This question clearly demonstrates that the OP has no understanding of the software development process. I've been doing software development for the last 15 years, mostly as a consultant, and have been on A LOT of projects at many different clients. I have yet to see one with "excellent product specs" completed up front. Why? Because customers never know what they want until they see it. And even when they think they have defined something well, they don't understand what they will actually get back.
Software is very abstract and unless you are a developer or a technical person (which most customers/users aren't), then it's very difficult to conceptualize how it will work once implemented. Then there's the reality of changing customer requirements and priorities. I'd like to know how the OP is writing perfect specs when such a thing doesn't exist in the real world. And there are many other aspects to development which the OP doesn't seem to understand either. Who is doing the business and technical analysis of these requirements? What's the process when requirements change? Where is QA and user acceptance testing in all of this?
I suspect nobody is doing these things. What's really happening is that he writes something up based on vague requirements (which are likely to change), throws it over the wall to a developer, and expects a polished product to be thrown back over. Meanwhile the customer didn't understand what they were asking for in the first place, changed their requirements, increased scope, got something back that was maybe close to the written spec but actually wasn't what they wanted in their mind, with no analysis or design having been done, that wasn't ever tested by anyone other the developer who wrote it. And all of those scenarios are called "bugs" by the OP. This is a dysfunctional process that is unfortunately all too common. No wonder your developers balk at fixing this stuff for free.
I don't doubt that there are bugs in the code, especially if the OP is trying to do this on the cheap. There is no substitute for experienced programmers, and there's a reason that people who are experienced cost more. So the first problem is that the OP thinks he can get something for nothing or next to it. But the main problem here is the OP's lack of understanding about the software development process.
If you want to improve things and not have your customers complaining all the time, then start with yourself - read up on software development methodology, ditch the waterfall/throw over the wall approach, and pay up for developers who know what they are doing. I'd suggest a more agile method where customers are very involved in the process, are able to get their hands on the product as it's being developed and provide continuous feedback. Otherwise, look in the mirror and expect more of the same. Developers don't need your empathy, they need a competent project manager.
I see paired programming as just another gimmick to get around the fact that there is no substitute for having experienced programmers and effective code reviews. As a consultant, I've worked on many agile projects, including some involving strict XP paired programming, and didn't see any better quality with that than with anything else. It's all about who you have working on the project, having decent management and a true agile philosophy... not "agile theater."
I'm an experienced developer and I've interviewed a lot of people myself. As a consultant, I've also frequently been the interviewee. It's easy to weed out the BS types by engaging them in discussions not just about what they've done, but get into the why and how, the pros and cons of various technologies, methodologies, etc. Give them hypothetical scenarios to find out what approach they would take. If they throw out buzzwords and can't explain how/when/why they used something, alternatives they have considered, etc, then things become obvious. That also goes a long way toward showing the candidate's potential, how much of a proactive learner they are, and so on, unlike interview gimmicks. I think coding tests are poor substitute for an effective interview.
Be aware that for an experienced developer, the interview goes both ways. I may want to see some examples of your code to see if your team is up to my standards, and I will certainly be asking many questions myself. If I'm expected to jump through lame interview hoops as part of the process, then it's likely not something I will be interested in - I tend to turn down those interviews.
So it's better to lift a lighter weight more often, than a heavier one just a couple of times.
No, the only thing that lifting lighter weights more often will give you is the ability to lift light things many times. That's called endurance. Lifting heavy things less often will give you the ability to lift heavy things. That's called strength. Which one is "better" for you depends on your fitness goals.
Certainly hummingbirds will like the sugar water as much as bees do.
Hummingbirds only exist in the Western hemisphere. But certainly hummingbird feeders could be used for this. The feeders are usually small enough that most larger birds aren't going to be able to use them, though I do find the occasional oriole or even woodpecker on mine. An ant guard will keep other types of insects away.
Yeah, funny how nobody gets upset about all the white-guy stereotypes on the show - Homer, a fat lazy stupid slob, the doughnut-eating police chief (with pig-like upturned nose), the evil corporate boss, the corrupt politician mayor of the town, the quack doctor, televangelist... guess they're funny until it hits too close to home, eh?
As the oldest child (and only girl), my problem solving skills included torturing and beating the crap out of my younger brothers. A later problem solution consisted of moving out of the house before they got big enough to return the favor.:-)
And I don't care squat about job security, promotion opportunities, or other intangibles that come along with permanent positions. I've been around the block enough times to know there is no such thing as job security, and working your way up the ladder involves way too much political game playing and too much stress and effort compared to the reward. What I care about is using technologies I'm interested in and working on good projects. That, and show me the money! This is why I'm a contractor. I come in, do my job well, and when I leave the office, I'm on to doing other things in life that I care about. My resume is very strong and I never have a problem finding the next assignment or negotiating the rate I want. I like change and the challenge of learning something new every 6 months or so. I've been a J2EE developer for the last 8 years and it's been a good wave to ride.
I'm not into the SCA myself, but I am into early music including early brass. There aren't going really to be trumpet solos from the Renaissance for a couple of reasons. For one thing, much of the secular instrumental music (aside from keyboard and lute) prior to the Baroque period wasn't notated, because music notation was still developing and many people couldn't read music. The invention of the printing press certainly helped in that regard, but that music tended to be geared more toward vocal, sacred, or polyphonic instruments and/or ensembles. So much of non-keyboard/lute solo instrumental music probably wasn't written down or published, it was more likely to be improvised.
And there wasn't really a concept of "solo trumpet" as you're thinking of it - it was definitely more of an ensemble instrument, particularly because it didn't have the capability to be a solo instrument without having valves. The first true solo I can think of for trumpet is the Bach 2nd Brandenburg, much later than the time period you are looking for. Bach must have known some amazing trumpet players - if you hear that piece played on period instruments it's really incredible.
A couple of suggestions - first ditch the trumpet for period music. A cornetto can be had for under $500 (http://www.jeremywest.co.uk/cmi/index.html). It looks nothing like a trumpet, but uses a brass mouthpiece and so is considered a brass instrument but with a much more subdued sound than a modern trumpet. It has recorder-like fingerings, and as a trumpet player you should be able to pick it up quite easily. It will go really well with the whole SCA environment, both visually and aurally.
Second, go the the Choral Public Domain library and find some pieces you like. Lively madrigals would probably work for what you are looking for. Take some of those melodies and adapt that for instrumental playing - add some ornamentation to make it more interesting. If you can get some fellow SCA'ers to join you with some percussion instruments, there you have it.
Another option is to go to your local university library (normal public library won't likely have a large selection) and look up Renaissance instrumental consort pieces. You might be able to adapt some of the parts to become more of a solo.
Also, do yourself a favor and find some good recordings by Ensemble Doulce Mémoire, Concerto Palatino, etc. Learn to appreciate the sound of early brass instruments.
I'd say the number one reason is because the rest of the world knows that we don't really care what they think of us. For those who spend the time coming up with lists like this, that must be really annoying. So go ahead, keep on hating, and we'll keep on not caring.
The English word you were looking for is "hurdy gurdy." Don't judge all medieval music based on that one instrument. Very little instrumental music was notated before the Renaissance and what has survived isn't typically solo material. Certainly not with the hurdy gurdy, which was (and still is) used more as an accompaniment drone. For something more interesting, check out ensembles like Anonymous 4, Sequentia, or David Munrow's Early Music Consort.
Lots of music sounds the same to me and/or drives me crazy. As far am I concerned, everything went downhill after 1750 (death of Bach.) But being an organist, I guess I would be a bit biased about that.
There are many different temperaments which use a 12-note scale. And you're confusing well temperament with equal temperament. Bach did not introduce or use equal temperament. In fact Bach wrote the Well-Tempered Clavier to exploit the different sonorities of the 24 major and minor keys as demonstrated by a well-tempered instrument. In well temperament, each key is playable but has its own unique quality, as opposed to the concept of equal temperament, where every key sounds exactly the same (and inherently out of tune.) Listen to a recording performed on an instrument tuned in a well temperament, and the difference will be apparent.
Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "All that medieval stuff that never leaves the one key". First, there was no concept of key in the medieval period - everything was written in modes which is an entirely different type of theory from modern keys. Second, I think your statement shows that you haven't listened to much medieval music. A musical period that covers almost 1000 years (500 - 1450) does have a lot to offer in variety on many levels, if only you take the time to pay attention.
If people would actually vote in elections instead of sitting on their lazy asses whining all day and not actually doing anything, maybe we'd have some better people in power.
No, we'd only have different people in power. Unfortunately, they'd still be politicians.
Hey, I'm female and I've been in the IT industry for about 10 years. I do have to say in spite of a lot of the juvenile sexist crap posted on Slashdot, the vast majority of guys I've encountered in the workforce have been intelligent and non-sexist in their behavior toward me. There have been many cases where I was the only woman in the department, and even one case where I was the only woman in the company. I have worked in a lot of different companies in several states, but perhaps I have just been very fortunate in that regard.
I think the GP poster was initially making a good point about personal responsibility, but unfortunately he had to ruin it with all the sexist BS ranting. I suspect that he, like alot of the other guys on here who post nonsense like that, feel safe in the relatively anonymous world of the internet, and post a lot of things that they'd never dare say in person - especially when they know their wife/girlfriend/mom will never see it. The more vehement they are online about it, the more I think they are compensating for their own shortcomings in real life relationships. I bet the GP poster's wife would get a good laugh to hear about how he's the big "MAN of the house."
You know, I was with you until you brought up all this "MAN of the house" nonsense. Apparently in your world, the little woman is on the same level as the whiny kids who have to be told "No!" to expensive cell phones and cable TV. I am all for personal responsibility and choice, not having kids when you can't afford it and so on. However, the MAN of the house isn't the only one who gets to make those choices! And if you're treating your wife like some child who can't make responsible decisions instead of an adult partner in your marriage who actually has a brain, then yes, you are an asshole. Or if you married a whiny little girl who cares more about material things than she does about her family's needs, what does that say about YOUR choices in life?
A fellow music theorist turned computer person here - got throught the first year of a PhD program in music theory before deciding to switch careers. The main thing that changed my mind was working a $7/hr part-time job over the summer after that first year. We were scoring standardized music tests, and that job required a music degree. Problem was, many of the other folks already had their PhD, and I realized I didn't want to earn that degree and then think making $7/hr was a good or necessary thing. So I bit the bullet, gave up my TA and got a second masters degree in MIS through the college of business. I'd always had an interest in computers, and had already taken a number of CS courses for fun.
I could have just quit school (and I was very tempted to do so many times because I was so burnt out), but getting the masters and using the college recruitment process definitely got my foot in the door much more quickly. I started as a programmer for a major telco company, and since this was during the dot-com days, was able to job hop my way to several promotions and raises, learning a lot along the way. I also used my experience as a college instructor (having taught music appreciation and theory) to find additional work teaching Java programming. That helped me learn even more (one of the best ways to learn something is to teach it, in my opinion) and looks good on the resume.
Of course, my music degrees usually come up as a topic in job interviews, everyone wants to know what instrument(s) I play (harpsichord, organ, trombone, by the way.) For whatever reason, that seems to fascinate people and I suppose it helps get my resume noticed that much more, which is fine with me.
Making the decision to switch was tough, but I haven't regretted it for a moment. For one thing, it's given me a lot of flexibility in terms of job location. In music theory, you're lucky to get a job at a community college. I also have the income now to enjoy music as a hobby, for example, I bought a couple of nice trombones and a double-manual harpsichord, which I never would have been able to afford had I stuck with a career in music. I still stay very active musically, so I don't feel like all that time I spent studying music was wasted. The training I have allows me participate in some high-level ensembles. I even keep my theory skills up to date by transcribing facsimiles into modern editions from time to time, something I enjoy doing (black mensural notation, anyone?) One of these days I may go back and get my PhD, but probably in software engineering rather than music theory.
For some reason, the photography market seems particularly susceptible to this practice. It's very well known and the topic is discussed often on photography forums.
I've shopped with both B&H and Adorama and have been very satisfied with both in terms of price and service. However, even these retailers will try to upsell... after you place an order you get a voicemail or email saying you need to call them in order to confirm the order. Then the sales person will try to sell filters, warranties, etc. Not super-high pressure, and no misrepresentation about whether the product is in stock, or any other scam tactics.
I do have a preference for Adorama because when I ordered an expensive lense from B&H, they didn't ship it until I returned their call. In my experience with Adorama they will go ahead and ship the order and without the return phonecall. As someone pointed out, keep in mind that these are Jewish-run businesses and so will be closed on any related holidays, so plan ahead if you're in a rush.
There's also the fact that no one is pushing for a disclaimer sticker for any other scientific theory...
As a matter of fact, I've been pushing for a disclaimer on the theory of gravity. There is nothing to prove that there is not a giant invisible hand pushing everything to the ground, and I feel that both sides of the debate should be presented in the classroom.
Sorry for the double - another thing I meant to mention is that since you're singing bass (and often by yourself), you're really the foundation on which the rest of the choir depends. Your pitch, which will often be the root of the chord, is what they'll be tuning to, and the root movement in your part is what drives toward cadences. Uncertainty on your part will affect everything above you. This means that a basic knowledge of music theory will help you, and your choir, all that much more!
Slashdot Mirror
This question clearly demonstrates that the OP has no understanding of the software development process. I've been doing software development for the last 15 years, mostly as a consultant, and have been on A LOT of projects at many different clients. I have yet to see one with "excellent product specs" completed up front. Why? Because customers never know what they want until they see it. And even when they think they have defined something well, they don't understand what they will actually get back.
Software is very abstract and unless you are a developer or a technical person (which most customers/users aren't), then it's very difficult to conceptualize how it will work once implemented. Then there's the reality of changing customer requirements and priorities. I'd like to know how the OP is writing perfect specs when such a thing doesn't exist in the real world. And there are many other aspects to development which the OP doesn't seem to understand either. Who is doing the business and technical analysis of these requirements? What's the process when requirements change? Where is QA and user acceptance testing in all of this?
I suspect nobody is doing these things. What's really happening is that he writes something up based on vague requirements (which are likely to change), throws it over the wall to a developer, and expects a polished product to be thrown back over. Meanwhile the customer didn't understand what they were asking for in the first place, changed their requirements, increased scope, got something back that was maybe close to the written spec but actually wasn't what they wanted in their mind, with no analysis or design having been done, that wasn't ever tested by anyone other the developer who wrote it. And all of those scenarios are called "bugs" by the OP. This is a dysfunctional process that is unfortunately all too common. No wonder your developers balk at fixing this stuff for free.
I don't doubt that there are bugs in the code, especially if the OP is trying to do this on the cheap. There is no substitute for experienced programmers, and there's a reason that people who are experienced cost more. So the first problem is that the OP thinks he can get something for nothing or next to it. But the main problem here is the OP's lack of understanding about the software development process.
If you want to improve things and not have your customers complaining all the time, then start with yourself - read up on software development methodology, ditch the waterfall/throw over the wall approach, and pay up for developers who know what they are doing. I'd suggest a more agile method where customers are very involved in the process, are able to get their hands on the product as it's being developed and provide continuous feedback. Otherwise, look in the mirror and expect more of the same. Developers don't need your empathy, they need a competent project manager.
I see paired programming as just another gimmick to get around the fact that there is no substitute for having experienced programmers and effective code reviews. As a consultant, I've worked on many agile projects, including some involving strict XP paired programming, and didn't see any better quality with that than with anything else. It's all about who you have working on the project, having decent management and a true agile philosophy ... not "agile theater."
I'm an experienced developer and I've interviewed a lot of people myself. As a consultant, I've also frequently been the interviewee. It's easy to weed out the BS types by engaging them in discussions not just about what they've done, but get into the why and how, the pros and cons of various technologies, methodologies, etc. Give them hypothetical scenarios to find out what approach they would take. If they throw out buzzwords and can't explain how/when/why they used something, alternatives they have considered, etc, then things become obvious. That also goes a long way toward showing the candidate's potential, how much of a proactive learner they are, and so on, unlike interview gimmicks. I think coding tests are poor substitute for an effective interview.
Be aware that for an experienced developer, the interview goes both ways. I may want to see some examples of your code to see if your team is up to my standards, and I will certainly be asking many questions myself. If I'm expected to jump through lame interview hoops as part of the process, then it's likely not something I will be interested in - I tend to turn down those interviews.
So it's better to lift a lighter weight more often, than a heavier one just a couple of times.
No, the only thing that lifting lighter weights more often will give you is the ability to lift light things many times. That's called endurance. Lifting heavy things less often will give you the ability to lift heavy things. That's called strength. Which one is "better" for you depends on your fitness goals.
Certainly hummingbirds will like the sugar water as much as bees do.
Hummingbirds only exist in the Western hemisphere. But certainly hummingbird feeders could be used for this. The feeders are usually small enough that most larger birds aren't going to be able to use them, though I do find the occasional oriole or even woodpecker on mine. An ant guard will keep other types of insects away.
Yeah, funny how nobody gets upset about all the white-guy stereotypes on the show - Homer, a fat lazy stupid slob, the doughnut-eating police chief (with pig-like upturned nose), the evil corporate boss, the corrupt politician mayor of the town, the quack doctor, televangelist ... guess they're funny until it hits too close to home, eh?
And in doing so, accomplish more than you.
As the oldest child (and only girl), my problem solving skills included torturing and beating the crap out of my younger brothers. A later problem solution consisted of moving out of the house before they got big enough to return the favor. :-)
And I don't care squat about job security, promotion opportunities, or other intangibles that come along with permanent positions. I've been around the block enough times to know there is no such thing as job security, and working your way up the ladder involves way too much political game playing and too much stress and effort compared to the reward. What I care about is using technologies I'm interested in and working on good projects. That, and show me the money! This is why I'm a contractor. I come in, do my job well, and when I leave the office, I'm on to doing other things in life that I care about. My resume is very strong and I never have a problem finding the next assignment or negotiating the rate I want. I like change and the challenge of learning something new every 6 months or so. I've been a J2EE developer for the last 8 years and it's been a good wave to ride.
So what he's actually saying is that all agnostics are female?
And there wasn't really a concept of "solo trumpet" as you're thinking of it - it was definitely more of an ensemble instrument, particularly because it didn't have the capability to be a solo instrument without having valves. The first true solo I can think of for trumpet is the Bach 2nd Brandenburg, much later than the time period you are looking for. Bach must have known some amazing trumpet players - if you hear that piece played on period instruments it's really incredible.
A couple of suggestions - first ditch the trumpet for period music. A cornetto can be had for under $500 (http://www.jeremywest.co.uk/cmi/index.html). It looks nothing like a trumpet, but uses a brass mouthpiece and so is considered a brass instrument but with a much more subdued sound than a modern trumpet. It has recorder-like fingerings, and as a trumpet player you should be able to pick it up quite easily. It will go really well with the whole SCA environment, both visually and aurally.
Second, go the the Choral Public Domain library and find some pieces you like. Lively madrigals would probably work for what you are looking for. Take some of those melodies and adapt that for instrumental playing - add some ornamentation to make it more interesting. If you can get some fellow SCA'ers to join you with some percussion instruments, there you have it.
Another option is to go to your local university library (normal public library won't likely have a large selection) and look up Renaissance instrumental consort pieces. You might be able to adapt some of the parts to become more of a solo.
Also, do yourself a favor and find some good recordings by Ensemble Doulce Mémoire, Concerto Palatino, etc. Learn to appreciate the sound of early brass instruments.
I'd say the number one reason is because the rest of the world knows that we don't really care what they think of us. For those who spend the time coming up with lists like this, that must be really annoying. So go ahead, keep on hating, and we'll keep on not caring.
The English word you were looking for is "hurdy gurdy." Don't judge all medieval music based on that one instrument. Very little instrumental music was notated before the Renaissance and what has survived isn't typically solo material. Certainly not with the hurdy gurdy, which was (and still is) used more as an accompaniment drone. For something more interesting, check out ensembles like Anonymous 4, Sequentia, or David Munrow's Early Music Consort.
Lots of music sounds the same to me and/or drives me crazy. As far am I concerned, everything went downhill after 1750 (death of Bach.) But being an organist, I guess I would be a bit biased about that.
Oh BTW, I'm not man. ;-)
Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "All that medieval stuff that never leaves the one key". First, there was no concept of key in the medieval period - everything was written in modes which is an entirely different type of theory from modern keys. Second, I think your statement shows that you haven't listened to much medieval music. A musical period that covers almost 1000 years (500 - 1450) does have a lot to offer in variety on many levels, if only you take the time to pay attention.
If people would actually vote in elections instead of sitting on their lazy asses whining all day and not actually doing anything, maybe we'd have some better people in power.
No, we'd only have different people in power. Unfortunately, they'd still be politicians.
Hey, I'm female and I've been in the IT industry for about 10 years. I do have to say in spite of a lot of the juvenile sexist crap posted on Slashdot, the vast majority of guys I've encountered in the workforce have been intelligent and non-sexist in their behavior toward me. There have been many cases where I was the only woman in the department, and even one case where I was the only woman in the company. I have worked in a lot of different companies in several states, but perhaps I have just been very fortunate in that regard.
I think the GP poster was initially making a good point about personal responsibility, but unfortunately he had to ruin it with all the sexist BS ranting. I suspect that he, like alot of the other guys on here who post nonsense like that, feel safe in the relatively anonymous world of the internet, and post a lot of things that they'd never dare say in person - especially when they know their wife/girlfriend/mom will never see it. The more vehement they are online about it, the more I think they are compensating for their own shortcomings in real life relationships. I bet the GP poster's wife would get a good laugh to hear about how he's the big "MAN of the house."
You know, I was with you until you brought up all this "MAN of the house" nonsense. Apparently in your world, the little woman is on the same level as the whiny kids who have to be told "No!" to expensive cell phones and cable TV. I am all for personal responsibility and choice, not having kids when you can't afford it and so on. However, the MAN of the house isn't the only one who gets to make those choices! And if you're treating your wife like some child who can't make responsible decisions instead of an adult partner in your marriage who actually has a brain, then yes, you are an asshole. Or if you married a whiny little girl who cares more about material things than she does about her family's needs, what does that say about YOUR choices in life?
I could have just quit school (and I was very tempted to do so many times because I was so burnt out), but getting the masters and using the college recruitment process definitely got my foot in the door much more quickly. I started as a programmer for a major telco company, and since this was during the dot-com days, was able to job hop my way to several promotions and raises, learning a lot along the way. I also used my experience as a college instructor (having taught music appreciation and theory) to find additional work teaching Java programming. That helped me learn even more (one of the best ways to learn something is to teach it, in my opinion) and looks good on the resume.
Of course, my music degrees usually come up as a topic in job interviews, everyone wants to know what instrument(s) I play (harpsichord, organ, trombone, by the way.) For whatever reason, that seems to fascinate people and I suppose it helps get my resume noticed that much more, which is fine with me.
Making the decision to switch was tough, but I haven't regretted it for a moment. For one thing, it's given me a lot of flexibility in terms of job location. In music theory, you're lucky to get a job at a community college. I also have the income now to enjoy music as a hobby, for example, I bought a couple of nice trombones and a double-manual harpsichord, which I never would have been able to afford had I stuck with a career in music. I still stay very active musically, so I don't feel like all that time I spent studying music was wasted. The training I have allows me participate in some high-level ensembles. I even keep my theory skills up to date by transcribing facsimiles into modern editions from time to time, something I enjoy doing (black mensural notation, anyone?) One of these days I may go back and get my PhD, but probably in software engineering rather than music theory.
Just keep in mind that gravity is a theory, not a fact.
I thought it was a joke too ... but it really says that in the article! Reminds me of the old "I've fallen and can't get up" commercial.
I've shopped with both B&H and Adorama and have been very satisfied with both in terms of price and service. However, even these retailers will try to upsell ... after you place an order you get a voicemail or email saying you need to call them in order to confirm the order. Then the sales person will try to sell filters, warranties, etc. Not super-high pressure, and no misrepresentation about whether the product is in stock, or any other scam tactics.
I do have a preference for Adorama because when I ordered an expensive lense from B&H, they didn't ship it until I returned their call. In my experience with Adorama they will go ahead and ship the order and without the return phonecall. As someone pointed out, keep in mind that these are Jewish-run businesses and so will be closed on any related holidays, so plan ahead if you're in a rush.
But I think we'll need a disclaimer sticker on that waste ... after all, nuclear physics is theory, not fact you know.
As a matter of fact, I've been pushing for a disclaimer on the theory of gravity. There is nothing to prove that there is not a giant invisible hand pushing everything to the ground, and I feel that both sides of the debate should be presented in the classroom.
Recall that in the pilot episode of TOS that Majel Barrett played number one, and was even wearing pants!
Sorry for the double - another thing I meant to mention is that since you're singing bass (and often by yourself), you're really the foundation on which the rest of the choir depends. Your pitch, which will often be the root of the chord, is what they'll be tuning to, and the root movement in your part is what drives toward cadences. Uncertainty on your part will affect everything above you. This means that a basic knowledge of music theory will help you, and your choir, all that much more!