Bad Reputation

I over simplify, but how could reading music not help you? It's a no brainer to me, but the origional idea that us less than musically literate musicians are inferior just because ........... well thats silly too. Have I mentioned I don't really care what other musicians think of me? :lol: Yeah, thats probably a lie. :lol:

:mrgreen:

TR, I think you nailed it with that one word "inferior". We all tend to get a bit defensive if we think somebody has aimed that one at us..... even when we know that.... well... maybe there's a grain of truth in there, and we would be better off with some extra skills. :wink: I'm clearly an inferior guitar player to most of the regulars here, but I try not to spend time trying to justify that, instead I prefer to work on closing the gaps in skills and knowledge - because it's all good to have.

Cheers,

Chris

To all who don't read music -yet,

Reading music is as useful to a musician as being able to read and write any other language you speak is. It's that simple, and the reasons are the same. It's a very efficient way to store a huge quantity of information and it's a wonderfully useful way to communicate anything from big ideas to small details.

Imagine a classroom.

The topic for the day is a poem that takes 4 full minutes to read.

In both cases they won't all learn the poem properly, or fully understand all the detail. But the second is clearly a much more efficient way to get down to business . Surely I don't have to spell out why?

When I play with my mates we all read music, so it's like Scene 2. Everything is very much quicker, more accurate, less misunderstood, easier to discuss, etc. Plus it's simple to take away to work on later and to refresh our memories about what we did and said. We still can (and do) use our ears, demonstrate things to each other and so on. There is no down-side to our using our reading abilities, but the advantages are enormous. End of story.

Please give it a try. As NoteBoat says, the time invested is small, but the pay-off huge. As he also says, the earlier you start the less time you'll spend with Mary and her Lamb. But you can even rock that one up to keep it cheerful 8) .

Scrybe,
<snippy>
And I like how you subtly inferred that the responses from the non-readers were not good! Ha
<snippy>

Not at all, cnev! I was merely trying to suck A big time with the dot-readers to get them to answer my Q, and thought it a more subtle way of doing so than posting "please please please please please please please answer this for me ye gods of dots and rhythmic hieroglyphics" :wink:

And it worked! Thanks for the responses guys. I'm finding I need at least ten minutes daily to keep it up - I can read one-note stuff okay, but any more than one note at a time, or alternating bass and treble lines, and a break of a couple of days is sufficient to leave me stumbling right now.

Another question - when reading for sight-reading practice - how much effort do you put into eg phrasing and general expression? I'm finding paying too much attention to this can knock me off following all the notes accurately - is it okay to focus on just hitting each note cleanly for now, and then worry about e.g. should I use a rest stroke or a free stroke here, should I add some vibrato, etc, once I'm reading more comfortably? I trust I can do this without it being detrimental to my progress?

Scrybe, there's phrasing and there's phrasing, if you know what I mean :)

Like I said, sight reading at a gig is different from practicing sight reading. You'll often have time to look everything over, and probably even enough time to run through the sticky bits with the volume down. And when it is showtime, phrasing in a paid situation is important. But what's more important depends on context - that half note with the accent mark should definitely be the right pitch (with or without vibrato)... those sixteenth notes with all the accidentals and the legato mark above the phrase swing the other way - get the rhythm right and make them smoothly connected, and if you play C# on the "e" after 3 instead of Cx, you'll probably end up ok.

For sight reading practice it's a bit different. You're only doing each piece once (although I'll give you some tricks about that in a minute). You're really practicing your interpretation, at sight, of anything that's on the paper. If it's on the paper, it's important; if it's not, don't worry about it. Get the rhythms right (this is THE most important single element), the pitch, the dynamic marks, the accents, and the phrasing that's marked (staccato, legato, vibrato marks, etc).

Rest stroke vs. free stroke is different - that's a performance issue, rather than a notation issue. Even though scores can be marked with string numbers, finger numbers, pick direction, etc, these are suggestions for performance. If you can play it another way, that's ok. (Ask any contest judge - they're never supposed to deduct points if the performer uses a different fingering than what's on the page, as long as they get the notes right)

I don't practice sight reading classical guitar music - only plectrum stuff. But sometimes I'll fingerpick that for variety. So perhaps Alan or other classical players will have more tips than I will. When I do sight read and fingerpick, my default choice is rest stroke fingers/free stroke thumb. If I see overlapping tied notes or lots of chords, that changes to all free stroke; if I see sixths or larger intervals, or single note lines that descend to the 5th or 6th string, it changes to all rest stroke.

Ok, the tricks for playing pieces more than once... when I first realized my reading was sub-standard, I had very little money for extra music (I was in college at the time). And you can't work on sight reading if you play the same thing over and over. So here's what I did: I took the music I already had and played it backwards :) Seriously. And if a piece had bar lines that made neat little columns of the measures, I'd play down - or up - the columns. I shared these tips with a classmate, and she had one of her own - she flipped the music over, and played it upside down.

Each of these has serious downsides. Playing backwards literally - starting at the last note and working forward - can give you some darn near impossible rhythms, especially if there are lots of ties. Playing backwards less strictly (starting with the last measure, beat one, playing the measure, then going to the penultimate measure beat one, etc) is easier, as is playing up/down columns, but you won't be able to do notes tied over bar lines well. Flipping the music upside down gives you some issues with modality - for example, lines that mean G/B in one direction will mean B/D the other - a major third becoming a minor third. And of course any key signature will have you playing the accidentals on the wrong lines :)

But really, all of this is good stuff. Playing the notes in a different order means you're playing them in a way other than the 'musical' way - you'll get strange rhythms, awkward leaps, etc. Being able to handle those will make you a better reader. And as a bonus, you can now play one piece of music several times and it's still sight reading practice!

A truly awesome response Noteboat, I'm gonna have to give those ideas for reusing a piece of music a try! Right now, I don't have enough music to play each piece just once, so I've been working through my pieces once each, then returning to the start before playing them a second time. There's enough space between the first and second play throughs for me not to recall the pieces well enough for it to be too problematic, but it suffers that I'm only working on e.g. keys and strange rhythms presenting in a pretty small body of work. Sight reading is definitely going to be a priority for my studies over the next few years though, and I really wish I'd got onto it earlier. That's one area where not having a guitar teacher really hurt my development - we'd read scores while listening to the music in some lessons in school, but there was never any time to cover this seriously on a playing level.

Sheet music is not expensive, if you're willing to look around a bit.

When I'm in Leeds, I go to the cheap book shop - they sell nothing but books that no-one else could flog - at very reduced prices. They invariably have something interesting.

Last year, I got a book of "100 tunes for 100 years" - all neatly laid out by decade and all in standard notation (£5.99 I paid). Then there's the real books - around 200 songs all in std notation.

Scrybe,

I was only kidding.

But I have a question for those who actually buy sheet music in standard notation for modern rock songs is it really accurate and vastly better than the tab out there because when I look at the books at the music store that have a song in both tab and std notation they are a bit better than the tab on the internet but far from 100% correct.

Isn't most rock music notated by some guy the publishing company hired to to the notation because I don't think most the bands would know how to write it out so aren't I getting someone's interpretation as what they hear the notes to be?

Isn't most rock music notated by some guy the publishing company hired to to the notation because I don't think most the bands would know how to write it out so aren't I getting someone's interpretation as what they hear the notes to be?

Hi Chris,

In many cases that's probably true. However, the general idea is that the person they hire probably has a better ear than most customers (including me), and will also give a more accurate rendition than many of the ‘home made' versions on the net. From my point of view, it also saves a whole lot of time trying to transcribe it myself. It's a quick and efficient way to get the necessary info about a song or tune. And I guess I also get the satisfaction of owning a legal copy (which does mean something to me, although others will disagree).

Worrying about possible inaccuracy is probably not really the main point either. A half way decent hobby player, let alone a pro, should be able to tell whether what they're playing off a page matches what they wanted to hear. If it doesn't then they should know how to alter it. If they can't tell the difference, well... who would care?... :wink:

Most notation based rock song books I've seen and/or bought give the musical essentials (not some sort of note by note scored part for drums, bass, rhythm, lead, vocals etc.) - i.e. enough information about the rhythm, melody and harmony to build the music to suit. The basic score may also give some extra pointers to the dynamic side of things.

For instance, the melody line you're given will typically be the ‘tune' you remember and it will be mostly about the part the singer sings (Try giving a singer a guitar tab, and see what they say... :twisted: ). This means that the notated music that you see is not necessarily just a copy of any tab you might see underneath, they can be two different parts. That's certainly the case in the one book that I have that also shows a tab - it's not just the same thing written in two formats. In that book (a Dylan songbook) the notation gives the melody - for reference by the singer and or a lead player - and the tab is a ‘paint by numbers' version of what to do with the chords (either strummed or finger-picked). One song is given in two versions - one picked the other strummed, in different keys. As a rhythm player I can choose which parts of the melody I can toss in as well, if I'm playing on my own. As I don't buy tab books, I don't know what the norm is for them.

Everything is variable depending on what your needs are. You can change the rhythm - either subtly or dramatically, add additional flourishes to the melody, and rearrange the harmony however you like. Usually this is done to suit the band members you have - how many you have, and their skills (or lack thereof...). In other words, you are expected to be able to add any further detail and arrangement for yourself, based on your level(s) of musicianship.

For instance, I have a Bruce Springsteen book with nearly 100 of his songs. At the top of the page you get diagrams for all the chords in the song. You also get the lyrics and a single line of notation ( 2-3 pages per song). It contains enough information to put the song back together, provided you have a reasonable working knowledge of how rock band music works. The score format can differ a bit for other types of music.

Is that what you wanted to know?

Cheers,

Chris

Thanks Chris yes that was more than enough info I find those notation/tab books terribly busy and difficult to deal with but I understand how they are laid out I just don't like them and after I went through an intial stage of buying several I never use them anymore.

I will admit I have gotten so used to the way my instructor tabs songs out I hate using anything else. He tabs the song but also includes the note duration etc so you have the rhythm and note duration so you can play the song even if you have never heard it before and since he just uses symbols most complete songs are no more than two pages where as in those books the may cover 5 - 10 pages, very annoying to me. Unfortunately that has left me in a little bind since I have become to dependant on it, the good thing is I can now pretty much play any song and have it down in a matter of hours but I'm not sure what would happen if I left my instructor. I guess I could struggle through those books if I had to but I'm all about economy of time so whatever gets me playing the song in the least amount of time is what I prefer. I work alot of hours and have a bunch of stuff going on and when we get together with the band on Friday nights I want to be prepared.

Anyway I always enjoy your cerebral take on many posts although I don't always agree with your line of thinking I enjoy reading different sides of the equation. I find that discussion like that can be a catalyst to try new things or at least to think about them in a different way.

T Unfortunately that has left me in a little bind since I have become to dependant on it, the good thing is I can now pretty much play any song and have it down in a matter of hours but I'm not sure what would happen if I left my instructor. I guess I could struggle through those books if I had to but I'm all about economy of time so whatever gets me playing the song in the least amount of time is what I prefer. I work alot of hours and have a bunch of stuff going on and when we get together with the band on Friday nights I want to be prepared.
I was exactly the same. I didn't start on all this until I was nearly 60, so I wanted the fastest and simplest way possible. When I started trying to play the piano I found reading a nightmare - to the point of thinking I must be musically dyslexic. I even went so far as to devise my own system of notation that had the information lined up in a way that related more directly to the piano layout. It also went down the page, instead of left to right on a staff. It worked, but transcribing everything into it was a pain. There are also perfectly good rival notation systems that don't use all those sharps and flats, but give each pitch a discrete name. Again, they work but are a fiddle to change to. Ultimate, none of them really seem any better either.

The two things that clinched learning standard notation for me were:

Anyway I always enjoy your cerebral take on many posts although I don't always agree with your line of thinking I enjoy reading different sides of the equation. I find that discussion like that can be a catalyst to try new things or at least to think about them in a different way.

Thanks for saying that - but I should add that I don't always agree with myself either ! :wink: As you say, it's a catalyst. That's why I write it all out - to try and find out whether the random thoughts hold up when put into print! It's also handy to sometimes discover (via replies and feedback) that it's still incomplete or wrong... :o

So I actually spent a fair bit of time yesterday working out how to answer your question (It could just as easily have been a couple of minutes, I never know in advance). I ended up scrubbing out numerous versions because they were badly put, sounded like they could be seen as pissing on tab readers, or just sounded wrong in some way. But trying to bash it into shape always seem to be a useful way to learn something. Maybe it's just becoming a necessity as the brain cells fade away... :)

If you do decide to try and learn notation I'm sure you won't have any trouble learning the format. What probably will take time is matching it swiftly to the movements. It's a bit like 'getting' bar chords but not being able to do them for a while. And like bar chords, some bits are tough, and others quite easy. Doing a little bit each day, with no pressure applied, seems to work. At least it did for me. As Roy said in another post it “sorta snuck up...”

Here's a message for you. See how long it takes to figure it out. If you get the noises right you should be able to pick the lyrics that go with it. It's just three words, repeated at the end of a pretty well known song. Roughly speaking it says “join in” - but not in those words...

You only need one finger on one string to play it. You can play the first note on the open B string.

Cheers,

Chris

Going from my own newbie experience I would guess that one of the reasons many guitarists can't read standard notation is that it is just so much easier now to do tabs. If you don't have the money for lessons, or the time, smarts and patience to teach yourself, then it is tabs or just don't play at all.

Hell, I want to learn to read music. I even took lessons to learn that as well as learning how to play, and the teacher just kept handing me tabs. I told him I wanted to learn to read notation, and I know he knew how, but he told me tabs were all I really needed right now.

I also had a guitarist friend who always harped on other people that they needed to learn to read and not just use tabs but when I would talk to him, he would tell me...wait for it...all I really needed was tabs. Do I look stupid or something? (Don't answer that.)

So, in my experience it has been nigh to impossible to find someone willing to take me seriously enough to teach me notation. Perhaps they think I am just a bored housewife, or a dumb broad, or it's too late for me to learn, I don't know. I have recently ordered Noteboat's book in hopes that I can teach myself. I do think part of being a musician is understanding how music works and I really do want to learn but it's been frustrating trying to. Btw, I went into the music theory forum a few times but that was way over my head.

Btw, I went into the music theory forum a few times but that was way over my head.

I should probably point out that I had four years of music lessons in school doing theory before coming here, and I like jazz, so many questions I ask there are not going to be the most basic. But please don't shy away from the place - if you post a question about something you want to know about, I'm sure it will get answered. I do sometimes think that section gets used by and benefits those of us with a little more experience, and our posting there puts off some who'd like to learn but find the place a little daunting. :oops:

Chris C - now your making me have to think :shock: I've been on the road for two straight weeks and haven't touched my guitar but if I'm not to stupid it looks like the same repeating notes being played anyway I'm trying to work it out in my head
but not sure when I'll have time.I'll give it a go when I get home hopefully tomorrow if my flights aren't canceled.

UGC I guess it depends on where you live my current instructor can/will teach me how to read if I asked but I really am consumed with learning more songs that is my current short term goal and to work on my lead playing which before anyone says I'm sure reading music may help but I still need to work on some of the more physical aspects like playing very fast passages which sight reading won't help that's more about practice, economy of movement and learning to relax more.

Great discussion thread!

Noteboat - you have provided the best rationale I've seen yet for most of us to put forth some effort to learn to read music. Although I'm probably in the 10% camp that doesn't need to read; the 80% group sounds like where I'd prefer to be. I've read books on music theory and actually find it interesting but I've never put in the effort to really learn to read music. Can you recommend any books/series to guide one in the process for learning to read standard notation for guitar? While I have several guitar instructional books, my eyes will gravitate to any tab on the page. Thanks! :D

Chris C - now your making me have to think :shock: I've been on the road for two straight weeks and haven't touched my guitar but if I'm not to stupid it looks like the same repeating notes being played anyway I'm trying to work it out in my head
but not sure when I'll have time.I'll give it a go when I get home hopefully tomorrow if my flights aren't canceled.

UGC I guess it depends on where you live my current instructor can/will teach me how to read if I asked but I really am consumed with learning more songs that is my current short term goal and to work on my lead playing which before anyone says I'm sure reading music may help but I still need to work on some of the more physical aspects like playing very fast passages which sight reading won't help that's more about practice, economy of movement and learning to relax more.

Well just to help you out, the dot there means that the note is extended to half its value ( in this case the note takes up 3 beats because of the dot)

I played it, but didnt recognize it O_o, guess its just a different age zone O_O.