-
To start with - I'm an autodidact that don't read music. Nevertheless I have had the pleasure to play with other musicians all my life. Born 1947 and started playing in 1961. I have always wanted to learn more and still do so.
I read only the chords but can play all the "difficult" ones even if I don't manage to do so in every position. Comping, playing chords & chord progressions is the stronger side of my jazz knowledge. I can also improvise decent in different styles (pop, blues and a little jazz) without making a fool of myself.
So what is my main issue?
Well, I have noticed that for most, but not every, opportunity I play it is possible for me handle the musical situations without being thrown out of the stage and that with our without sheets of music.
But - I have seen other "players" that are excellent readers of the small dots (that I don't know anything about) and are very good musicians. The strange thing is that without their sheets of music they can play nothing?
In Sweden, maybe in other countries too, a common statement about guitarists are: "The best way to get a guitar-player to keep quiet is to put sheet of music in front of him". With certain other musicians it seems to be the opposite.
What do you think about the advantages or disadvantages in this matter?
/R
-
02-18-2010 11:04 AM
-
I've played with many classical and classically trained musicians over the years. I found the same thing that you did-the overwhelming majority of these fine musicians can not play without the dots, and can not improvise.
They are no fun at parties, and they never get "the girl"!!!
Now-I can read, but wouldn't call myself a sight reader. I need to sit with a piece and play it through once or twice to get it in on my brain. Of course, I'd probably find it easier if I bothered to practice reading and playing, but I don't-too blooming lazy, I guess.
It certainly is an advantage to read. Why? Well-sometimes the MD will hand me some music and just say-"Bill- work out the chords from the piano lines and bass and write them in for yourself whichever way you want". Mind you-she's lazy- she'll orchestrate for the brass, but expects everyone else to just know what she wants!! That'd take hours if you couldnt read at all.
My advise is-there is no downside to learning to read-it all helps.
I think most MD's realize that guitarists are a different breed-they like to do things their own way, and want to write things down their own way.
-
Reading helps, especially for one who would play jazz. For starters, there are all the tunes you want to learn but may not have a recording of handy; reading is how you 'learn 'em right'.
A player should be able to play a lot *without* reading anything---it's called memory on the one hand and improvisation on the other!---but reading is a great plus for the musician.
-
I have also met classical players who cannot improvise.
But they never learned.
I'm sure they could do it if they applied themselves.
-
autodidact=self taught. New word for me. Thanks
It shouldn't be an either/or situation. Work on everything.
-
Autodidact is a very common word used among painters, sculptors and other people in creative works or hobbies. These are the ones that never went to academies or art schools but still work in that field.
Originally Posted by Gramps
So of course a musician can also be called an autodidact if he has no education in his field or on his instrument.
/R
-
learning to read music never hurt anyone, and those who say it did just need something to blame their playing on.
-
Originally Posted by ingreen
I can't see why there would be something wrong by asking a question based on your own experiences. I never said that one or the other alternative is right or wrong. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
I never stated to be a professional musician or a "well-rounded, capable jazz guitarist". Did I say that there is something wrong with reading music?
The question asked was: "What do you think about the advantages or disadvantages in this matter?" and is based on my thread in this subject. I just hoped for a second opinion.
/R
-
1. I've never heard anyone say they regret learning how to read music, but I've heard plenty say they regret not knowing how to read music.
2. Just because a classical musician (who can read music) can't improvise doesn't imply that learning to read music makes you forget how to improvise.
-
I can't think of any disadvantages to learning to read music. Just don't let it get in the way of your ear training. And there's no reason it should.
There are some technically very advanced classical guitarists I've met that play beautifully, but have very weak ears. But that's not the fault of all the reading they did, reading music was the only way they learned their tunes. Their weak ears was because they didn't spend any time developing their ears.
-
Okay, here's my $0.02... I love to jam and don't need written music to play, but being able to read has expanded my knowledge of the fretboard and helped me learn things that I would not have otherwise. Personally I try not to let myself be limited in anyway.
-
One thing missing from this thread...it's actually satisfying and fun to read music...and it does take a while.
I would feel strange calling myself a musician if I couldn't read, but I'm sure that will be controversial. I guess my question would be why on earth would you NOT want to read the language that you love??
BTW...it's absurd to think that reading could HURT your musicianship????????
I love to read music and you get better every day but never master it in a lifetime....it's a fun journey.
Sailor
-
Music is a language, and not being able to read or write music is the same as being functionally illiterate in any other language - you can do it, but it makes things really difficult.
-
I wouldn't agree to that music is just a language. Studies suggest, that music is much more bound to feelings and emotions, than words are (if they are at all).
I usually do not work with sheets as well, but whenever I get stuck, I use them to proceed. But I'm just a hobby player and thats enough for me. So I think that everyone has to find his own approach, which to a high degree depends on the ambitions one has.
-
I like Jimbachs post. Not being condescending at all but functional illiterate does define it perfectly. You CAN play, (functional), but CAN'T read, (illiterate).
On another note....I just finished a Grad class in Music Philosophy and one of the leading music philosophers of our day, Bennet Reimer, goes to extraordinary lengths to show that music is NOT a language!! Too much for here but worthy of looking at his writings...fascinating.
As an undergrad I had a professor who always used to say, "we love the music"...meaning the actual printed page. I think it still resounds with me because it gave us an appreciation for the beauty of the written notation itself, and how much 5 lines and seven notes can convey.
Sailor
-
A rudimentary knowledge can be quickly learned.
By the the rudiments I mean egbdf and face, key
signatures and note values. From there you will be able
follow the melody and that always gives you a leg up.
You would still be miles from Glenn Gould but miles
ahead of where you were.
-
Glenn Gould...need I say more??
Sailor
-
I didn't say music was *just* a language. However, what if it is? Language gives us Shakespeare and Keats, in addition to expense reports and legal briefs. Surely 'mere words' can convey a wide variety of emotion. Notes and rests are the words and punctuation of music. A gifted musician is like a gifted actor or orator, interpreting their language. Originally Posted by martins
I should also point out that, with respect to music, I am barely literate, and am constantly frustrated by lack of ability to convey what I play on guitar (or hear in my head) into written form. Imagine if you had a great thought, or a message of love and affection, and you lacked the tools to commit them to paper. The frustration is similar.
-
At a minumum, I think you need to be able to read enough standard notation to pull a melody off a lead sheet.
But I'm with Gramps - no need for there to be a choice. Learn standard, learn TAB, and also keep using your ear. Each has it advantages for the guitarist, depending on the situation.
-
I always work at being a better sight reader, but I have encountered the situation often where the best reader I am playing with is lost without any charts.
-
Just recently I started to learn to read and write standard notaion. It's slow going for me because I always had a mental block about it. One day I realized that not being able to read and write ( even crudely ) was analogous to being in a library and wanting to read other peoples ideas and not being able to. I also wanted to be able to notate my ideas. It is not as difficult as I thought. Even fun at times. I'll never be great at it. But I can wade my way though musical licks and passages enough so I am learning more than I ever could before.
Give it a try. I recommend getting GuitarPro 5. It allows to write in TAB and helps you to learn what all those dots and stems mean.
Gregg
-
I can read a little bit, more like decrypting actually, certainly not sight-reading. It's way, way easier on a keyboard instrument than on the guitar, for a simple reason: on Kbd, on note points to one and only one key, while on the guitar it might correspond to up to 6 positions on the neck.
I suppose that's why tabs are more popular for guitarists. I can't read tabs though
.
-
Exactly, I have a friend who is a kind of multi-instrumentalist, he has often told me just that. It makes the reading more complicated on the guitar because it depends on in which position you are on the neck. Originally Posted by Lambosoa
I can read a little bit, more like decrypting actually, certainly not sight-reading. It's way, way easier on a keyboard instrument than on the guitar, for a simple reason: on Kbd, on note points to one and only one key, while on the guitar it might correspond to up to 6 positions on the neck.
I suppose that's why tabs are more popular for guitarists. I can't read tabs though.
I like your way of describing the reading as "decrypting", so far even I can analyse a song that isn't too complicated.
/R
-
GuitaRoland :
My "2 cents" also...
Reading is good for me when...
-I'm learning from books with only standard notation
(most methods, fakebooks and jazz technique books)
-I'm working with other musicians (non-guitarists)
(playing unknown repertoire or even mine/their originals)
-I'm composing my own music (or writing down transcriptions)
(Reading better = writing better!)
-Trying to learn piano voicings and progressions
(A very useful musical tool to understand harmony!)
I learned to read at first with the Bill Leavitt books (Berklee) and some of the Galbraith volumes.
The biggest issue, for me, was to learn "all the notes" on the fingerboard and then figure out the f******g rhythms!
Once I could read any note and any rhythm, it became deceptively easy!
I wish you luck in your reading endeavors,
-
Learn to read music. Do you want to be a guitarist or a musician?
Reply With Quote
Raney and Aebersold - Great Interview (1986)
Yesterday, 11:21 PM in Improvisation