Music theory exam tomorrow - any last tips?

[TensorCalculus]

I have my Music theory exam first thing tomorrow.

Any last minute tips for me? Things you've found useful or helpful? Something I should know before taking the exam? I'll take all the advice I can get: I'll probably need it.

Thanks in advance! :)

 

[fresh_42]

I have my Grade 5 Music theory exam first thing tomorrow.

Any last minute tips for me? Things you've found useful or helpful? Something I should know before taking the exam? This is my first ever music theory exam, so I'll take all the advice I can get: I'll probably need it.

Thanks in advance! :)

Not quite meant for Music classes, but the preparation and general tips are probably the same.
https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/10-math-tips-save-time-avoid-mistakes/

 

[BWV]

Music theory is not an academic subject, its an art - If you cant hear and sing it you don't really know it

 

[fresh_42]

Music theory is not an academic subject ...

I have a book that tells something different. Guerino Mazzola connects music with groups and category theory.

 

[berkeman]

I have my Grade 5 Music theory exam first thing tomorrow.

Any last minute tips for me? Things you've found useful or helpful? Something I should know before taking the exam? This is my first ever music theory exam, so I'll take all the advice I can get: I'll probably need it.

What kind of questions do you think will be on the exam? Have you spoken with any students who have been through the class in the past about what kinds of things are asked on the exam?

EDIT/ADD -- Since it is the middle of the summer, is this a summerschool class? What kinds of things have you learned in the class?

 

[BWV]

I have a book that tells something different. Guerino Mazzola connects music with groups and category theory.

Yes there is plenty of that - got to keep the PhD mill going - but it’s scientism and of little use for actually creating playing music

 

[BWV]

Was curious and found a practice test here
https://atlascloud-eu.psionline.com/phoenix/s/lw/test.html#2020-G5-1.3

Started the test and gave up because I can’t remember the stupid British rhythmic nomenclature ( I went all through music school not knowing or caring what a ‘crotchet’ is) but surprised that it is all written (but maybe I shouldn’t be as that’s easy to test on). The high school AP music theory has a proper component on ear training and singing - you can’t really do theory without them, But the test seems straightforward- it’s transpositions, clefs, notating rhythms properly in a given meter, cadences, triad inversions.

 

[TensorCalculus]

Music theory is not an academic subject, its an art - If you cant hear and sing it you don't really know it

Hmm... really? I found it felt a lot like maths: just counting, applying the same method again and again. For aural exams (singing. Listening etc) I agree though.

What kind of questions do you think will be on the exam? Have you spoken with any students who have been through the class in the past about what kinds of things are asked on the exam?

EDIT/ADD -- Since it is the middle of the summer, is this a summerschool class? What kinds of things have you learned in the class?

I've done past papers: so I know what the exam is like. And yeah, I've spoken to some people who've done it before, all they've said is "it's easy, you'll be fine"

No, I just ended up doing it in the summer by coincidence. I had two one-hour lessons where my violin teacher just explained everything to me and yeah now I have my exam pretty soon :)

Was curious and found a practice test here
https://atlascloud-eu.psionline.com/phoenix/s/lw/test.html#2020-G5-1.3

Started the test and gave up because I can’t remember the stupid British rhythmic nomenclature ( I went all through music school not knowing or caring what a ‘crotchet’ is) but surprised that it is all written (but maybe I shouldn’t be as that’s easy to test on). The high school AP music theory has a proper component on ear training and singing - you can’t really do theory without them, But the test seems straightforward- it’s transpositions, clefs, notating rhythms properly in a given meter, cadences, triad inversions.

"Stupid British rhythmic nomenclature" is so accurate hahah- you're right the test is pretty straightforward. It's one of those things where you can apply the same method each time and it will work without fail: once you know it, you know it - if you get what I mean.

 

[Pythagorean]

Music theory is not an academic subject, its an art - If you cant hear and sing it you don't really know it

that's an interesting perspective, considering that the majority of music theories developed around the world conform to Pythagoras. While you can create music with music theory, that's generally not what it's for. You create music by feeling (the art), but you analyze what works and why with music theory (the science).

Edit: to expand a bit - consonance, dissonance, meter, pitch - all objective properties. Whether somebody prefers dissonance or consonance is subjective, of course - but consonance and dissonance themselves are objective and measurable.

 

[BWV]

that's an interesting perspective, considering that the majority of music theories developed around the world conform to Pythagoras. While you can create music with music theory, that's generally not what it's for. You create music by feeling (the art), but you analyze what works and why with music theory (the science).

Edit: to expand a bit - consonance, dissonance, meter, pitch - all objective properties. Whether somebody prefers dissonance or consonance is subjective, of course - but consonance and dissonance themselves are objective and measurable.

Acoustics is the science, theory is not - is it science how to resolve a particular chord? It’s a syntax, rules of particular styles / aesthetics and culture - decidedly not science. It’s like cooking - at some level cooking is just chemistry but that tells you nothing about how to season some tacos

 

[TensorCalculus]

Acoustics is the science, theory is not - is it science how to resolve a particular chord? It’s a syntax, rules of particular styles / aesthetics and culture - decidedly not science. It’s like cooking - at some level cooking is just chemistry but that tells you nothing about how to season some tacos

I guess it depends on which bit of the theory you are talking about. Surely you would agree that transposing music, or converting from simple to compound time, is just like maths? The composing of music, yes, I agree is more like an art...

The exam portal was down because of scheduled maintenance today, lucky me I had an extra day to prepare!

 

[Pythagorean]

Acoustics is the science, theory is not - is it science how to resolve a particular chord? It’s a syntax, rules of particular styles / aesthetics and culture - decidedly not science. It’s like cooking - at some level cooking is just chemistry but that tells you nothing about how to season some tacos

Yes, again resolving a chord is an objective process defined by a set of rules. Whether somebody likes it or not is the subjective part. Why we percieve "resolution" (thats a bad word for it since its easy to equivocate with e.g. conflict resolution) is an area of neuroscience. For example, studying why certain populations prefer consonance and others prefer dissonance is an objective question (not that its an easy question to answer because of the complexity).

The neuroscience of taste is actually quite interesting scientifically too - there are genetics involved in many cases. The reason we like sugar is because it used to be a signal for nutrition. We are, of course, too smart for our own good and hacked the sugar away from the nutrition so that signal is misleading now.

Edit: also the science underlying music is "neuroacoustics". Not just acoustics

 

[BWV]

Yes, again resolving a chord is an objective process defined by a set of rules. Whether somebody likes it or not is the subjective part.

Who made the rules, and how did chords come to be a thing, particularly as only European music has chords that resolve

Why we percieve "resolution" (thats a bad word for it since its easy to equivocate with e.g. conflict resolution) is an area of neuroscience.

The term Resolution has been used in every theory book for 400 years, who ever confused it with anything else?

For example, studying why certain populations prefer consonance and others prefer dissonance is an objective question (not that its an easy question to answer because of the complexity).

What populations prefer dissonance!

The neuroscience of taste is actually quite interesting scientifically too - there are genetics involved in many cases. The reason we like sugar is because it used to be a signal for nutrition. We are, of course, too smart for our own good and hacked the sugar away from the nutrition so that signal is misleading now.

Edit: also the science underlying music is "neuroacoustics". Not just acoustics

Granted there is some anthropology and neuroscience around music, but that is not music theory as commonly understood

 

[berkeman]

"berkeman, dispatch, https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/music-theory-exam-tomorrow-any-last-tips.1081436/ respond code-2 "

Copy, responding to thread hijack, code-2...

 

[Pythagorean]

Who made the rules, and how did chords come to be a thing, particularly as only European music has chords that resolve


The term Resolution has been used in every theory book for 400 years, who ever confused it with anything else?

What populations prefer dissonance!

Granted there is some anthropology and neuroscience around music, but that is not music theory as commonly understood

Melodies can resolve too. For example, drone music and Dastgahs both understand the function of the tonic.

Mostly laymen, but also the weak version of the Sapir Whorf can influence how even an expert thinks about borrowed terms like "resolve".

Are you suggesting that musical preference is objective and uniform?

 

[berkeman]

Dispatch, berkeman, code-4.

 

[berkeman]

Aaaand to follow up this thread closure, if you want to discuss an interesting topic that is not a direct response to the OP topic, please start a new thread. Thanks.