mirrorbestfriend said:

so he should stick to the rules of counterpoint?

but if prince dont know music teory,then tell me one thing:
how come miles davies said that prince plays piano like ordinary 60s jazz player.

thebanishedone said:

miles was using prince to get a wider audience...all jazzers know that

Ah, another "Does Prince know Music Theory?" thread!! I love these

The first thing we have to establish is that music 'theory' and traditional 'rules' (counterpoint etc.) are two different things. It's a common misunderstanding by those who are just getting into music theory. Just because you know 'theory' doesn't mean you can't break the rules. 'Theory' is nothing more than having a knowledge and understanding of the way sound works, in particular the harmonic language of music.

In this regard, Prince definately knows his theory. Prince has written and played stuff in just about every key and every modal tonality possible. There are also many bootlegs of rehearsals where he explains to the band what he wants by using traditional musical language. The idea that someone could produce, compose and play all the instruments on all those albums without picking up a thing or about theory along the way is just absurd.

toejam said:

Thanx for that, I was slowly losing my patience with this thread

mirrorbestfriend said:

.....
You know you're very annoying and you condemning Prince for his talent is being to take a fucking toll on me . And judging by the way you talk about yourself you seem to be obessed with yourself also.

5 words

Go away you egotistical loser

toejam said:

Well actually it's a another tried guitar thread aimed to have discussion about his playing, but pretty much just like ALL guitar threads on this site they either turned into what this thread has, people getting off topic and when the discussion of scales come up they start arguing about his knowledge of theory; or like the last one when technical ability comes up again people get off-topic again offering nothing to the thread talk about how he uses emotion and doesnt have to play 100 mph like vai, satriani, etc all in all the threads end up off-topic and irrelevant to what the original poster wanted to discuss. So can we talk about some guitar, or you guys gonna keep arguing over some bs that's been talked to death?

toejam said:

u dont know theory so what u say aint valid

mirrorbestfriend said:

Im sorry..but that is BULLSHIT !
everybody you just mentioned including Miles have agknowledged his Genius !
hendrix didnt read or write music either..he's 2nd rate too correct..?
stop the Bullshit please...

mirrorbestfriend said:

prettymansson said:

THANK YOU I just wish this Negro can get that through his thick ass cranium already

Why the fuck are y'all taking this shit seriously?!?
mirror is just a troll, who's been hanging around here for some time now. Just take anything he says as a joke and you'll be fine

Also, thebanishedone, for the 1000th time... PRINCE CAN'T READ MUSIC. PRINCE DOESN'T KNOW MUSIC THEORY.

mirrorbestfriend said:

That's just the beauty of art - you can afford to let people do things their own way, instead of just doing it the way others have done it before. The result, at best, will be great art - and at worst, less great art. That's all.

In other, more functional areas (baker, dentist, pilot, construction worker, whatever) there is usually a RISK involved with someone not doing things by the book. So there, the rules must be followed. In music, they needn't be. Simple as that.

kdj997 said:

No offence, but you don't really know what you're talking about here.

Theoretical knowledge (in any field!) and creativity are two separate things. You can be extremely creative without knowing any theory; you can be very well-educated but not creative at all; OR they can co-exist just fine within the same person.

A painter knows, theoretically, that mixing blue and yellow makes green. Would you consider him more creative if he didn't know that?

Is a writer less creative if he knows how to spell?

Kstyles00 said:

Whether you can read music or not, doesn't have anything to do with it, really. Reading is just ONE way to absorb information, there are always alternatives.
Even if Prince could read, he would still have to be able to hear the notes to play them.

To play by EAR, play by EMOTION, and to READ music are not something you must choose between.
All three of them can function simultaneously, or in any combination.
[Edited 1/5/08 3:37am]

mirrorbestfriend said:

I don't agree with you. I think lots of musicians (including the names you mention!) WOULD actually consider Prince a genius.

Although personally, I think it's a little silly. Prince is of course a wonderful artist and musician, let's just leave it at that.
I don't see the need to try and define what a "musical genius" is, and what you must (or must not) know to qualify.

johnnyreeferseed said:

You think so?

I would say he probably knows a little bit - definitely more than the average rock artist, but WAY less than someone like, say, Frank Zappa or Stevie Wonder. (And they don't know it all either...)

johnnyreeferseed said:

That I absolutely agree with.

Accujack said:

What's "better" and what's "perfection"? These are all subjective matters.

Let's assume that those albums did in fact turn out EXACTLY the way Prince intended them to.
Then we could say that having more theoretical knowledge wouldn't have improved his result.
He knew all he needed to know in order to make the music he wanted to make.

On the other hand, let's assume for instance that the famous "strange" chord in the chorus of "Sometimes it snows in April" in fact WASN'T intended; that Prince actually heard something else in his mind, but couldn't figure out what it was. Then you could say that the result WOULD have been better, had he possessed more knowledge. ("Better" meaning closer to his intentions)

The point is, it's all speculation. No need for it, really.

art doesnt come from a textbook, do u think a certain someone read art for dummies before being able to paint mona lisa? i dont believe in the need to study "art" its a natural talent, god given.

There si something interesting about music theory in Miles Davis' biography. He mentions a teenager he met on the streets of NY who plays electronic percussions. He was amazed by this kid's talent. He hired him. Then th kid kept asking Miles to teachhim music theory (harmonies etc). Miles finally told the kid that if he taught him music theory he would totally kill his talent and that he would never play percussions the way he does ever again. He mentions that his ignorance was his strenght.

Dance said:

Think of music as a language; the notes are words, the phrases are sentences, the songs are stories. If you only choose the most common words and then put them together in a very predictable way, it's not very exciting to listen to. But if you take those same "everyday" words, but arrange them differently, the result can be more interesting. Or you can throw in some unusual words or expressions that you don't hear very often, to emphasize what you're trying to say.

But if you just take some random words and put them together - either because you like their individual sound, or because that's simply all you know - chances are people might not get the message you're trying to convey. If there is one...

Of course, as a listener, you have to be familiar with the language to be able to detect these nuances. To me, a person speaking Chinese would make no sense regardless of how well he expresses himself - it would all sound the same, just like many people wouldn't be able to tell, say, John Coltrane from Kenny G.

But to my ears, I feel that sometimes when Prince improvises and chooses to go outside his blues/pentatonic comfortable zone, it's obvious that he has no clear idea of where to go or what to say. Which, of course, is what makes it exciting!

I have some students that are the same way. When they improvise, their limited knowledge forces them to go outside their boundaries, and sometimes they actually come up with amazing stuff - although it's usually just by accident, they wouldn't be able to play the same thing again.

Prince deserves credit for daring to go outside of his own limits, instead of just staying in the comfort zone (like for instance, Eric Clapton or Maceo Parker). But I wouldn't say he knows what he's doing all the time...

toejam said:

This is someone who knows what's he talking about.

I would say that Prince certainly knows a little theory, but not nearly as much as people seem to think he does...
(And that's mostly because there's a lot more to know than most people realize)
[Edited 1/5/08 5:04am]

FunkyBrotha said:

Agree.

FunkyBrotha said:

Don't agree.

.
[Edited 1/5/08 7:35am]

About not reading, I read an interview with Jeff Beck and he said that he was in a plane with people from the Mahavishnu Orchestra and told to one of the guys that he felt embarassed because he didnt know how to read music and didnt have the music knowledge that jazz musicians have

Then the guy said: "you dont need to, we do" (or something like that)

Some of the greatest musicians in popular music dont have all this knowledge, but they made great art, that is loved by some of these technical musicians.

But I agree it´s not an excuse for not studying. Reading music is always useful, specially if you are a sideman, a hired musician.

How was Prince able 2 play While My Guitar Gentle Weep if he can't read music? Was this all done by ear? He was the shinny star that wonderful night. I love this thread and no nothing about theory etc.

FuNkeNsteiN said:

i know a neapolitan 6th when i see funk!
prince is musically illiterate and his music would be genius if he attended berklee school of music for 2 years
[Edited 1/5/08 10:23am]

With knowledge comes responsibility.

People tend to forget that.

pennylover said:

Yes.

As a matter of fact, I would think that very few (if ANY) of the musicians on stage that night actually knows how to read.

But does that make them less great musicians? Of course not.

RealMusician said:

yes it does.....they're not being all they can be