Thanks, everyone, for their input. Lots of interesting perspectives here. (I'll just quote a couple folks here, although each response caused me a lot of thought.) Hopefully I'm not going to get too long-winded here...

Just to clarify, my original intent was mainly to ask about the realistic level of music theory required to start playing - at least rudimentary music - on the Stick. I’m hardly adverse to the prospect of gaining better knowledge of theory - as I said, it’s one of my near-term goals. However, I view theory as a tool, rather than as an end unto itself.


That's a great first question to ask, and it also frames my perspective. My eventual primary focus would likely be composition. Although I wouldn't hate having strong performance skills on the Stick, history suggests that composition is more my forte than performance. In this role, the Stick would ideally function much like a piano, although much more portable and with its own set of expressive strengths and limitations.


I definitely agree with this, with the caveat that being able to label what you hear and think makes the composition process a heck of a lot less tedious and protracted. Going through this a few times in the past caused me to realize just how limited my theory and ear training actually are at this point. (BTW, I've always been drawn to the whole "find a piece that really moves you and find out why" analysis angle. I've run with that a couple of times, but likely need to do so more often.)

So from that perspective, more in-depth theory background (at least to the level required to write the music desired) would be better ... but perhaps not to the level of instant, intuitive recall as would be required for live improvisation (let alone at the Giant Steps level).

Having said all that, I realized a while ago - mainly caused by switching from piano to classical guitar - that there's a physical, visceral aspect of actually playing an instrument, including how the instrument feels when being played, how the tone quality emotionally resonates, etc.. (If this weren't a factor, frankly it would be easiest for me to simply create music with a DAW, a good sound library, and a notation application.) Coming back to my original question about the Stick, if consensus was that I needed to head for the mountains and spend three years in a shack with my copy of Walter Piston before even touching a Stick, I frankly would have a tough time coping with that.

Hopefully that clarifies things a bit, and much thanks again for everyone's input.

You nailed it! [emoji1303]

I have a lot of resources for learning music theory, yet I seldom take advantage of these resources. I use the Stick and Railboard to help me relax and unwind after a long day. I typically lay on my back when I play. I close my eyes and tap a random note and then go from there. Before long, my fingers are flying on the fret board and the music is filling the room.

I've learned to get the sound that I want, just by listening to what comes out of my head. No music theory is involved in this process. I would like to learn tunes that others are playing, but at this point in my life, it's more important to just unwind and have a bit of fun. The Stick and Railboard are very therapeutic. I play almost every day and it's a blast.

I also play sax, guitar, harmonica, and Roli Seaboard. I love creating sounds and use them to develop emotion in my cinematic video hobby. BTW - the new 'Ghost Busters' movie is being filmed a few doors down from one of my properties.
https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/produc ... ciresolve/
https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/ca/pro ... nemacamera

Knowing the rules, the explanations, being able to discuss, and having the ability to write down what you hear in a professional manner is handy - but at the end of the day, it's by and large a naming convention and a measurement system... having and using this knowledge is more appealing to some than others, but honestly... if you can hear it, and kind of play it then the explanation for what you are hearing and playing isn't too far away.

Have you considered taking lessons? Steve and Greg would talk a bit of theory in as you learn some tunes... Also, the Free Hands book, the Stick Book, Stickology, and the Greg Howard Songbook is loaded with useful/practical theory... and it's often the simplest things that are so useful...

not sure if I added to this thread, hope that helps.

I often wonder where talented musicians, learn how to play.
Here's an example of a violinist that has exceptional skills...
Did he learn from music theory, or was it natural talent?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITPG44d6vfU[/youtube]

I'll re-phrase the question.
How much of his talent is 'natural' vs music theory?

Well, theory alone doesn't teach you how to play anything - and violin has some extremely specific things going on there, like any instrument so that's a no to theory alone. How to hold the bow, bowing, vibrato, slurs, etc That stuff comes with and from a lot of instruction and practice. Sure there's the exception to the rule, but it's rare... I guess it depends on how you define theory/talent...

Maybe talent is the drive to persevere through the challenges presented by the instrument... Maybe theory is simply the way to explain what it is you play verbal and written...

I'm willing to bet that particular fellow has spent an equal amount of time honing all attributes required to learn that particular piece of music. From ears, to reading, to scales to arpeggios (chords) to the progressions, to the arrangement, rhythm, dynamics, and probably the history of the piece and it's author as well as just the mechanics of generating a good tone, projection, etc etc...

Anyways, back to the original topic - I am definitely of the opinion that knowledge is not a bad thing, learn whatever you can - it certainly won't hurt your playing...

Agreed...

Several famous and successful musicians have no formal study of music theory, and don't know any one of the names for the things that they have intuitively internalized. That used to be me, as a young lad, before I finally went to music school to learn names for things.

But I also discovered at school that I had not independently rediscovered 800 years or so of music theory on my own. I may have re-invented a wheel or two, but there was a vast internal combustion engine of music I knew nothing about. I didn't even know what I didn't know.

Circle of fifths, for example. And how to harmonize 4-part stuff, and how modes work. Lots of stuff about studio engineering, as well.

As Eddie Van Halen, who can name the notes of his guitar and knows what major and minor is, and that's about it (and who ALSO had years of piano lessons when he was a kid, and whose dad was a professional musician), says that's it's green on both sides of the street: learn theory or don't. Just rock it out (paraphrasing).

As for Stick, the isomorphic (I forgot the fancy word for the chord patterns are the same everywhere) design of the frets means that you can just do patterns, even if you don't know what the names of them are.

A ninth chord sounds the same whether I know what to call it or not, or just think of it as "triples" stacked on each other.

The only entry requirement to learning Stick, in my humble opinion, is having a Stick, and keep Sticking with it. Lessons are a great idea; musical theory knowledge certainly helps a lot. Nothing is "required" other than you and a Stick. But a lot of things help!