Leonard Cohen, Bob Dylan, Neil Young 的樂理水平如何？

01-06

在此只討論樂理，不討論偉大與否。

樂理水平，這是一個很虛的詞。三位都不是科班生，不可能像音樂學院的學生那樣，期末考試有一門叫做音樂理論或者和聲學的課，否則直接拿成績單出來看就可以了。但面對創作音樂人，論他們樂理水平的高低，我覺得是一個挺沒有意義的事情。對於一個創作者來說，夠用，即可。包括樂器的掌握程度，夠用，即可。像迪倫的《鈴鼓先生》就用了G、A、D三個和弦而已，或者再不濟加上掛留Asus4和Dsus2，這就夠了。

科恩，迪倫，老楊，三位極具風格化的創作者，他們的樂理絕對是夠用的。儘管都是自學成才，科恩還謙虛地表示自己的所有音樂都來自於當年某個西班牙人教給他的六個和弦，可他們的作品中，無不展示了對和聲解決的智慧。

真的，夠了。

在當代"樂理"這玩意兒本身就是一個統籌歸納的學科. 請注意是先有音樂再有樂理. 當年調性音樂乃至十二平均律這些玩意兒是大牛們嘗試用數學方搗鼓聲學所遺留下來的副產物......

這時候問題來了, "系統的學過樂理"和"會不會樂理"這本就是兩個概念. 一個人只要能對音樂(特指旋律和聲)的"美與否"有自己的評價標準他就是會樂理. 學過樂理的人嘗試用特定的方法解決音樂問題和沒學過樂理嘗試憑自己的感覺解決音樂問題本質上來說是一樣的.

這三位大師的生平個人並不十分了解. 不過他們每個人都用自己的方式去"解決"音樂並且廣受好評, 我的推論是他們對於"系統的樂理"這門學科並不十分了解(估計沒我懂lol), 但是顯然是"會樂理"並且能把樂理拿來好好使用的.

以上

PS, 我們學校有專研Bob Dylan的課, 就是研究總結他的音樂風格, 可以說是"D氏樂理"吧. 這課還是4階的, 本科最高階.

以下是Bob Dylan對Leonard Cohen的歌曲在樂理應用上面的討論：

「人們在提及Leonard Cohen的時候總是避開他的旋律。但對我來說，他的旋律和詞都是了不起的天賦。

即便是那些對位的旋律線條，它們給他的歌曲帶來了美妙絕倫的個性，又提升了主旋律。據我所知，在現代音樂里，沒有其他人能夠做到這一點。

……

Leonard 特別使用了在走向上看起來古典的和弦進行。他是一個比你想像中更敏銳博學的音樂人。」

而Bob Dylan看得到Leonard Cohen在樂理上面的精彩應用，那麼他自己本身的樂理水平一定也不會差！

英文全文討論如下，太長就不一一翻譯了：

來源：https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/17/leonard-cohen-makes-it-darker （很棒的採訪，感興趣的可以去看看）

When people talk about Leonard, they fail to mention his melodies, which to me, along with his lyrics, are his greatest genius,」 Dylan said. 「Even the counterpoint lines—they give a celestial character and melodic lift to every one of his songs. As far as I know, no one else comes close to this in modern music. Even the simplest song, like 『The Law,』 which is structured on two fundamental chords, has counterpoint lines that are essential, and anybody who even thinks about doing this song and loves the lyrics would have to build around the counterpoint lines.

「His gift or genius is in his connection to the music of the spheres,」 Dylan went on. 「In the song 『Sisters of Mercy,』 for instance, the verses are four elemental lines which change and move at predictable intervals . . . but the tune is anything but predictable. The song just comes in and states a fact. And after that anything can happen and it does, and Leonard allows it to happen. His tone is far from condescending or mocking. He is a tough- minded lover who doesn』t recognize the brush-off. Leonard』s always above it all. 『Sisters of Mercy』 is verse after verse of four distinctive lines, in perfect meter, with no chorus, quivering with drama. The rst line begins in a minor key. The second line goes from minor to major and steps up, and changes melody and variation. The third line steps up even higher than that to a different degree, and then the fourth line comes back to the beginning. This is a deceptively unusual musical theme, with or without lyrics. But it』s so subtle a listener doesn』t realize he』s been taken on a musical journey and dropped off somewhere, with or without lyrics.」

In the late eighties, Dylan performed 「Hallelujah」 on the road as a roughshod blues with a sly, ascending chorus. His version sounds less like the pretti ed Jeff Buckley version than like a work by John Lee Hooker. 「That song 『Hallelujah』 has resonance for me,」 Dylan said. 「There again, it』s a beautifully constructed melody that steps up, evolves, and slips back, all in quick time. But this song has a connective chorus, which when it comes in has a power all of its own. The 『secret chord』 and the point-blank I-know- you-better-than-you-know-yourself aspect of the song has plenty of resonance for me.」

I asked Dylan whether he preferred Cohen』s later work, so colored with intimations of the end. 「I like all of Leonard』s songs, early or late,」 he said.?「『Going Home,』『Show Me the Place,』『The Darkness.』 These are all great songs, deep and truthful as ever and multidimensional, surprisingly melodic, and they make you think and feel. I like some of his later songs even better than his early ones. Yet there』s a simplicity to his early ones that I like, too.」

Dylan defended Cohen against the familiar critical reproach that his is music to slit your wrists by. He compared him to the Russian Jewish immigrant who wrote 「Easter Parade.」「I see no disenchantment in Leonard』s lyrics at all,」 Dylan said. 「There』s always a direct sentiment, as if he』s holding a conversation and telling you something, him doing all the talking, but the listener keeps listening. He』s very much a descendant of Irving Berlin, maybe the only songwriter in modern history that Leonard can be directly related to. Berlin』s songs did the same thing. Berlin was also connected to some kind of celestial sphere. And, like Leonard, he probably had no classical-music training, either. Both of them just hear melodies that most of us can only strive for. Berlin』s lyrics also fell into place and consisted of half lines, full lines at surprising intervals, using simple elongated words. Both Leonard and Berlin are incredibly crafty. Leonard particularly uses chord progressions that seem classical in shape. He is a much more savvy musician than you』d think.」

自己先回答一下問題，也解釋一下提問的原有和希望的答案。

首先有答案總是好的吧，不過目前第一的答案字裡行間說出一些我想要的，但整體還是想說，他們樂理好不好跟他們牛B不牛B 沒關係，而這一點相信大家都是知道的，點贊的也估計又是覺得：強調這三位宇宙級大師，人類精華的樂理是不是有點矯情和沒必要？科比牛B，一樣你也得說：投籃如何，組織能力如何，關鍵球如何吧，大師就不是人啦？樂理水平就忽略不計了？鳳凰傳奇你們天天猴著不放，說人家「動此大此」，他們仨的個有的拋開歌詞不說，單講樂理也是簡單一逼，我既不是要像現在扒魯迅那樣，把三位大師拉下神壇（事實上我要是能拉也行，我也沒這能力和資格，再說實際查查中國14億人口，這仨人都認識的加一塊能有多少，魯迅人人都知道，能口水的討論，這仨人是誰還得介紹十分鐘吧）所以還是希望提問者能從三位大師的樂理水平上做一下分析，比如誰的哪首歌是樂理水平非常牛B的，還是基本上首首歌都是那麼回事，之所以牛B是因為其人格魅力，或者是歌詞深度。在此只討論樂理，不討論偉大與否。

他們的樂理水平足夠寫出不朽作品

樂理水平、樂器演奏水平、唱功對這樣的唱作人而言都是夠用就行。就如同匠人手裡的工具一樣。有些匠人工具多，但幹活時不會用或者用不上。但還有一種匠人，雖然工具不多，但在幹活時往往能被他們用到極致。

樂理本來就是人體驗的科學歸納。現代音樂大師樂理沒有不是大師的。