////In principle I agree with Josepp (and how often does THAT happen!??).////

No, you don't. You're here to try and pick a fight as usual.

Folks, I'll say this one more time:

I'm not talking about performance. If you're good, you're good--everybody knows that. I'm talking about accepting money to teach something that you are not qualified to teach.

If you teach 500 people music theory wrong and some of them, in turn, teach this to others--you are damaging our culture. There is only one right way to teach music theory. You can't pick and choose and it is not a matter of faith. In Western music theory, there IS such a thing as a B-sharp whether in equal temperament or any other. If you teach people that there isn't, you are wrong. It's as simple as that.

Just because you're good on guitar or a great opera vocalist that does not automatically qualify you to teach music theory. What qualifies you is knowing your music theory.

It's not about making music fun. If you have to have music made fun for you before you learn it, you're not going to make it as a musician. It involves study and it involves practice and it involves lots of both. There's no way around it. You have to take your lessons home and practice them. And if you come back and you're not playing them correctly, your teacher has to know that and he has to tell you that it's not right. He can't do that if he doesn't know how to read music. Sorry, but that's the truth.

And if you're taking lessons from anyone who is skipping the music-reading part and only focusing on performance, I would recommend finding another teacher immediately. You need both. The idea that music theory is going to hurt you is pure stupidity. I've never known anyone whose musical abilities suffered because they knew their music theory. I've known people whose careers never got off the ground beause they didn't know it.