Only for musicians?

Have you studied music?

  • Yes

    Votes: 83 63.4%
  • No

    Votes: 48 36.6%

  • Total voters
    131
This kind of reasoning stems from the thread starter's need to feel that his claims to superior musical taste are legitimate and does, to be honest, make me quite sad.

Pretty much the only sensible post in this thread.
 
I only ever wanted to be a musician. Had the potential. Was far too lazy, now I'm stuck with law. Woohoo! Anyhoo, I studied music to a fairly decent level (enough to know a decent amount of theory, anyway), so I can't really comment.

I don't think that my musical knowledge affects the way I appreciate Opeth, but I DO know that my friend Alison is practically tone-deaf and plays no instruments, and she fucking loves Opeth. Living proof that there is no requirement to be musically inclined (in a practical sense) to love this band.
 
the more you understand the technical side of music, the more you appreciate opeth.

but while still being as technical as hell, they can be dramatically melodic to the uneducated ear...that's the reason why they are such a huge attack. most nu-prog bands miss out on that aspect.

there you go
well said Corleone. Having some musical background is definitely helpful. I have studied musical theory and for me(speaking for myself only) it helps me to understand what these musicians are doing. But, then most people I know want that "instant fix". You know, music that "hits" you right away. 3 minute junkie. Bands similiar to Opeth require attention. Your not going to put Opeth on while you wash the dishes. I'm going to sit with headphones on for the duration of the cd and concentrate. You come to my house, there ain't no fuckin' Toby-I'm-a-Ford-truck-man Keith playing.
 
I've been playing guitar for 8 years, drums for 5 years, and have studied musical theory. Being a musician, I can fully appreciate the complexity and great musicianship in Opeth's music.
 
This kind of reasoning stems from the thread starter's need to feel that his claims to superior musical taste are legitimate and does, to be honest, make me quite sad.

Nobody said anything about superior. I just noticed a trend and wanted to know if it was the same for other people. Maybe it's a Toowoomba thing, something in the water (or lack thereof; a joke for any aussies who are up-to-date with the ignorance and stupidity of the general public.)
 
well said Corleone. Having some musical background is definitely helpful. I have studied musical theory and for me(speaking for myself only) it helps me to understand what these musicians are doing. But, then most people I know want that "instant fix". You know, music that "hits" you right away. 3 minute junkie. Bands similiar to Opeth require attention. Your not going to put Opeth on while you wash the dishes. I'm going to sit with headphones on for the duration of the cd and concentrate. You come to my house, there ain't no fuckin' Toby-I'm-a-Ford-truck-man Keith playing.

Its just a matter of stamina. A first year university student may have to concentrate while studying something that a graduate can do in his sleep. Same with Opeth - it isn't that it requires more concentration or understanding, it is that the listener lacks these things.
 
Nope. Creativity lies in application of theory rules, not in their circumvention. I think we're a bit off topic anyway - we're heading towards the ancient question whether the means or the end more important. Opeth doesn't use theory but their music can be as enjoyable as Mozart - does that mean their music deserves less appreciation? A scientist in a lab discovers a novel synthesis to a new molecule after years of research and toil, while a mechanic on the other side of the world discovers the exact same molecule by accidentally mixing some oils while fixing his car. Does the scientist deserve more merit?


Opeth doesn't use music theory? How the hell can you even propose something like that? It's not like Mozart sat down with the "rules" and composed. He broke some rules. And those "rules", which have changed over time, come from analyzing music. They are descriptive, not prescriptive. Only it sometimes isn't taught that way, which is too bad. It makes for a lot of same-sounding music.
 
First, I think there's a difference between composing by ear and by application of theory. I can "propose something like that" because Mike barely knows the notes on the fretboard (see guitar world video), he hasn't had formal training and writes based on imitation, experience and influence. Of course, this doesn't mean the music sucks. I already said that above.

Secondly, you're assuming the rules strictly define the content of the music. They don't. If you think they do, then i'm not surprised you think same-sounding music stems from the overly strict application of theoryr Within the bounds of the rules there are a limitless amount of ideas and combinations. Just because someone follows rules doesn't mean they aren't creative. Mozart didn't break any rules yet he was creative. The rules began as descriptive rules (how could they have been anything else?) but now they are prescriptive. Again, creativity counts more than rules.
 
First, I think there's a difference between composing by ear and by application of theory. I can "propose something like that" because Mike barely knows the notes on the fretboard (see guitar world video), he hasn't had formal training and writes based on imitation, experience and influence. Of course, this doesn't mean the music sucks. I already said that above.

Secondly, you're assuming the rules strictly define the content of the music. They don't. If you think they do, then i'm not surprised you think same-sounding music stems from the overly strict application of theoryr Within the bounds of the rules there are a limitless amount of ideas and combinations. Just because someone follows rules doesn't mean they aren't creative. Mozart didn't break any rules yet he was creative. The rules began as descriptive rules (how could they have been anything else?) but now they are prescriptive. Again, creativity counts more than rules.

Paraphrase from Bach, "I want to know all of the rules so I can break them."

But seriously, just about anyone can sit down and listen to something and know where it's going. It's a natural progression. Try it yourselves, sit down and listen to something you've never heard before and in the middle of the phrase, pause it. You can probably hear in your head the most comfortable direction for the phrase to go. That would be how Mikael writes, I guess. And it's true innovation when you can break away from this expectation (not too much, just enough) so that it certain parts stand out and sound awesome. Creativity isn't necessarily about breaking rules, but it's certainly a technique.
 
i'm a classical guitar major but i believe studying music makes a very little difference if any. mike is a real artist that doesn't ever have to know what a cadence is to write music that is in his head. i remember watching a video of him where he didn't know the name of his favorite chord (a min add 9 i believe), which goes to prove he doesn't have to think of theory and technical song structure (by the way, bach peices can be broken down to 3 chord progressions), which to me means we don't have to look for it to appreciate it more. I've appreciated opeth (and tool's lateralus! which is godly!) far more than any other music since the moment it sent chills down my spine and touched my soul!
 
i'm a classical guitar major but i believe studying music makes a very little difference if any. mike is a real artist that doesn't ever have to know what a cadence is to write music that is in his head. i remember watching a video of him where he didn't know the name of his favorite chord (a min add 9 i believe), which goes to prove he doesn't have to think of theory and technical song structure (by the way, bach peices can be broken down to 3 chord progressions), which to me means we don't have to look for it to appreciate it more. I've appreciated opeth (and tool's lateralus! which is godly!) far more than any other music since the moment it sent chills down my spine and touched my soul!

That's pretty much my feeling too. As a guitar major yourself, Do you think Opeth would be even better if Mikael had studied music?
 
But, then most people I know want that "instant fix". You know, music that "hits" you right away. 3 minute junkie. Bands similiar to Opeth require attention.

I also think that this is the main point. Those long, winding songs are just too much for the average listener. I think that musicians (being an amateur myself) tend to be more able and willing to cope with this complexity.

However, I would be very cautious with this. While I can imagine that the hypothesis "The percentage of musicians among Opeth fans is higher than average" is actually true, it is probably hard to prove. I know people that don't know anything about music theory and still enjoy eg. classical music which is often not the easiest to digest.

Maybe we could start a vote here either asking to agree or disagree to the above hypothesis or asking who is a musician (studied/amateur/not at all).
 
I also think that this is the main point. Those long, winding songs are just too much for the average listener. I think that musicians (being an amateur myself) tend to be more able and willing to cope with this complexity.

However, I would be very cautious with this. While I can imagine that the hypothesis "The percentage of musicians among Opeth fans is higher than average" is actually true, it is probably hard to prove. I know people that don't know anything about music theory and still enjoy eg. classical music which is often not the easiest to digest.

Maybe we could start a vote here either asking to agree or disagree to the above hypothesis or asking who is a musician (studied/amateur/not at all).

Yeah, have to be careful as well in saying things like this. It's not too say that if you don't study music then you can't appreciate Opeth as much, just making a generalization.

I'm not sure if a poll would prove anything. I've said it in other threads where people think that the outcome proves their theory; the small number of users here cannot possibly accurately represent the majority of Opeth fans.
 
As a non-musician, I think I appreciated Opeth for different reasons. Now that I take time to come back to the band after learning guitar and studying some more classical theory, I find myself enjoying different aspects of the music, i.e. imagining the process of coming up with those ideas and getting them recorded and mixed, etc.
 
Whoops, I hit No on the poll...

I didn't read the poll question, i thought it was just "Is Opeth only for musicians", not "Have you studied music", which i should have voted yes on.