I Want to Understand Music Theory
Theory is not a pile of terms — it is three layers: how to notate it, why it holds, how to use it
The most common way to fail at music theory is to treat it as a list of terms to memorise. It is really three layers, and each is learned differently.
What you are trying to do here
First identify which layer you are after:
| What you need | Layer | Where |
|---|---|---|
| "what is this mark on the page" | notation | theo + glossary |
| "why a sharp here and not a flat" | principle | theo's key-signature and harmony parts |
| "I know it — now what" | usage | this site's culture pages and tools |
Where to read: by layer
Layer one: notation (how to read it)
The core of this layer is lookup, not study.
- Offsite: music theory — over 150 entries, starting from note names and the staff
- Offsite: glossary — term lookup (but short of its plan, see below)
- Onsite: metre: why 3/4 and 4/4 sound different — the most intuitive explanation of this layer
Layer two: principle (why it holds)
This is the only part of theory that genuinely requires understanding.
- Offsite: music theory — the chapters on key signatures, intervals and progressions
- Onsite: the circle of fifths — an interactive map of the key-signature system
- Onsite: modes: one frame, seven home bases — why one set of pitches carries seven colours
Layer three: usage (how to apply it)
This layer is what turns knowledge into music.
- Onsite: the three commonest progressions — the three cheapest
- Onsite: cadences: where the feeling of stopping comes from — why some endings "land"
- Onsite: suspensions — the second before it resolves
- Onsite: folk variants: there is no "original" — where principle loosens in folk song
One line through all three layers
If you want to see notation → principle → usage connected in one place, start with why the major scale sounds happy. It starts from the simplest question, climbs one layer at a time, and includes the dispute about its explanation.
What is not built yet
Honestly, three gaps:
1. The glossary is short of its plan — lookup is what this layer needs most, and it is still a skeleton. This is the most practical obstacle on this route 2. The theory site has no learning path — it is 150 parallel entries with no indication of "read these ten first" 3. No entry point showing how the terms derive from each other — each entry explains itself and not its neighbours
I consider point two a genuine gap: a 150-entry parallel knowledge site is fine for those who already understand the subject, and equivalent to no order at all for a beginner.
Next
- The site-level view: what each of the thirteen sites is for
- Wanting to play rather than understand: instruments hub · teaching and practice hub
- Back to the home page
Sources
- 本页为导航页，内容为据实整理；状态说明以各站实际条目数为准（2026-10-03 实测）
Used for fact-checking only; all prose is original.