›

Bought this book

What's Hot
Phil_aka_PipPhil_aka_Pip Frets: 9794
in Theory

Not sure I'm liking it that much. He's so dead keen on his little circles, and I can see a passing resemblance between his patterns of dots round the edges to the structure of scales within an octave but to me a scale structure is a lot more obvious than trying to make an analogue if a circle with dots around the edge.

Has anyone else tried this book? Should I persevere with it? So far, it doesn't seem to be helping ...

"Working" software has only unobserved bugs. (Parroty Error: Pieces of Nine! Pieces of Nine!)
Seriously: If you value it, take/fetch it yourself
0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom

Comments

  • LestratcasterLestratcaster Frets: 1083
    What is it you're trying to learn about? Scales?

    Personally I have always been recommended the AB Guide to Music Theory or the London College of Music handbooks. But as always with theory always apply it to said instrument you're playing, otherwise it will never make sense.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • bingefellerbingefeller Frets: 5723
    It looks like it over complicates learning scales, I'm not sure where to begin with it!  

    Are you looking for an esoteric method?  
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • vizviz Frets: 10681
    The best two models for visualising how music works are, imo, the piano keyboard, and the musical staff system. Everything stems from those two views; nothing else is needed, though the Circle of 5ths provides a good complementary view.
    Roland said: Scales are primarily a tool for categorising knowledge, not a rule for what can or cannot be played.
    Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • Phil_aka_PipPhil_aka_Pip Frets: 9794
    I like to think I already understand scale theory. I was attracted by the notion of a "Mathematical" approach, and wondered if the book would show me something I hadn't seen before. I'm disappointed.
    "Working" software has only unobserved bugs. (Parroty Error: Pieces of Nine! Pieces of Nine!)
    Seriously: If you value it, take/fetch it yourself
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • bingefellerbingefeller Frets: 5723
    I like to think I already understand scale theory. I was attracted by the notion of a "Mathematical" approach, and wondered if the book would show me something I hadn't seen before. I'm disappointed.
    You could take a look at Pat Martino, who views the guitar in quite a unique way and compares it directly to a piano, which sort of carries on from what Viz just said.

    This explains his method pretty well.  http://www.mtosmt.org/issues/mto.06.12.1/mto.06.12.1.capuzzo.pdf
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • Phil_aka_PipPhil_aka_Pip Frets: 9794
    @bingefeller ; wis for something interesting that I don't have time to read now but will later!
    "Working" software has only unobserved bugs. (Parroty Error: Pieces of Nine! Pieces of Nine!)
    Seriously: If you value it, take/fetch it yourself
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • vizviz Frets: 10681
    By the way, once you’ve exhausted all the maths around notes, try the maths around tuning systems!
    Roland said: Scales are primarily a tool for categorising knowledge, not a rule for what can or cannot be played.
    Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
Sign In or Register to comment.