Quote: Originally Posted by chip mcdonald I argue that it is, unless "extensive amount of experience" entails just wasting one's time during that extensive amount. People gain an understanding of theory regardless if they have the nomenclature. If your extensive amount of experience playing the piano means you're learning to play Bach then yeah, that's basically a waste of time in relation to understanding how chords work and how to write pop songs. A good waste of time, and of course you'll absorb some good stuff but not really what the o.p. is talking about. On the other hand you could have an extensive knowledge of harmonic theory and be able to write brilliant songs and yet not be able to actually play the piano beyond bashing out a bunch of block chords. So again, knowing enough theory to be able to write great songs has nothing to do with instrumental ability. Quote: Originally Posted by chip mcdonald I didn't say one couldn't do that. But if one doesn't have the harmonic awareness that it's "unorthodox" you can't repeat it. You either have to have the musical awareness of technically what's going on, or enough experience to hear it If I know know that I can string a few certain chords together and they sound mysterious then there's no reason why I can't repeat that even if I don't know how to explain theoretically what's going on. There's a huge gap between your "musical awareness of technically what's going on" which can seem like a big hurdle for some people and "enough experience to hear it" which we basically all have just from listening to music. You yourself said "People gain an understanding of theory regardless if they have the nomenclature." although I would argue that that's not actually an understanding of theory since theory is basically just the nomenclature.