quote by jazz_rock_feel
By some (specifically one).

#upto

It's a fairly common definition. I'm sure you've heard it before.

Quote by captainsnazz
no it isn't
music is sound-based art and the organisation or non-organisation of it is irrelevant to its definition

I'm not sure you're understanding what is meant by organization here...

I don't meant writing notes or putting chords together. I mean, you are planning it in some way, whether that means composing a complex opera or just splicing together weird noises, it is still "planned" in some fashion. Therefore, it is organized in that manner.
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Sep 11, 2014,
#25
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
I'm not sure you're understanding what is meant by organization here...

I don't meant writing notes or putting chords together. I mean, you are planning it in some way, whether that means composing a complex opera or just splicing together weird noises, it is still "planned" in some fashion. Therefore, it is organized in that manner.

i know what you meant and you're still not right
there is plenty of music that does not adhere to this definition and plenty that depends on breaking it entirely
#26
Quote by captainsnazz
i know what you meant and you're still not right
there is plenty of music that does not adhere to this definition and plenty that depends on breaking it entirely

If you say so. I'm quite sure there is some planning involved. But whatever.
#28
Quote by captainsnazz
planning the composition of a piece does not necessarily entail organising the resulting sounds themselves

I never said it did. When did I even imply that?
#29
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
I never said it did. When did I even imply that?

you said: "music is organised sound"
i said: "no it isn't there is music that involves non-organised sound"
you said: "i'm sure there is planning involved in this music"

either you were implying that planning in music involves the organisation of the sounds involved or it was a completely out of the blue comment
#30
Quote by captainsnazz
you said: "music is organised sound"
i said: "no it isn't there is music that involves non-organised sound"
you said: "i'm sure there is planning involved in this music"

either you were implying that planning in music involves the organisation of the sounds involved or it was a completely out of the blue comment

Ok, whatever. You misunderstood me massively. But, anyway, I think you get what I mean now.
#32
Quote by captainsnazz
i always understood what you meant and you're as wrong now as you were eleven posts ago

broaden your horizons

/sigh

Why do I even bother? Having a conversation with you is liking banging one's head against a wall.
#33
Nobody plans out the sounds of traffic, crowded rooms, or construction yards, but those situations are musical.There are sounds (pitched or otherwise), and those sounds have duration. There are moments of silence and non-silence.

Music doesn't have to be organized or planned; Music is not necessarily a thing that is meaningfully created.

It simply occurs when the human brain takes an interest in the interruption of silence.

Whether or the listener considers their interpretation of that interruption (not everyone finds random everyday noise musical after all, and certainly not all the time) to be "art" is the other story. Its subjective.

But as usual, the MT gang has gone completely off topic.

The only reason not to learn the notes on the fretboard is if for some reason, you believe it will make you a WORSE musician.

It can only make you better.
"There are two styles of music. Good music and bad music." -Duke Ellington

"If you really think about it, the guitar is a pointless instrument." - Robert Fripp
Last edited by Jet Penguin at Sep 11, 2014,
#34
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
/sigh

Why do I even bother? Having a conversation with you is liking banging one's head against a wall.

i think you've banged your head on enough things already
i'm not even trolling you in this thread, you're just wrong and i'm pointing it out
#35
Quote by Jet Penguin
Nobody plans out the sounds of traffic, crowded rooms, or construction yards, but those situations are musical.There are sounds (pitched or otherwise), and those sounds have duration. There are moments of silence and non-silence.

Are they musical? Really? All sound has pitch and duration, results in moments of silence and non-silence; does that truly make all sound "music"?

You can decide to play a bunch of traffic sounds (that's the planning part), in some random sequence, and that would be music. But is traffic by itself, without any planning on the part of someone, intrinsically music?

Quote by captainsnazz
i'm not even trolling you in this thread, you're just wrong and i'm pointing it out

If I'm actually wrong, prove it. Give me examples. Make an actual argument. All you've done so far is go, "You're wrong". That's what your argument up to now consists of. You've not really stated why (except in a vague manner), you've given no supporting examples, and have made no actual case.

Lay it all out in precise detail. Stop this ambiguous "middle school-esque" bullshit and actually present your argument, snazz.
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Sep 11, 2014,
#37
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Are they musical? Really?

they can be
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
All sound has pitch

no
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
and duration

maybe
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
results in moments of silence and non-silence

not necessarily
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
;

lol
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
does that truly make all sound "music"?

it's not that all sound is music, it's that all sound could be music
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
You can decide to play a bunch of traffic sounds (that's the planning part), in some random sequence, and that would be music.

missing the point
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
But is traffic by itself, without any planning on the part of someone, intrinsically music?

here's the score for a piece i composed:
Quote by I Quadruple In Size by A. Baker
go outside and listen to traffic

there you go traffic is now music


Quote by crazysam23_Atax
If I'm actually wrong, prove it. Give me examples. Make an actual argument. All you've done so far is go, "You're wrong". That's what your argument up to now consists of. You've not really stated why (except in a vague manner), you've given no supporting examples, and have made no actual case.

Lay it all out in precise detail. Stop this ambiguous "middle school-esque" bullshit and actually present your argument, snazz.

I didn't think I'd have to lay anything out in precise detail given your monumental intellect.
#38
Quote by captainsnazz
I didn't think I'd have to lay anything out in precise detail given your monumental intellect.

This is the kind of bullshit I meant. Now, make an argument. Or don't. Either way. But, if you want to be taken seriously in MT, you will. Up to you...
#39
he did make an argument

like directly above the part you quoted

you must have read it
i don't know why i feel so dry
Page 1 of 2