quote:

---

Originally posted by jsinjin

...I have five beginner clawhammer books in front of me right this second and I signed up for with subscriptions Brainjo and other banjo beginner works and in every one of them the focus was on tunes and learning to play by ear without tab. Then a gradual I IV V. There was absolutely no discussion of triads or the relationship of chords or inversions. In fact I had to go to a colleague in the department of music at the college where I teach to get recommendations on how to start learning the theory but it was very difficulty to put together.
I don’t feel that most banjo introductory stuff is set up to explain the basics early. And I believe it would have helped me learn much quicker than trying to play by ear.

---

Some of what you're describing isn't necessarily "basic." And little to none of what you're describing is required to begin playing clawhammer banjo, which long before any of the methods or tutors described elsewhere in this discussion came into being was passed down through aural and oral tradition. (And I know it wasn't originally called clawhammer)

I totally understand you believe you would have made more progress with banjo had someone taught you music theory before having you make the first sound on the instrument. I continue to disagree, for the reasons  I described at length in another discussion on this same topic not too many weeks ago, and which I selectively repeat (and revise) here.

You didn't learn your native language by learning the rules of grammar or learning to read before you started speaking. Instead, you learned language by imitating the sounds of people talking to you. You heard and learned vocabulary, grammar, syntax, usage, and idiom through hearing and then speaking -- so that by the time you were three or four years old you were essentially fluent in your native language. I'll guess you had been speaking, reading and writing English for years in elementary school before your language curriculum included the first actual grammar lessons: to explain the rules and workings of the language you were already using all the time.

Likewise with music. And especially an instrument like 5-string banjo -- both clawhammer/old time/folk traditions and three-finger/bluegrass styles -- in which how it's played is as important as what is played. Learning by watching, listening and repeating makes the most sense for these modes of playing.

That's because banjo is not playing literal, linear, melody, or even only melody. It's accompanying itself with chord tones or other harmonizing tones wrapped around the melody or passing notes in between the melody, and the occasional hit of the open fifth string whether it's in the chord or not. In clawhammer, it matters what part of the stroke is making what sound. And before that it matters which of the 2 to 4 locations of most notes you're supposed to play.

Generalized music theory learned before playing is not going to help you make these instrument- or style-specific choices. 

The parts of theory that could be most helpful at the outset might best be presented simply as useful information: Keys and chords and the note names of the strings. Not a whole lot more.

Later on -- and for some players, "later" is years -- is time enough for theory to get into the why or be more fully explained. Even then, only as far as it helps the player. Theory is good for explaining the music you're hearing and making. Most of it is not necessary before you're making music.

I've often said that people who can play but think they don't know theory, actually know more theory than they realize. Again, this is the same as language. We all know our language's grammar long before we're taught the names for the parts of speech or get formal instruction in rules we've been following for years.

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

Hangout member Rick McKeon has written a very good introductory level book on the music theory that banjo players might find helpful, called, appropriately enough, Music Theory for Banjo Players. Published by Mel Bay.

The generalized theory information applies to every instrument. The application of theory to banjo is focused on G tuning and three-finger. So the few exercises might not be entirely appropriate to your needs. Still, iIt might be worth checking out the table of contents and sample pages.

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

I'm a broken record on this: but I believe if you want to advance on banjo, you need to listen to banjo music representing the type of banjo music you would like to play. Listen sometimes just to soak it in. Listen other times to engage and try to understand what's happening.

And to repeat something I've said elsewhere: If it's turning out that your accidental choices of banjo and clawhammer/stroke style play are not working out for you, there is still time to switch to a version of banjo or easier stringed instrument on which you can pluck linear melodies and strum chords with a flat pick, using standard notation available in countless songbooks. Four-string banjo or baritone uke would be especially suited to this. 

quote:

---

Originally posted by LouieChee
I don't fully agree with you in the context of old-time and bluegrass banjo. Bluegrass and old-time banjo are two styles defined almost entirely by a tradition of playing. In this music, the answer to "why?" is usually, "because that's the way it's done". I think some basic music theory can be helpful at times, but if the goal is to pick "blackberry blossom" or solid bluegrass banjo, I don't think music theory is directly beneficial to the goal.

There are some amazing bluegrass players who will admit to not knowing any theory behind the music.

---

Couldn't agree more.

As I just said at length above, these styles of banjo are best learned by diving in -- listening, watching, repeating (with or without tab or notation). Later -- maybe after one can play some songs or wants to play with others (where basic knowledge of keys and chords will be helpful) -- is time enough to learn theory: to explain the music you've been making, which will then help you progress.

There's not a lot of theory that's necessary or helpful before one can even play a tune or an exercises.

As to the amazing bluegrass players who admit to not knowing theory (Billy Strings being only the latest), I believe they know more theory than they know they know. If they can improvise on a song they've never heard before, play a song on the spot in a different key than they usually do, or use a capo, they definitely know some basic key and chord theory.

quote:

---

Originally posted by EEB

The 'apple pie' approach tutors are what are not working for him.

---

Well, the proof is in the pudding (or the pie, as the case may be): If that newfound knowledge advances his playing in a real and appreciable way, then I'll eat my words. But I'm fairly confident that will not be the case, as he is still working through basic material in an OT vein.

I won't restate Ken's excellent post, but the comparison to language learning is spot-on. Many people who have undertaken learning a second language as an adult can probably relate to the experience of discovering some rule or pattern that feels like a conceptual breakthrough. "Why didn't anyone just tell me this from the beginning!?" But when you confidently try to apply that rule/pattern in a real-time conversation, you completely botch it. Either you are forcing it into an inappropriate context, you are fixating on it to such a degree that it interferes with your thinking, or you are revealing yourself to be unaware of the many exceptions to that rule/pattern that native speakers simply "know." If you stick with the language and reach a more advanced level, looking back, you realize that explicitly conceptualizing the rule/pattern in that way wasn't actually that useful, and all you were really missing was sufficient exposure and practice. 

jsinjin,

In my experience, the people who teach banjo and/or provide banjo instructional material are those who have learned how to play the instrument, but haven’t necessarily learned much about music theory. Why would you expect those people to be able to provide you with music theory instruction? In pedagogical parlance, that’s beyond the scope of the curriculum.