[LyndsySimon]

> it's funny to me that the same ideas are masked behind hoighty-toighty music theory terminology that is used almost exclusively in reference to...music that was composed hundreds of years ago.

I'm just coming up to speed on music theory, but my impression so far is that it's reactive, not proactive. We already have music that we like; music theory is about trying to tear it down, identify why we like it, establish base principles that can be used to guide composition, and then use those to create something new. Fairly recently, this had led to "generative music".

I'm finding music theory to be useful to build a more accurate mental model of the instruments I'm playing, which I believe will eventually improve my ability to improvise and play by ear. I think that people who are musical prodigies have an intuitive understanding of those things, but I'm having to build my own understanding explicitly.

[thomasfortes]

I've been playing bass and guitar occasionaly (as an amateur musician) since I was 15 and I'm now in my early 30s, I studied a bit of theory when I was learning and already knew how to build chords and also have a reasonable ear, last months I decided to learn how to read sheet music and study musical theory and jazz a bit more deeper, what I found is that now I'm way more confortable with my improvisation not being repetitive and over the same scales again and again and that I have a way better knack at finding the next note on songs that I haven't heard before, so my experience is similar to yours.

As an aside, I'm pretty certain that I'm suffering from frequency ilusion, I frequently find musical theory discussions at every place that I am used to read, where in the past it seems that this things were not that prevalent.