|
find a music teacher
|
Representing
8,707
music teachers
|
|
|
| ||
| * powered by Bullseye Zip Code/Store Locator Software | ||
| login | join now | forgot password | Saturday, July 04, 2009 |
Teacher Lounge
HOT BUTTONS
TOPIC - Do students need to learn how to read music to be successful musicians?4/25/98 MusicStaff.com contact@musicstaff.com
I don't think that it is necessary for students to learn to read music. I have always maintained that the most important component of making music is to express yourself. This is not something that you aquire from reading music. In fact over the years I have discovered that it can sometimes lead to players who are technique oriented, but don't know how to let go and feel the music.
5/19/98 Danny dbass45@yahoo.com
I agree with you in regards to being able to express yourself. However, music is a language just like English or Spanish, and to be able to fully understand it, you should also be able to read and write in that language. I believe that it should be something that is incorporated into music education to give the student all the benefits of his/her instrument. Whether they choose to use that knowledge would then be left up to the individual.
5/19/98 Jim Kabara kabara@tjsintsys.com
I feel it is important to learn how to read music ! The students I teach are not playing "gigs". They are all students in music programs that require music reading. I believe that it is very helpful to have the ability to read music in order to better understand it and play it.
5/21/98 Bill Lurie guitar@autoroute.net
As we are a private guitar school, most of our students do not want to read music. Tablature has become the "notes" for an entire generation of guitar players. We tend to teach written music to students with previous instruction on other instruments and/or with students who require it for University music classes. We usually attempt to teach reading with most of our students, but we can't insist upon it. Unlike a public school, our students pay us. It's difficult these days trying to convince a student they have to read. They know they can obtain the music over the internet, written in tab. In this respect, guitar may be different from other instruments. There are classical folios written entirely in tablature. So, while we try and encourage note reading, we realize times have changed from when we were students.
5/29/98 Bob Walker bwalker@worldpath.net
I'm trying to teach my students to be competent musicians. This means that learnig to read is neccessary. It is true that guitar has tab, but I've found that student's come back and thank me for getting them to read because it opened more of a variety of music for them to play. They could also write thier ideas down for other musicians to play.
5/30/98 Dean F.H. Macy Mus.D. deanmacy@monad.net
YES!!!! Though not as beginners. In order to have a successful vocal music career in classical music, reading is a MUST!
6/8/98 Don Erhardt
There have been many musicians that have made great music that could not read music. Many of these people have an extraordinary talent for their instrument along with golden ears. Not all of us are as lucky. Learning to understand the music and how it applies to your instrument is paramount. Being a damn good sight reader is a wonderful skill but not all that nessesary in the pop world. Being able to work through written music is a skill that I try to teach, the understanding of what is taking place on the score/chart. I believe that a complete understanding of your instrument comes with reading. I know of no better way of understanding what you're playing when you're playing it than reading often, especially in a jazz setting. Reading is not for everyone but all the well rounded employable muscians I've met have this skill more or less under control. I have seen the results of too many musicians being burned out by teachers who prefer to teach the tangilbe approach of number crunching music (ie. reading/theory/theory).The ultimate goal is playing from your experience as a human (emotions/pictures/soundscapes). Reading is important but not at the expense of the music within.
6/9/98 Kit Eakle keakle@wenet.net
Reading music is clearly NOT crucial to being a professional pop musician. However reading music IS vitally important to childrens learning. Reading should never come at the expense of the beauty of music as a means of expression.
But the most amazing,powerful and important thing about reading music when properly taught, is that it gives unites the "number crunching" and the expressive aspects of our beings.
Music is a truely unique subject and expressive medium. When fully exploited, it has the capability of bringing together all aspects of learning and expression. Music has the capability of unifying our bodies, minds, and souls, both socially and as individuals. Without learning the written aspect of music, this power is seriously debilitated. Without music literacy, a child is not truely educated.
That is no reason to "put down" instrumental teachers who work hard in music studios to give kids skills for playing pop music professionally or for imitating their favorite stars with no reference to written music. It also is no reason to disparage the many music performers, including some outstanding geniuses, who make fabulous music with no understanding of notes on a staff.
But unless our schools also teach students to read and write music,
we, as a society, lose the most powerful tool for education
available to us - bar none. This has been shown, over and over again in
study after study. If you want to improve children's learning,
in ALL subject areas, teach them to read, write AND perform
music.
6/15/98 Maria esnem@juno.com
Reading music is NOT the most important part, yet I think it adds confidence to the musician. I have a student with a beautiful voice. He has been singing for over 15 years. He sings in church, does solo work and sings in a community choir. Yet, until he started piano lessons and began to read music, he felt he was only an "ok" singer. Now, after just beginning to read music, his confidence has soared. He feels that since he can recognize the notes on the staff, he is a better asset to the choir, and has more ability in sight reading. It has been a boost to his morale and has made him all the more willing to practice. So, I feel that learning the basics of music reading can be an amazing benefit for all musicians.
7/14/98 Steve McGraw Steplin1@aol.com
I agree, teaching to read is not necessary, BUT and I do mean BUT, this will limit the ability of the student. I just read how guitar playing is done in tablature. True it is.BUT when I was in college I was recommended to play in a musical(guitar) and what to my surprise but I had to read the music to get the solos as written and the director did not want a free espression of the solo. I already read music as a trumpet player and it helped me get into reading as a guitar player more readily. Conclusion: If you want to be limited in your skills you do not have to read.
7/15/98 Anna Fagan anna_fagan@wda.disney.com
Hmmm...does "successful" mean "able to make a lot of money in your profession", or "able to express yourself musically to your own personal satisfaction"? In either case, the ability to read standard musical notation would certainly broaden your options. HOWEVER, the inability to play "by ear" and the inability to improvise are also very restrictive.
I explain to all of my students that reading music is a
means to an end. Composers need a way to share their musical
ideas, and as performers we need to be able to read not only
the "black-and white notation", but also the intent behind
it -- the emotions and the message. To that end, they also
compose their own music -- both on and off the staff -- and
they also play and transpose familiar melodies by ear.
7/22/98 Charles K. Moss ckmoss@sumter.net
The very idea of NOT teaching students to read is absolutely ludicrous! The goal of my teaching studio is to produce competent, independent music readers at the piano. Those who would approach music strictly as a improvisatory "skill" are missing the point that music is a highly intellectual endeavor. It is MUSIC READING that stimulates the brain and legitimizes the inclusion of music in the curricula of schools. Without music reading, we have lost our connection to our heritage of past centuries. The originator of this idea cannot truly be serious about this. READING IS MUSIC!
8/26/98 S. Kolding skolding@hotmail.com
This should be a no-brainer. While there are examples of "successful musicians" who do not read music, I will never forget my own experiences in music school. There were several vocalists who did not read music, and the rest of us who did grew tired of waiting for them to figure out what they were doing half the time. While these young musicians all had exceptional voices, they did not have the respect of their peers or professors - and I don't believe any of them ever became "successful" musicians.
9/23/98 caffeine spikejazz@yahoo.com
Can you all say "Paul McCartney?" He was huge and didn't read music. But, if you want to increase your students' chances of "making it" or just becoming better musicians (and people), they should learn as much as they can!
10/23/98 Joan Sutherland allegra@sprint.ca
Although the question is interesting up to a point it's really too abstract. I think I'd prefer to know WHEN everyone thinks the reading skills should be added. On the violin, the issue of good and comfortable violin and bow holding and posture comes first. Perhaps some theory can be taught independant of reading actual pieces while beginning playing skills are being developed. Then when these are familiar, the child can start to work on reading easier sight-reading pieces. For piano, I don't think it's such a problem. What have other violin teachers found?
11/13/98 Alan Voss subv7@aol.com
As a guitar teacher I see some value in Tablature but for the most part I am against it. Some tabs that I've seen are more complicated than reading music. The bottom line is that reading music should be just as easy to learn and says much more about how the piece of music is to be played. You can't just sit down and play most tabs anyway because of the lack of rhythmic values.
I am wondering if teachers of all instruments have a high turn over of
students due to lack of parent support in regards to the discipline of
practice. I am a guitar teacher and have always wondered if guitar lessons
just are not held as important as other instruments which for example are more
vital to school band programs. Thanks Alan
11/21/98 ratnip bach24@mail.texas.net
This is the most preposterous idea I have heard in years. I have a suggestion: Let's tell Julliard and the other great conservatories and music schools of the world that we want them to do away with any curriculum that requires the reading of music. I wonder where we'd be had Mozart, Bach and Beethoven not been able to read music????? In any field there will always be the exception to rule, but get real folks. I mean *REALLY.* Scheesch.
12/5/98 Mark mjenning@usit.net
Music is a language. Agreed? .....
To be fluent in any language, one needs to be able to read (and understand) what someone else has written, and "speak" (play) it so that the listener understands it. One also needs the ability to write their own "thoughts" in a way that someone else who knows the language can "speak" what you've written.
And if all musicians/teachers were honest with themsleves,
they'd all agree - a TRULY well rounded musician can do not
only the above, but can also read what someone else has written,
and contribute their own thoughts to the original idea of
the writer. (improvisation)
1/5/99 James missippy@aol.com
I have just read about 90% of the comments & opinions regarding the subject of reading music or not & would have to say I agree with the pros & cons. My approach is to try to determine which system will work for which student. Sometimes it is hard for a student or anyone for that matter to make a decision or have an opion about something until they have experienced it to some degree. ie; I didn't used to like green beans!
2/10/99 joel pace
The idea of not learning to read music in order to play piano is ridiculous. Why would anyone want to spend the time and effort of practicing and not do it the right way. Possibly some older beginners may want to learn chords, however not teaching a child to read music would be cheating that child out of a lot of opportunities.
2/19/99 Jerry Gerber jgerber@slip.net
The debate about reading music has centered around, mostly, playing music. One person mentioned that there has been much "great" music written by those who have "golden ears" and who do not read music. I would like to add to, and contradict these statements. Firstly, there have been great SONGS written by those who do not read music. Many of the Beatles songs are fine examples of this. But then again, George Martin arranged many of these songs and he was fully trained as a classical musician and read music. But, nevertheless, there have been fine songs written by those who do not read music. But has anybody ever heard of a fine or "great" violin concerto, sonata, symphony or opera written by those who cannot read? Can you imagine Mahler's 4th, Prokofieff's 5th or the Brandenburg concertos being invented without notation? Of course not, because music notation itself is INTEGRAL to the creative process when it comes to creating long-form and complex works which contain development, variation and thematic or motivic references.
One may be a great orator, but if this orator cannot read or write English (or whatever language they are orating in) how fully, how deeply can this person really express themselves? The written form, whether it be music, mathematics or common language, is absolutely necessary to the exploration of ideas, the potential thought contained in ideas and the organization of ideas. It is true regarding music composition. Notation, and the mastery of the written language of music is an indispensable tool for the musician who is ambitious about his art.
Jerry Gerber
http://www.slip.net/~jgerber/
4/17/99 Allen Cole drfligo@erols.com
Written music is a language, and any player who doesn't read, write and speak it has a handicap compared to those who do. That said, I don't think that it's necessary to teach reading as the FIRST THING. I prefer to start off a student with enough fingerings to make a major scale and then just let them play around on the (woodwind) instrument as if it were a recorder. Teach them a couple of songs, and give them some more to learn at home. Let them play music FIRST. After this, I can quickly show them the advantages of learning to read and write it. I agree that learning to play straight from reading does tend to produce button-pushers. Learning to read is a slow process and I think that it unnaturally slows down the faster process of learning to actually play. Why not let the kids bang out some songs while learning their whole notes, half notes, clefs and staves in some kind of workbook. If they can play a couple of coherent tunes before dealing with written music, they'll more likely learn to read and write music together. To me the bigger problem is getting them to fool around on their own, as opposed to depending on the teacher to dictate their every action. (that's what I'd like see some comments on)
4/20/99 Guy Babusek mrclmind@aol.com
The question posed is "Do students need to learn to read music in order to become successful musicians?" I think it really depends on the definition of "successful". It is not necessary to read music in order to play certain styles of music successfully, yet reading music opens up unlimited potential for musicians of any style. When a student can read music, there is a mode of communication for musical ideas which is open. I have noticed that many musicians are a lot like computer experts and astrologers. They love to talk in highly complex jargon which tends to intimidate the novice. In truth, all musical theory is quite simple and succinct. It's all in how the material is presented. Even 16th century counterpoint can be easily assimilated when presented in an unassuming manner. I think that written music is an important part of the musical experience that should not be sacrificed due to the bad habit of certain stuffy musicologists attempting to isolate themselves in ivory towers. Written music is a treasure that can be shared by all musicians. We should not rip off our students by omitting music theory from their education, but we do have a responsibility to make learning theory an easy and satisfying experience. I was able to learn to read music very quickly by having a teacher take a written piece of music and play a recording of the same piece. They would point to each measure as it was played. After I "got" how to count, I was able to point to each measure my self and keep up with the music. Eventually, this lead to being able to read scores. In this way, the music taught me how to read itself!
4/29/99 Randall Closson Randall.Closson@alltel.com
Depending on the style of Guitar I am teaching, I never "insist" on reading. (Of course, with Classical Guitar the question is moot.) I do try to "sell" them on the idea by telling them about the Gigs I got because I can read. I also quote some of the great non reading guitarists who express regrets that they didn't learn. However, I do strongly feel that learning to play by ear and improvise are equally important.
5/11/99 Heather Knowles HRK26@aol.com
Learning to read music---How many successful novelists are there that can't write a sentence? It is absolutely absurd to believe that anyone who calls themself a musician shouldn't/wouldn't be able to read notes on the staff. As a master's student in voice and as a teacher of voice and piano students, I can tell you from experience that anyone, no matter how t alented, who cannot tell a 'C' from an 'E-flat'will be at a disadvantage in their musical lives. They may be a hit for a while, but music involves growth and artists cannot be successful if they cannot grow. To be able to look at a piece of music and interpret it for yourself from what the composer has written is what being a musician is all about. If you only take your interpretation from what you have heard or by what someone else has instructed you to do, then you are not a musician, you are a zerox machine. This issue is a huge problem in the world of arts today. Pop culture is here today, gone tomorrow. In music situations today, to say you are a musician, means that you are expected to know "how to be a musician". Not being able to often means not getting the job. I cannot imagine how anyone would want to be a musician and not hold all the tools that make that dream a possibility. Secondly, not being able to read music puts you in another rut...how do you communicate with other musicians?? There is a huge universe of music out there and much of it requires knowledge and understanding which requires knowing the basics. As a teacher, I require all my singers to learn to read music. They often think they don't need to, but soon realize how helpful it is. Talent can only get you as far as talent goes, most likely someone else will come along more talented than you. The arts in the U.S. are struggling to survive. We need to teach this socieity that arts are just as important as other aspects of our culture and we need to teach children that music is important for them. Musicians and teachers in this country need to learn how to be musicians in all senses of the word. If we fail to do this, who will be the musicians/artists of the future? Computers and recordings?
5/17/99 dane dane_sadler@excite.com
Absolutely not! Notation is nothing more than the alphabet of music. However, so many people confuse the reading of notation with actual theory. Just like you can speak and understand any language without neccessarily knowing how to spell, you can be very versed in theory and the understanding and application of music without needing to know how to read notation. Furthermore, in view of the fact that the need for studio guitarists has declined something like 95% over the last several years because of the advent of digital workstations, the pursuit of learning to read is virually a fruitless endeavor; moreover, it takes an incrediable amount of time to become fluent at sight reading. For my young students I encourage reading only if they are extremely interested in doing so. For my adult students, I discourage learning to read unless they have a huge trust which enales them to not work and have plenty of time on their hands which they are going to need in order to become well versed in notation. That said, I still believe everyone should learn the basics of notation so that when they look at a piece of sheet music they have some idea of whats going on. One last thing, for all you classical enthusiast out there, you will definitely need to learn notation in view of the fact that so much classical music is not available in notation nor has it been arranged for guitar. So you will need to learn how to read in order to arrange it for guitar for yourself. Good luck! Remember, guitar playing is not a competition ---- it's a wonderful lifestyle we all share.
6/11/99 mekiel e. tate When you play vibes but you can't read, how do you learn to play by ear?
6/15/99 Scott Burns scotteburns@juno.com
The students who know how to read and write usually come up with better compositions, though some get bogged down by writing over their playing ability! Being a literate musician has allowed me to keep a couple of gigs that illiterates have not held.
6/21/99 Hannah Kim roseland14@worldnet.att.net
Reading music is an art in itself which can be categorized into various stages and levels. Since music is an international language, having the skills to read music breaks down barriers and allows one to understand others cultures and beyond.
6/21/99 james cito28@aol.com
As a music student I can say that learning to read music is a pain, however it is very necessary to be well rounded. The key, from the student perspective, is to incorporate therory and note reading with acutal PLAYING WHICH IS WHAT ALL STUDENTS WANT----TO PLAY!!!!
6/28/99 Becca Giedosh sousy_girl@hotmail.com
I believe that students need to learn to read music to be successful musicians. All aspects of music are just as important as any other. Should a student not learn the scales because they will learn the notes eventually anyway? Hardly. So personally I am all for the learning to read music. The student should understand every aspect of the music and use it to help enhance each area of the musical educational process.
6/30/99 Pat Coffee p.b.coffee@worldnet.att.net
A beginning student must be taught the basic elements of music, the beginning technique required for their chosen instrument group, and how to teach the "monkey" they see in the mirror. I teach percussion and I require them to have a full length mirror to watch their stick movements. I am firmly against the *rote* system of teaching a beginning student. To learn to play something without understanding what it is, to just minmick a 'fingering' or to reproduce a 'sound' without knowing what that pitch is or what it means is robbing that student of the basics they need upon which to build a solid foundation in music.
7/14/99 James JimWest@concentric.net
Yes! Musical illiteracy is just as common as it has ever been. It it not difficult to learn to read music. Becoming fluent takes practice. Becoming good at anything takes practice in case nobody noticed! As a music teacher, both public school (Grades 1 thru 12, and college)and private instructor, a music store owner, and a practicing professional musician, the most frustrating people to deal with when you want to perform arte those who don't know what is going on. Being able to improvise is great, but that also takes practice. Franz Liszt himself used to PRACTICE improvisation! I feel sorry for those people who are denied the ability to read music by a "music teacher" who doesn't understand HOW to teach reading. In over 50 years as a musician, I have played everything from dance band music to Broadway shows to symphony orchestra music, sung in amateur and professional choirs, and have done a lot of conducting. MUSIC READING IS ESSENTIAL! As mentioned, teaching people to read music is quite simple. If you don't know how, let me know and I'll tell you. Stay away from "gimmicks" that try to teach music reading skills. Learn rhythm first, then pitch, and the rest will come. If a student wants to learn to play an instrument or sing, they will do whatever is necessary, including learning to read to accomplish their goal. If they are just looking for a quick shortcut, I don't think will ever succeed in my organizations. If anyone doubts this, let me know.
7/22/99 Eric Browning ericbrowning@mail.com
As a teacher of few students, I usually let them decide between music or just tablature. I feel that tablature is an excellent way for kids to be able to play songs they like quickly. Once that is accomplished, they can write their own tablature songs if they wish. Regular music is available in more styles, but for most blues and rock (the most common styles of my students) tab works fine.
9/7/99 Dean FH Macy deanmacy@monad.net
Let's rephrase the question. "Do students need to learn to read in order to become successful in today's world?" Or, "Does a student need to learn about medicine before becoming a doctor?"
9/8/99 Vanessa Jayne vjayne@yahoo.com
I believe it is possible to be a talented musician and not read. However, it is nearly impossible to be a successful musician and not read music. Sight reading alone is one of the most important keys to being a musician, and if can not read you cannot sight read. All musicians should read music, it is definately not a hinderance to any musician. If anything it only makes one less thing for the teacher to teach, and we are not teaching all of music than why are we here?
9/24/99 Angela Felsted angysf@yahoo.com
Isn't ready tablature a skill in and of itself? Isn't it, for guitar players, a way of reading music?
Isn't playing from a fake book a skill in and of itself? Isn't it also a way of reading music?
It isn't that music is so hard to read. It's that so many people are afraid to learn it because they think it is harder than it really is.
The real reason it's important to read music is because it cannot be preserved if it is not recorded. And what better way is there to record music than to write it down? Electronic equipment goes in and out, it is constantly changing. But music which is written down can be preserved clearly, effectively, and for very long periods of time.
Performers also have more of an opportunity
to interpret music "their way" when they
can read sheet music. They can play
around with what's on the page instead
of using thier ears to copy someone
else's interpretation of whatever piece
or song they are working on.
9/25/99 Phil Martin brucknerlvr@excite.com
I don't know if anyone has said this but it is one thing for a student to be artisticly engaged but it is another to bring together that raw energy of artistry AND knowledge that makes a student a great musician. Its the ability to analyze and sythesize (sp.) on the spot that makes a great musician. Composers, even those that despise the language of music must go through this process. They have made their own viable working structure. Singers should know what a phrygian cadence is and how it works and what it means artisticly. Why sing if you can not interpret the music? Even children singing folksongs must have a harmonic (unconscience) language to sing. One can not be a creative musician or just a musician without knowing the rules. I sarted learning the piano through Jazz on my own. I had NO idea what a 7th chord was or its usage but I started to understand it from listening. I started creating a language to choose from. Simply, one can not be a neophyte and a musician all at once.
10/29/99 Kent Burnside jkburns@logan.net
Students absolutely should learn to read music. They don't have to be professional-grade sight-readers, but to allow them to slip through without learning to read music at all does them no favor. Excepting certain kinds of popular music, virtually any performing situation a person might find him or herself in will require at least some familiarity with standard notation. The ability to receive musical information via printed music is an enormous advantage for any player, at any level of development.
11/5/99 Chip McDonald chipm@mindspring.com
Knowing how the process of reading works I think is important for a person to think of oneself as a "well rounded musician". Having said that, I don't feel it is neccessary for being a "musician".
I *am* bitterly opposed to the regimented application of making reading the first priority of music education. This has been the cause of many a person to decide music is not for
them, and additionally seems to have been detrimental to some whose reading skills and experience greatly exceed their own ability to hear and play, sans written material.
11/6/99 Dave Tarnowski dtarnows@davesworld.net
I think the ability to read is very important. Unfortunately, I am a private guitar teacher, so I have to consider that I am paid by my students. Also, I believe learning to play an instrument is more important than my beliefs of what is important. My “method,” such as it is, is that ALL my students go through a Book one of a method (Mel Bay, Belwin, whatever), or prove to me that they know the basics of reading. (It’s difficult enough to explain a lousy eighth note with the book in front of you some days. I don’t even want to try it without some way of showing it to them. I also remind them that, unless they have photographic memories, writing it down is the only way they can take it home with them. Tab is fairly good, of course, but since it contains no way of indicating note values, it’s worthless with a song one has never heard more than once or twice before.) After the first book we can go into tab, or basic chord charts, or even continue reading if they want. I can’t force them to keep reading, but I believe understanding the bare minimum is critical. Critical enough that if they don’t want to go through the book, I won’t give them lessons. This is how I was taught, and I feel that if my teacher had kept me in books with their lame and/or uninteresting tunes I may not have kept playing for 25 years. He was smart enough to know that, and I quote him here: “kids just want to learn how to jam.” It’s true, for the most part. We can only hope that once they’re done working the minor pentatonic to death they’ll be invested enough to further explore the instrument and theory that leads to more music. Sorry if I repeated anything anybody else said. I couldn’t bring myself to read all the posts. Play on.
11/8/99 Jimmy Hudson Jimmy@guitar-dominion.com
I personally beleive that not teaching a student how to read music is practicing malpractice on the teachers part. I am a guitar instructor, and unfortunately the guitar has kinda become the idiots instrument. People buy a guitar, learn a few chords and think they are musicians. This is not true. I don't even teach my students chords untill they understand intervals and how to build chords using intervals themselves. Guitar players are a dime a dozen, but guitarists are very few and far between. Tablature is not reading music. There is no value of time involved. If I tabbed out something and made ten copies of it and gave it to ten different students, I would have ten different responses from them. Any other instrument would for shure have sight reading involved. I agree with the other teachers that say music is a language. It is a written, read, and spoken language. I look at every one of my students as if they are going to be doing it for a living. We all know that it is a hard way to pay your bills, but the more educated you are on your instrument the more work you will get in the long run. One thing you do have to do though is to find a happy medium. They want to learn their favorite songs, yet they need to learn how to sight read and their theory, so I reward them. If they can accomplish something I have taught them, I will work on one of their songs with them. They really seem to enjoy that.
11/8/99 Carolyn Melohawk@aol.com
Of course students MUST learn to read music if they are going to be successful on their instruments. Why students DON'T want to learn to read is the question that should be asked. Why so many teachers can get by with tablature (which doesn't allow for rhythmic values) or tapeing the song for the student to take home and simply imitate is what should be addressed.
Students refuse to take on the discipline of COUNTING. They will not MAKE themselves keep a steady beat and play the rhythm on the page in front of them. That is too much like work. Anyone can learn to push buttons that have letter names attatched to them....ah, but to push those buttons at the RIGHT TIME, that is the key to reading music. Without rhythm there is only noise.
I find that if I teach rhythmic reading, sans instrument - just clapping the hands- first,allowing the student to get a good rhythmic grasp of the phrase before he/she actually PLAYS the pitches....they are able to realize the melody much faster from the page.
Get them over the fear and into the discipline of counting and there is no more barrier to reading music.
Now, getting a parent to work with you when Johnny pitches a fit and refuses to do the counting is something to address on another day! LOL
11/8/99 Amy Menginie amvenus19@aol.com
I think that learning to read music is a very important thing to acquire. But, the very essence of being a good musician is not in the reading and writing technical part of music, but in your own feelings and expressions. You can learn to read music very well and play it very well, but if you do not put feeling into what you are playing, you can become a very unsuccessful musician.
11/11/99 Chip McDonald chipm@mindspring.com
The Real World:
People have different motivations for coming to music lessons. They may not neccessarily desire to be considered a "musician", or perhaps they are - but everyone comes to it with a different expectation.
The role of the teacher in private lessons is to fulfill their expectations. That's what they're paying you money for. In reality, alot of people are not interested in pursuing a rigorously clinical all-encompassing approach to learning an instrument. Being flexible with one's teaching attitude keeps the door open later for perhaps a change of attitude in the student. Enforcing a "reading or else" policy, in the face of a student who is admantly opposed to it, accomplishes *nothing* if they get mad and quit.
Alot of people call themselves "guitarists" who shouldn't. Alot of people also call themselves "musicians" on the sole basis of being able to read music - and they shouldn't, either.
11/11/99 Chip McDonald chipm@mindspring.com
FURTHERMORE....
I'm of course pro-music education in public schools.
However, I'm tired of getting kids in guitar lessons who have come up through the "system" - some whose parents refer to their children as "prodigies" and have won awards, etc. - who can read very well, but can't answer simple questions like "what two notes don't have sharps?" or "how many notes are there in all of music?". *Fundamental understanding* is NOT being taught whatsoever; these kids have lousy to non-existent time, poor hearing abilities, and no concept of harmonic and melodic theory. As far as I'm concerned, I don't care if they've been playing an instrument for 7 years or more, they're essentially beginners. The "idiocy" is in defining "playing an instrument" based on reading skills alone.
Ok, I feel better now.
12/4/99 Monty monty@hatzoffmusic.com
No, you don't need to read to become a successful musician!!! Success is measured differently by everyone.
Ok, I feel better now.
12/4/99 James
I believe that reading music is important. I am trying myself to learn to read music.
A student can decide for themselves.
Young children, whose parents have put into private lessons, should be taught, per the parents request.
Context is everything.
An adult student makes the decision to learn. What he decides to learn is his own choice. The options & opinions should be explained, but never forced. To do so removes the freedom in music.
Communication, is what music is about. Communication of emotion and feeling. This emotion & feeling is _not_ contained in the symbols in music notation. It cannot be learned from them alone. It can, however, aid in the understanding of these emotions. There are many, more important things to learn about music, before reading notation.
One must learn to speak, before he can read.
Ok, I feel better now.
12/7/99 Faye ebest88512@aol.com
Yes. Reading music is very important in many jobs. I play the organ for two churches and they give me new music I have never heard or played before the very day of the service. When that happens I can read and feel the rhythm without playing it because I have those skills, then performing it is easy.
I have many students and I teach them to read which come easy for some and not so easy for others. The students
who play by ear I have to work much harder with and give them good reasons to invest their time. But will possess
the best of both worlds.
1/6/00 Patrick pmaddex@yahoo.com
I come to this question as a voice teacher.Students must learn to read music. Now the question is when?
Let me put it this way "A musician is a Pilot, a Vocalist is a Bird." One needs a machine
to perform, one is born to perform. Teach them first to fly with a passion for music
before you clog their brain with the operating manual.
1/11/00 Nancy Logdson Nancy10458@aol.com
I know that some of you feel that a musician is not a musician unless he or she can read music and understand theory and all that. Well, from my own story...I come from the Ozarks where there are wonderful, talented musicians and pickers who cannot read a single note. I am one of these, yet....I make good money, write great songs and perform all around. I have always felt that while it is great to do it the hard way....if you plan on becoming a studio musician or a stage performer...you don't need all of that. Just because we don't have formal training does not mean that we do not understand a G from an D as one of you put it. We who play by ear have developed our own system because we love the music and we have the freedom to be original rather than play what someone else has written down. How many people do you know who play only by note...make a good living at it? Yes, there are some...but you won't hear them on a Country or Rock radio station...and you won't see them reading from a peice of paper at a Bluegrass festival.
2/11/00 Cathy Thompson Calt8308@hotmail.com
In regards to learning to read music, do we teach children to look at books for the pictoral content alone, or do we want them to be able to synthesize the text AND pictures for meaning? Same goes with music, and I believe that expression comes AFTER learning the notes. Here's a perfect example of the harm done when learning by ear alone: while at Interlochen during its summer camp, I witnessed a very gifted violinist move down 9 chairs during a weekly challenge because she learned the notes during rehearsal, by ear NOT by theory. Look where her education (or lack of)left her during that one incident? If music is indeed another language, please teachers, do your students a favor and get them started on the right note (no pun intended!) - TEACH THEM TO READ MUSIC.
2/12/00 Robyn M. PIANOBLESSINGS@webtv.net
Wow! What input on such a subject! My own experience as a teacher comes from the fact that living in a tourist area there are many entertainment complexes that require auditions for pianists. I check on criteria for these auditions - as a fulltime teacher I simply don't have the time to perform myself however, my students budding as they each are might swing a summer job with one of these places. Each one requires sightreading capabilities for auditions and not music that the pianists have seen previously. If they cannot read music - well, that goes to show. I teach a balance of ear training, and playing in my lessons along with the note reading and in my opinion the student becomes independent of the teacher once he begins to pick out and up music on his own by sightreading new material that he/she has chosen. Boy what a hot article to display amongst teachers and other musicians. Many celebrity singers that cannot read a note but have lovely voices hire the trained musicians that can do the song writing for them also.
2/22/00 Charles Rathmann rathmann@wi.net
Is music reading necessary to become a successful musician? Well, that depends, doesn't it.
If you plan to work in situations where you are recreating instead of creating most of the time, sight reading is required. But for those in the improvisational jazz or blues genres, a knowledge of chords and modes and the ability to play them on their instruments are all that's required. Of course for reference purposes it is very useful to be able to glance at a piece of paper and be able to learn a piece of music. For really complete musical expression in the moment, one must free the mind from rational concerns. The music must happen from a state of unconcious competence. I don't know if sight reading music compatible with that sense of flow.
2/25/00 Noli Bravo angar@bigfoot.com
Different strokes for different folks! In the old days, it was traditional for children to start from a standard-type of learning. Generally, parents look for teachers who could mainly get the children impressed by tapping on some simple, familiar tune right from the very beginning. Little do some parents know the outcome of it in the long run, for students who had taken the traditional approach often than not, better off starting in a non-traditional environment. I am speaking through experience with my students here in Japan. Showing someone's expression as we all know, is a huge impact to how they become more effective and encouraging when it comes to performing in front of people, whether in a recital or live gigs. Most japanese are somewhat mysterious in showing their genuine feelings. My approach in teaching is purely generated from their own feelings, creativity and enjoyment. It's an on-going struggle between the teacher and the students but a modest change of their response and body language gives me the prize for staying focused on them.
Noli Bravo, Founding Consultant
ANGAR program
http://w3.mtci.ne.jp/~angar
3/1/00 Jennifer Carlson jenca@juno.com
I loved to sing from a very early age, but failed a talent audition in sixth grade because I couldn't sight-read. I would have played my part on the piano, but couldn't vocally read it. I enrolled in the Indianapolis Children's Choir as a founding member in 1986 and WOW! I can still remember what it felt like the first time I comprehended something on the page before the rest of the group. The training paid off, as I was hired as an eighth grader to do a recording for Hal Leonard Publishing. That experience proved to me how important sight reading is. I have since performed with one of the world's best college choirs, the Luther College Nordic Choir under Weston Noble's direction, and sight-reading plays a HUGE part in learning new music. Last year I joined the band Blaq Lily (you haven't heard of us -- yet!) I work completely off of chord symbols and improvise backup vocals by ear. But I can say with confidence that it is my ability to read music and know what I am playing/singing that has made it possible to successfully sing and play in this style. Thank you to my piano, voice, and harp teachers! I can do ANYTHING in professional music now. I hold a B.A. in vocal music ed. and just finished my M.M. in choral conducting. I teach privately and am hoping to be hired as a studio musician. Remember, studio musicians, YOU MUST BE ABLE TO SIGHTREAD!!
3/11/00 Emma Thompson emmathompson78@fsnet.co.uk
Thanks to everyone whose comments I've read today - you've helped me add fuel to my fire. As a trainee music teacher at Cambridge, I've been having this 'discussion' with my tutors for months now. Our theory lessons are ripped to shreds if we're unlucky enough to be delivering one when we are observed by the heads of our departments and we are told that we should be working 'in the medium' constantly. As a result, though, a few of us feel that music isn't taken seriously as a subject by the pupils we teach. Okay - we want them to enjoy it - but surely we must lay the foundation for a lifetime of enjoying music on a deeper, more satisfying level. Please contact me with any other sides to the story. I'm considering this becoming my dissertation topic.
3/11/00 John P. Gulyas jgulyas@yahoo.com
In my opinion there are two factors to be considered.
1. Is the focus jazz?
2. Is the focus classical/legit?
To be a successful classical musician, being able to read music is imperative. You must be able to read what's on the page. If not, you'll be lost.
On the jazz side, since written music just gives the basic melody, reading is not as important. A jazz musician can pick up the "head" after listening to it once or a few times. Since the most important things in jazz are the chord changes and improvisation written music is almost obsolete.
In jazz, the musician must know the chord changes and the chord scales to go over those changes, so therefore, being able to read music is not as big a factor in success.
In direct response to the question at hand, No, being able to read music should not determine a musician's succes. However it can certainly help!
All the Best,
John
3/12/00 John Watts JWWatts@prodigy.net
I feel it is extremely helpful for a student to read music. This gives the student a visual idea as to what you are trying to teach. When used in conjunction with recorded material the student can practice the written material until it is mastered and then apply it to the music being heard.
3/15/00
What two notes don't have sharps?
I am learning that some music teachers don't put reading as a priority. Re:"what two notes don't have sharps?" Even Guitar teachers should have fundamental understanding of music theory. The sharp raises the pitch of a note by one half step. All notes can be sharped. A# B# C# D# E# F# G#. A simple answer to "how many notes are there in all of music?" doesn't seem so simple when considering A, A#, Ab, Abb, A##, B, B#, Bb, Bbb, C, C#, Cb, C##, Cbb, D, D#, Db, D##, Dbb, E, E#, Eb, E##, Ebb, F, F#, Fb, F##, Fbb, G, G#, Gb, G##, Gbb, not to mention in Germany an H, ..lookup enharmonics, 35? in all. or is it 12 different pitches.
I feel better. Though knowledge doesn't make me a successful musician, only a successful teacher.
I don't think there is a simple answer to music literacy fostering successful musicians. Musicians who learned by example
or ear often say they wish they could read better. On the other hand ones who read well wish they could play like those
who play by ear. I agree with the flexibility. Successful musicians should be cultivated in music literacy along with
support of artistic interpretations of improvisation. Certainly not mirror images of their teachers. I prefer to define
successful musicianship as pride in performing a piece from start to finish with the ability to read music as well as
improvise, others can go as farout as saying that fame and fortune defines success in musicians.
3/21/00 Claraclarioke@hotmail.com
I am a vocalist and an instrumentalist. Being a formally taught instrumentalist, I find it imperative for vocalists to know music. How can you understand 7/8 time if you can't read music? How do you make those entrances? By winging it? This leads to sloppy music. Learn the music, learn the language. Then take it away. It is a lot easier to take it away than it is to add it. If I can't tell my soprano vocalist she is twenty cents sharp, what good is she? Let's define "successful" while we're here. Successful as in professional? Every professional needs to know how to read some of it. Successful as in enjoyable? I enjoy piano and my technique is worse than an oranutan's. I enjoy it, I am not professional. No one is asking me to. If I were to perform on a stage, I would be asked to learn proper technique. It would be easier to learn proper technique in the first place and have it taken away. It is in the best interest of the student to start with good technique and good musical background, then take it away and let them feel the music.
3/24/00 Angela Felstedangysf@yahoo.com
I think teachers who teach beginners have a tremendous responsibility to teach their students both how to read music and what music SOUNDS like.
I believe that teaching either one alone, while neglecting the other, is doing a great dis-service to the student.
Knowing what music sounds like, but not understanding how to read it can be very hard on a child's self esteem when he or she gets into a situation where they are expected to read music like their peers but are unable to.
They can be made to feel like there is something wrong with them, or like they are not talented. When in reality their inability to read music results from never being taught how.
You can be a musician without being able to read music, but it is a handicap.
People who are blind can listen to books on tape, people who are deaf have sign language. People who can't read music have other ways of figuring out how music is supposed to sound so they do not have to read music.
But why go through all that trouble to compensate for not knowing how, when you could just learn. It really IS easier in the long run.
People who are blind or deaf usually can't change that they are blind or deaf. But a musician can always learn how to read.
The thing which is sad, is that so many are not shown how to begin with.
3/29/00 Paul Odenwelder Traceydo@aol.com
I've been a teacher for 17 years and a professional performer for for 22 years, and I can say that I've played with alot of great sight readers who couldn't play, and great players who couldn't read. Many musicians get so hung up on reading notes and they lose the idea of FEELING the music. That's not to say that reading is totally unimportant,it is essential to theory and understanding music as the "scientific art" that it is,but I personally know many great players that don't have the slightest clue what they're playing. That does not make them any less of a player. The audience doesn't care if you can read it-they only care if you can play it.
As a guitarist the ability to listen to a piece and learn it "by ear" is infinitly more important. In 22 years of playing out I've only once been given a piece of music and been told "here, play this", but in those same 22 years I've been given dozens of tapes just hours before a job and been told to learn the song or songs for that days performance. Not many great readers are also great hearers-If I have to choose I'll take my ears over my eyes any day of the week.
Just an added tidbit to all the purists that are fuming over these comments-
Yes I DO read- and I will teach students to do so, but not all students are interested in becoming professional musicians,
and my job is to teach them to play-period. Even if they only ever play for their enjoyment they still deserve the chance
to learn to play, and I am committed to making music enjoyable to my students, that means teaching them to play first. If
their own personal goals include sight reading then by all means I will teach them, I just won't force it on a student who
wants to play but doesn't want to read.
There now I feel better!
4/7/00 Janet Sawyer janets@gosiggy.com
This discussion has been interesting to listen to, and after reading all that's been said, I've come to this conclusion: if one plays the guitar or primarily plays jazz, the need to read music does not seem to be crucial. And I certainly agree that many good players don't have a clue as to what the music is all about, since I play in a string trio where the lead player doesn't know the foggiest thing about music. And she's an Oberlin graduate!! However, if one plays a violin and hopes to somehow earn a living by either teaching or playing the instrument, reading is essential. My lesson years were in the 1940's on piano & violin and back then, everything was classical so I was never taught to try to play by ear. So I had to teach myself chord structure, progressions, etc. One thing I know for sure is that vocalists who can't read music can be a real pain. I'm an accompanist for an annual musical and only one singer out of the seven or more can read. It's left to the poor piano player to instruct the singer on timing, phrasing, speed, etc. With some of them who think they're either Sinatra or Ella Fitzgerald, it's a disaster as they do whatever they feel like without any attention paid to the beat, as they think that's what Frank & Ella did! Sorry for the long posting and many thanks to all of you for an enlightening conversation.
4/8/00 josh brink5055@aol.com
It is very important to learn how to read music if you wanna become a good musican. I'm not saying that you can't make it with out, but it will be very hard....
4/9/00 P.S. Martin verklarte_nacht@excite.com
Yes. Is the answer to the question. I suppose you want an explanation. Well, even the greatest improvisers aren't REALLY improvising. They are taking little chunks of knowledge and throwing them together into a grand scheme. This takes musical knowledge and yes, the ability to read. Why? Reading means comprehension. The comprehension leads to insight yada yada...and so forth. Just because someone has a lot of "soul" or "spirit" does not mean that it produces the musician in all of us. What produces the musician is a synthesis of the soul and the knowledge. Even the greatest conductors will tell you this, and so will Miles (if he could), as well as Slash. Even primative cultures study to become dancers and singers in their own rituals and tribal events. They have a gift that is synthesised with music to give you their art. Enjoy...
4/16/00 fission chips fnord@fnord.fnd
ok. i have to comment on this.
i am a professional musician, producer and sound engineer. i also play keyboards. i have a vague understanding of musical staff, enough that i can translate it if i have to. but here is the thing: i never have to. with what i do, i never encounter sheet music. i know music very well, and can play/comp with anyone. i know virtually every scale and chord shape. and i don't use staff. where music is heading, nobody will use staff. it is archaic, obsolete, and does not make sense in the realm of sound design/engineering. it is limited to notes and rhythm, and music nowadays requires much much more than that. it leaves out many key parameters in sound sequencing such as exact volume, exact swing, effects, eq, precise accenting, filters (cutoff, hipass/lopass, sweeps etc), gates/precise note length, polyrhythms/strange time signatures, precise note bends/detuning, and much more... i have written/sequenced music with a number of hardware and software sequencers and have found them incredibly more efficient and effective in song production and even just to jot riffs down..
so ok.. sorry if i sound a little pissed. i am offended at a number of comments that i read which state that one cannot be
a musician if they cannot read music. yet, i can see the point in stating this.. i think it is essentially necessary for a
musician to learn to read/write music if they want to play certain styles of music, like classical. i think if they don't
want to limit themselves and would like to explore different styles of music, perhaps even create some new ones, then staff
is not the way to go.
4/26/00 Fumpkin Fumpkin@hotmail.com
It is very important to read music IF either your instrument or style is dependent on staff music. For example, a pianist or a horn player will find it easier to learn other peoples' songs with written music. It only makes sense that the more proficient they are at reading music, the easier it will be to learn more songs. Now, as a guitar instructor the only times I teach reading music is when the player is headed towards Classical, Jazz, etc (where 99% of sheet music is in staff and not in tab) or music school (where how good you read staff determines your grade.)
In other instances, it does seem that a majority of the students just want to play for fun. The fastest and easiest way to teach them is by ear. Unless they have goals that require reading music, this is the most successful path I have seen.
Finally, with that all said, it is time to ruffle some feathers. With the guidelines written above, I can't see why a teacher (eg. guitar) would teach a 13 year old boy with a metallica shirt on staff music. Could it be anymore obvious that you are wrong? I understand that as their teacher we need to guide them away from bad habits, but we also have a responsibility to help them to enjoy the instrument so that they will keep on playing. I have sometimes thought that teachers that employ this method to EVERYONE have found a way to confuse the student or to keep the student for LIFE until they are proficient at reading. Ok, thanks for your time guys.
5/5/00 Willie Lawson wlawson3@tampabay.rr.com
The most effective way can be shared is to write it down. Depending on technology is a problem if the battery in you MP3 player dies. Reading music is like reading a book. The performer can use all he knows about the stlye and composer and add a bit of his spirit and create something new. The sample and sequence world we are in now ..well frankly.. is... boring and unimaginative. People that don't want to learn to read music are just being lazy. They use all of these "reasons" to justify to themselves that they are NOT lazy. I really don't want to start a fight. This is just my opinion.
5/7/00 Verklarte Nacht brucknerlvr@excite.com
"Can't read music?" Don't bother applying for any music performance related job...serious ones at any rate. You learn music so that others can understand you and so that you can understand them....its a language. You go to germany....you learn to speak german to get around. It's a fact of life. Structure is commital to beauty. Anyone who says different is just proving the point. Yes my friend, you needn't read or write music in your sound design studio, but take that to a higher career level, you sitting in on a recording session for the new york Phil. They'll expect you to be able to read the score proficiently. And as far as Metallica goes, I agree...BUT! We must feed these kids music structure as well so that the aesthetic appreciation and simplistic beauty comes out of it. You don't think Steve Vai can't write notation, do you? How about John Pizzarelli? Tell me the DeLeo brothers are fakers and you'll have problems...Teaching music structure is possible...I know.
5/7/00 Chip McDonald chipm@mindspring.com
Nobody is giving any context. You can't announce "it is important to read music" as an all encommassing statement. There are times when it is neccessary - but not "always".
Additionally, one person posted "How can you understand 7/8 time, or know when to come in?" The answer to that is simple *learn* the music. Understanding rhythmic subdivision does not require being able to read music. Knowing when to come in also doesn't require reading music.
In fact, if one *can't* fathom these concepts without the staff in front of them, they *don't* understand music. The bottom line is the outcome of the music. The *listener* doesn't read music, they only hear it. They don't care if you're reading it or not. They *do* care if the rhythm is screwed up, or if inflections are played in a droll manner. It's exactly like the difference between a person merely giving a speech and a great orator; one can deliver a good speech while reading prepared notes, but that doesn't come off the same a person who hasn't memorized what they're about to say. It's *riskier* to do it that way, but that's really giving a speech, and not merely reading.
Teaching is not bound by any notions created by an ultimate authority
on "music". As I said before, everyone comes to lessons with their own
concept in mind, and one can either try to fulfill that or ignore it.
Sometimes I teach reading, most of the times I don't. What I *do* teach is
understanding of music, and good timing/phrasing. THAT is *much* more important!
If a person has a problem with hearing rhythmic nuance and has timing problems,
that should be fixed immediately and not futhered exacerbated by allowing them
to get farther along by reading things they're not executing properly.
Again - I'v taught people that can approximately read the ugliest page of splattered black
ink you can find, but their rhythm is essentially that of a beginner. I find no
purpose is that, except to fool themselves and listeners.
5/8/00 Harold M. Frazee harryz1007@aol.com
In my professional career I've had to draw upon all my skills. Reading music has been a tremendous part of that. Personally I have all my students learn to read (to whatever extent is either necessary or available).Being musically literate has enabled me to have some of the most memorable musical experiences in my career, both on stage and in the studio. Whether it is necessary to become a successful musician, probably not, but I would still reccomend learning to read. To not be able to read music takes away an entire world of beatiful musical experiences. Just as much as if you can't follow music by ear. Both should be learned.
5/9/00 Meg Gausepohl mdgausepohl@yahoo.com
My husband teaches band at an elementary school, and he will tell you that (in this case, at least) teaching to play without teaching notes can be disastrous. The previous teacher let the kids write the note names in their music, and they didn't learn to read. When he started this year, he had the beginning band kids learn to read the notes, but is still struggling after 8 months to get the intermediate kids to read. As a consequence, the beginning band has caught up to, and is about to pass up, the intermediate band. Also as a consequence, the intermediate kids are very frustrated with trying to advance without the skills they need - having been allowed to go through a whole year without having to do the work, they are now spoiled, as it were, and don't want to learn any further skills.
Of course there must be a balance between learning the language and practicing it. Perhaps reading isn't as important in
genres other than classical, but having the knowledge can give you an edge when seeking a career.
5/9/00 Michael P. Wolfsohn mpw@aol.com
While I do not think it is in all cases necessary to read standard notation to be able to play well and to be professionally successful in some kinds of musical endeavors, I certainly think of reading as extremely helpful and preferable. Let me clarify this. We all know of famous and/or successful musicians in various fields who do not read. (Some of them seem to take a great deal of pride in this.) It seems to me that the key thing here is understanding the musical relationships involved in one's music - notes/chords/scales, etc. - the whole gamut of music theory. While some exceptionally gifted people seem to have an innate understanding of this language, most of us do not. Lacking that innate perception, an understanding of theory becomes essential for real musical progress, and the best language we have to discuss theory is standard notation.
I mostly teach guitar players (who are notorious for their attitudes toward note-reading and technique study). I also teach Bluegrass banjo players, mandolin players, bass players, pedal steel players, singers and songwriters. I sometimes coach bands. In EVERY case, I teach standard notation AND theory. Invariably, once I have explained the benefits that a student will gain from this additional study, they agree that it is a good idea.
I believe that a lot of the bad reputation that note reading has gotten with musicians working in popular idioms is that no one has ever explained to them exactly how learning to read will help them, and they see it (rightly or wrongly)as a stuffy holdover from snobby, square classical music.
My explanation to guitar players includes the following ideas:
1> Learning to read as a guitar-playing discipline provides an opportunity
to break the hand-eye dependence that can limit speed and confidence.
2> Standard notation is a key to understanding theory ( which I always
teach as well) and an understanding of theory makes a great many things
possible.(The two that seem to particularly speak to guitarists are the a) it will
improve your ability to improvise meaningfully. And B.) it will help you
learn songs from recordings)
3> Reading standard notation allows you to play music not written for
guitar, or not available in tablature.
I have yet to encounter a student who, after learning to read at least fairly well and to understand theory at least reasonably well, was not glad to have made this study.
7/14/00 Robyn PIANOBLESSINGS@webtv.net
To Meg: in regards to your husband's frustration with students writing in names of notes in order to play their music. Many of my piano method books; example: Bastien, do just that in the beginning as their method of encouraging the student to play right away. The frustration on learning to read notes, keep fingers on the correct notes, count the rhythm and play with expression sometimes overwhelms a beginner student. I have students in their 2nd and 3rd yr. that run into a difficult note occasionally and I let them add the name in lightly as a reminder. This is not naming all of the notes I realize but when the student continually misses the same one over and over again, a reminder is a good incentive that that note is coming up to play again.
I had a transfer student advanced at that begin with me writing her notes in. We tried one piece without them in and realizing she KNEW her notes, she was just adding them in from old habits! Whoa!
But I see what you're saying about those particular students being spoiled and not knowing how to read their notes without writing in their names. It can be frustrating too!
7/15/00 Kira Plettser kirasmusicstudio@hotmail.com
The answer is Yes. Why? Because from reading all of the postings, I didn't understand how the ability to read music can interfere with creativity or ability to express one's soul and feelings. The only problem as I see it (and I've been a music teacher for well over 40 years) is the unwillingness of a student to do anything except have fun: then why is he/she called a student? They are then just houseguests and we have to entertain them- not bother them with studying. I agree that an explanation should be given but afterwards I don't want to ever see one more campaign against illiteracy (this time musical). By the way, I don't believe that people who can't read and/or write music can be called a composer. All of my students, even the youngest (5-6 years old) can create a melody and it's my task as a teacher to show them how to write it down using all possible theoretical knowledge. When they do it regularly, their interests expand and now they can read others' music and write their own.
7/22/00 Steve srob62@aol.com
I feel that it is important to learn how to read music, however it is equally important to know about the creative aspects of music and to also have the knowledge and expertise to know how to truly express oneself. As a teacher,my students get healthy doses of both aproaches.As a result, students will end up being a lot more well-rounded and able to play/perform in a variety of settings. Learning how to read music is viable only that it takes some of the mystery out of music...but so can having a thorough knowledge of theory(something that is not often taught--esp. in regards to "classical"musicians-and unfortunately it shows). In short, all these things are a means to and end, not the end itself.
7/22/00 Darlene Webster Darpiano@aol.com
YES, students should learn to read notes! What is so difficult about it? It is no more work than learning math fractions or multipication tables. One learns by memorizing, or by intervals or my using the little staff sayings. And after you practice over and over, you know your notes by memory. You then have the FREEDOM to play ANYTHING. I have piano students who have such great ears, but they read their pieces first to even know how the music sounds. Then they play it by "memory". Sure it is work, but well worth every effort. Music reading skills then carry over to voice or any other instrument. That is why I highly recommend PIANO LESSONS first.
7/26/00 Shannon squirt61@hotmail.com
In answer to your question as a piano performance major who really didn't learn how to read music until late high school, YES reading music is very important. I think that if I would have learned how to read music at a younger age I would be a lot more advanced in my playing. It would also be easier for me to pick up any piece and play it. All the research that I've done, either for class or my own personal benefit, has produced the has just helped prove the fact that I should have learned to read music a lot sooner.
8/15/00 Dave Brewster BrewhaMusic@email.msn.com
In my experience, standard note reading for a guitar player is a mess. I have a honors music degree from the Atlanta Institute of Music, and have studied classical guitar with a local university instructor. So I can sight read fairly well and feel comfortable with reading standard notation. BUT! In this day and age for a guitar or bass player/student, tablature is much easier to read and can show you the area in which you are to play, which is a major problem for many standard music reading guitar players. The only drawback I have found to only with being a tab reader is that, if you dont know how to count rhythms then you may not be playing the song or example correctly in time. You just have the notes you're supposed to play. So in many ways you have to be able to read the tab but also read the rhythm of what you're playing too. And learning tab is so easy, if a student wants to read regular music I usually show them tab first, then if the interest is still there, (which it normally is), I feel its easier for them to understand regular music. So in some ways tabulature can be a primer to reading standard music.
8/23/00 Jana Wagner jana_indy@netzero.net
Hi, I'm looking for samples of teacher contracts from those of you that rent space from studios, churches, etc. and work as independent contractors. Any help you can offer would be greatly appreciated!
Sincerley, Jana
8/23/00 Patrick Burnside musicbypat@excite.com
I've found that unspoken assumption that musicians who play in the more popular and commercial fields of rock, pop, blues, etc. generally don't read and don't need to, as compared to the classical and jazz counterparts. How unfortunate! As mentioned previously music is a language and while it is not absolutely neccessary to sightread, it is a clear advantage. It opens up the musician to a greater capability and increased diversity in terms of what sounds and styles he/she can process.
As an example, I begun my musical explorations like many. I got a guitar and fancied myself a singer, so I started playing in a little band that within six months of my starting was playing all the local frat parties and such. We played stuff like ACDC, the Romantics, Jimi Hendrix, U2, Beatles, etc. In another words music that was easy to learn by rote. The only reason we survived was that it was a very small college, with no real music scene, so we were able to "shine" by default. Now I always had a healthy respect for jazz and classical musicians, but didn't see sightreading as a necessary skill in my area. After I shattered my arm in a car accident, I was forced to suspend my "bar band" outings, and after healing decided to check out this prominent jazz program at a local junior college. My ego was smashed everyday for about two years, but I finally assimilated the vocabulary and "chops" enough to really enjoy and benefit from it. Don't get me wrong and certainly didn't stand out as the next Charlie Parker or Herbie Hancock, but the daily grounding in sightreading and theory really strengthened me musically. See once you understand the fundamental components(theory) of the music and build on your ability to process it(sightreading and eartraining), your ability to access and utilize a broader range of music and sound is increased. I never wanted much to be a virtuoso, my yearnings were more in the direction of composition. But because of that experience I can hear things in a Mozart symphony, Tchaikovsky ballet, atonal string quartet, or bebop sax solo and instantly understand what scales and harmonic qualities are at hand, and assimilate it into my work as a composer. Hopefully I have been able to demonstrate what a asset it is to sightread fluently, for once you've attained a competent level, you will never question its value again. Also, with beginning students I think its a crime to not require consistent and dedicated work in sightreading.
9/29/00 Marya Basaraba mslouli@aol.com
I was absolutely fascinated to read the comments in this debate by contributors since 1998 with many strong proponents of either side. It would NEVER had occurred to me that there would be a question about the validity or necessity of reading music but there are some interesting arguments nonetheless.
I am currently making a full time life in music, again, after taking several 'detours' into other areas of professional performing over a 25 year career in the Arts. I actually started teaching piano when I was 13, conducted the Children's Choir at my family church at 15 and was at University as a Music Ed Major when I was 16 with Piano as my first instrument. I played piano for Ballet Schools, accompanied the local Musical Theatre Company, taught private piano and was a Musical 'Station' for one of the first programs for Learning Disabled Children in Canada. The thing that singled me out and made it possible for me to make a living in music as a teenager and now in my fourth decade of music making, was my ability and gift for sight reading. While the Piano Majors at University were in the studio eight hours a day, I was sight reading the auditions for the National Youth Orchestra hopefuls and playing the orchestral reductions for the Piano Solo Concerto exams. In subsequent years, I studied Voice and ultimately have put aside a successful career in Film and Television as an actress and Media Host, yes, those detours I mentioned, to resume a full time life in Music, but now as in Opera . I think I'm the only person who ever came to Hollywood and became an Opera Singer!
Again, my gift for sight reading has singled me out in my community and made it possible for me to make a full time living as a singer and musician. Being able to play most opera score reductions means I can coach other singers effectively from the piano........my quick study and ability to sight read most scores, vocally and pianistically, put me way ahead of many of my colleagues and I was easily able to put over 30 roles into my repertoire in only a few years. All the rest of my performing background adds up as well, but the MOST important factor in making a living in music is the ability to sight read well. Most of the singers I know, no matter how competent or of a beautiful voice, have to make their livings in an Office or Restaurant because they do not piano or good reading skills. SO, when I am asked to take on a new student, the first question I ask is, have you had any piano.......if not, I say, especially to parents, "there are a lot of other teachers who will take your money........if you really want to learn to sing, I will teach you concurrently at the piano and sight reading will be a big part of the lessons".
Some people don't want to bother and that's their choice, and I know a lot of teachers who won't bother teaching them about MUSIC and the necessity to sight read, especially for singers. My belief is that they are charlatans and are not doing their students or the parents any favour by taking money to teach by rote. In fact, it is a big racket to teach when the end result is students who cannot function as musicians and only play or sing by imitation. Not only is this my opinion, but I believe it to be a fact, that no matter what the style of music, a singer cannot have a professional life in music without excellent sight reading, not just reading skills. The same goes for a pianist unless they are a Jazz phenomenon or a Classical pianist who only teaches. There is nothing worse than hiring a pianist who has a Doctorate from USC or some such Major University program who cannot read fast enough to make music at first sight. It's a waste of everyone else's time to suffer their incompetence. The art of accompanying is literally determined by a pianist's ability to read.......all the other musicians are expected to sit down and read their part at performance level.......why not the singers and pianists. Well, they all are, so why the issue of the NECESSITY to read music. I'm astonished that it's a question for debate!!!!!!!
9/19/00 Mick Choder mick@enter.net
Having been taught to read music as a child, I thought it completely ridiculous to expect anyone to learn or understand music without notation. It certainly allows for easy communication of ideas, stimulates the analytical brain, and gives a systematic structure for understanding what the West has been doing for hundreds of years. If anything, I am sorry I did not learn to read well enough for my current needs, and have been attempting to train myself for several years(It's much harder as an adult to find the time and motivation for this). Recently I've been disheartened to see many young guitar students learning only tab, assuming they'd never "understand" music. However, I can see that this is not the whole story. For example, African drum music originated and continues to be played without any written system, and rhythms can be communicated either orally or on the drum itself. There is no doubt that these African drummers create meaningful and emotionally moving music, and are useful members of society. Furthermore, I have to admit that when I create songs, I often pay no attention to note or chord names, and instead of writing the ideas in conventional notation, I just scribble the words on scrap paper.
So here's my thought for the moment: Music is as important and meaningful as a hug, and no lessons are needed for that -- just a little effort and a little sharing. But good relationships often require more than just a hug. You need to communicate verbally and nonverbally, and understand signals directed at you. You need to pay the bills, clean the kitchen, heal a wound, drive a car, tell a joke, etc. Learning to read music remains the best system to fully engage in music-making in our world. However, we need to share hugs, too.
10/4/00 Andy Edwards aedwards@patchway.biblio.net
10/15/00 Francis DiVirgilio tubafella@aol.com
10/25/00 Simon simoncsme@yahoo.com
10/28/00 Justin Schroder illbet@juno.com
12/4/00 Lisa Rae Vaughan LisaRaeVaughan@hotmail.com
12/8/00 Charity Sung whitebeast@goddessdreams.com
12/10/00 Pete Martorana danse51@yahoo.com
1/12/01 Marty Heresniak voxnaturalis@msn.com
2/1/01 Bruce Milburn themilburns@netzero.net
2/9/01 Jim Crye fortworthguitar@hotmail.com
2/22/01 Christene Vaughan jcvaughan@netzero.net
3/8/01 Amy K. Vlagirl1@aol.com As a private string teacher, I begin many children on the basic
philosophy of the Suzuki method, but move to reading notes as soon as they
are intellectually capable. (A good rule of thumb I use is, if they can
read English, they can read notes)But even if your goal is to be the best
jazz or rock musician around, relying on your ear, emotions and charts,
reading music certainly can't hurt.
3/11/01 Barbara B. Barbona@aol.com
4/2/01 Jenny SongandDance77@aol.com
4/9/01 Kevin Hildebrant McGreth78@aol.com
4/20/01 Jaqueline thesief@yahoomail.com
5/3/01 Eleonor England eengland@onebox.com
* it can be very helpful
and most important of all:
* Everyone thinks singers are idiots and no one considers them *musicians*
so I like to make sure my students are better musicians than the
instrumentalists they wil be playing with. It's embarassing the level of
musicianship that vocalists are held to. I mean, I'm not saying you hafta
read music to be a good musician, but you hafta know *something* besides
this "lalala" crap people associate with singers. And I think teaching
them to read a little (&/or teaching them other theory) is neccessary for
them to be taken seriously.
6/2/01 Michael Miller RollingFrogMusic@aol.com
6/2/01 Tom Flynn
6/27/01 Melvin Baer PunktCom@aol.com
6/30/01 Cholly cdp@cholly.com
I'm not a teacher, but you are talking about a student-musician's ability
to perform without being able to read music. I think I can offer practical
experience, not theory, in this respect.
I'm a music producer, working for major labels and indies, and I get to
see new people every day. Some 90% cannot read music. This includes the
ones who make big money, and the nobodies.
Of course, my point of view is directly related to the music industry's
recording side. But bands almost never "require" this type of training to
express themselves musically in todays pop world. Would it be good? Yeah,
it would be great! But no one in the industry will ever be interested
(except for me) if they can or cannot read music. And no one will know.
And there's more... some of the most talented, respected people out there
are totally musically illiterate.
I'm actually supporting the idea of teaching kids to read music, although
it may not seem that way. But I'd like to point out that, to some kids, it
might be a big obstacle in the way of actually liking music. It was that
way for me, and to this day, I can't really hold my own with notation... I
took more unconventional routed to get here.
Take care, and congrats again.
Charles Di Pinto
7/17/01 Ray Sword sword2drum000@cs.com
And as a teacher, I need the page to convey the patterns and notes to the
students in a group setting. Otherwise your have everyone just guessing at
what they are suppose to be doing.
Written music is the roadmap that gets you from the beginning of your
musical journey to the end and when you have passengers with you (your
accompliments) they need to know where it is you are going so they don't
get lost. Mind you, I have had many experiences with no sheets in front of
me but that is when you can feel and hear where the journey is going. You
have travelled that path many times before.
Best to all,
8/8/2001 Matthew Kean bbkean@hotmail.com
Now from all this you may think I am anti-reading. I am not, my students
all learn to read because this makes it easier to understand what's going
on when they play in a certain key, for example. I just don't want them to
rely on it to play.
8/17/2001 Paul Rzad rzad@ix.netcom.com
Oh..... sorry. Its a little better if we have a common methodology
for communication yes?
8/22/2001 Matthew Kean bbkean@hotmail .com
8/24/2001 Brevity Records cseger@brevityrecords.com
I don't believe there is a "need" to learn how to read music to become
successful, although it depends on the kind of musician you aspire to be.
Studio musician? Yes, the ability to read is invaluable. Performer? Not
necessarily. Is it beneficial to have the ability to read at your
disposal? Yes...It's definitely a nice skill, but it doesn't guarantee
success.
Creativity, originality, and passion bring about success in my opinion.
I view the ability to read music as an aid in the "musical process",
though really as a minute technical aspect of music as a whole.
True, the ability to read music assists with many theory based aspects of
music and probably makes the musician better overall in a "technical"
sense, though there is something which preceeds all technical musical
training called "natural talent".
Naturally talented musicians perform an expression of the "inner
soul"...they play or sing whatever comes "naturally" to them, not what's
written down on paper.
Success comes in many forms. Personally, I feel successful when I have
written a song that is true to who I am...then again, that's just my
opinion.
8/31/2001 Dr. Etuhs etuhs@hotmail.com
9/4/2001 Matthew Kean bbkean@hotmail.com
12/5/2001 J.W.Z ZZYY3@MEDIAONE.NET
I have a degree in Music from Berklee College of Music in Boston Ma. and
have been teaching for over 25 years and just take my word for it, that if you
are seriously considering taking lessons with someone who tells you that
you do not need to learn how to read music I would turn around and hightail
it out of there as fast you can. Open up your mind. Don't be afraid to
learn. There is no such thing as a shortcut. Knowledge is a wonderful thing.
12/11/2001 Stan stan1192@aol.com
Otherwise....a student MUST know how to read...to be a professional.
12/17/2001 Max beewash@hotmail.com
12/17/2001 Matthew Kean bbkean@hotmail.com
12/18/2001 Mariam Gregorian mariam951@hotmail.com
I have found it much more successful to train the ear and work on balanced
posture, etc. before putting a music stand in front of a child.
It is really tough on everyone when school teachers have the pressure of
putting on a concert and achieving instantaneous results. In the long run,
I believe that it really harms the child by trying to teach them a million
things at once.
In my experience, it is a lot easier to teach a good player to read than
it is to teach a good reader to play.
2/23/02 Sherry Boyd sboyd@mail.hockaday.org
When I'm working with other musicians it's the first things they 'hear'
that often lead down paths of inspiration with minimal persperation.
God's BEST,
Denis
God Bless You.
Most non readers are folk who either missed out on music instruction as
kids or as adults find it very difficult to pick up this new language, or
are just plain lazy. Most guitar, drum set (only) and bass players I know
can't read since most of them picked it up as a hobby or a way to impress
the opposite sex, didn't seek formal instruction and trained their ear to
be able to exist. In that world you don't need to be able to "read" other
than chord charts unless you really go after it and learn guitar notation
or take classical lessons to do session work or teach or play solo
concerts. Likewise oboe players and trombonists learn to read early on as
that is the way the bands and orchestras in the schools communicate. Some
pianists I know can play anything you throw in front of them but cringe if
you ask them to IMPROVISE so I think a good teacher should teach how to
read where appropriate but also must teach how to listen and pick up stuff
by ear...then how to improvise as well as play a written piece by memory.
The student will groan at whatever is hard for them, but no pain no
gain....the teacher must challenge the student to use all the tools at
their disposal to be able to touch the essence of music which transcends
technique...and that is the ability to communicate (universal)feelings
through sound.
Or I could be wrong.
My apology, I may not belong here. I have some experience as a student of
a recorder-flute (age 8), clarinet (age 12-15) and I was frustrated
because my brain is wired such as to require so much effort to transform
the reading of every single note into playing. With 15 I gave up on
woodwinds and turned to guitar, accord playing was fun. Finally there was
joy of music.
I learned Saxophone later and did it by ear, at least good enough for
playing in my graduation party band, and of course I had tapes, not a
score to learn what to play.
I retrieved my clarinet later and found that given *nice* music (meaning a
real piece, not some boring etude), even the effort in deciphering notes
can be rewarding. Now I finally got myself a piano, and I cannot possibly
believe I'll manage reading 2-6 notes on two different keys in parallel
.. so I play by accord and by ear plus, perhaps, reading one line of
melody. I am having fun learning new figures and approaches through
knowledge of the concepts of notation and harmony, but then playing and
hearing is what makes it fun.
I also did singing and my goal is it to be able to play my instruments as
immediately as I can "play" my voice, i.e., by ear.
Summary: the most valuable gifts my various music teachers gave me was:
(1) Recorder: getting the principles of fingering on all woodwind
instruments.
(2) Clarinet: the importance of correct breathing. The *supreme* value of
practicing the chromatic scale to get every tone with equal facility.
Playing a reed, so I could do the Saxophone.
(3) Guitar: the principles of harmonies, geometric transposition, being
able to use E-A-D-G string instruments (e.g., bass) in some sensible way,
and of course to sing along as you play.
(4) Piano: having both harmony and melody totherther on your fingertips is
such a joy. Everyone should be given the oppotunity to access a piano.
(I'm still chilled by the thought of how obscure the use of the guitar is
in comparison.)
Some music reading is good to know, but it was an utterly inefficient
vehicle for making me produce music. The chromatic fingering practice, and
principles of melody and harmony and forms of combining those, use of ear
and breath, rhythm, phrasing, improvisation, can be tought more directly
and are more relevant to enjoy active music while still having a life (in
the end, most of economical or social "success" comes from things other
than music, so, for all the lowly amateurs like me, teachers be sure to
give them a chance to enjoy music as a hobby.)
Obviously, someone studying classical violin will have a greater need to
read music than someone studying heavy-metal guitar. The former will not
work in the field lacking reading skills - the latter is still able as
long as he is skilled.
So, you see, all my students end up professionals: NO NOTE READING AT
FIRST, THEN NOTE READING IS EASY FOR THEM. They play a note song, and in
one to two weeks have it learned, not needing their music with little
effort!
See me at: www.fastrakpianocourse.com
Besides having that ability, mentioned above, they are VERY INTELLIGENT at
the piano.
I have known people in my forty years of teaching piano, who have a God
given mind for music, without studying, only listening and then playing
it. I have seen people who had such a great desire to play the piano, and
they couldn't afford it, but studied it on their own, and they are great
musicians. Then, I have played special duet musicals with those who
graduated from conservatories of music, and they are GREAT!!
I sure like my method...so do my beginners and Adult beginners!! Why?
Because reading notes slows the process of performance down, taking more
years to accomplish it --- "I remember! LOL!!" "If only I HAD THIS PIANO
COURSE WHEN I WAS 5 YEARS OLD!!"
We here at VOCALCONNECTION have added "Reading Music" in a non-thretening
way that the fear factor doesn't even enter the picture. We have a slogan
" You can look at it, You can listen to it and You can do it", and it
simply works.
We have created a well planned, thought through,organized,comprehensive,
logical and a user-friendly set up starting with scale #1 through #12
printed out to look at, it's also pre-recorded for our students to sing
with. Before they know it they are singing their hearts out just one scale
at a time. Without any hopla everyone is reading what's in front of them.
Some of the latter scales are quite complicated, it's just notes. Each
scale has a purpose and a goal, cultivating their singing skills from the
simples melody line to a sophysticated acrobatic Mastery. Age, Style or
Gender makes no difference. This has always been a trigger-point to get
our students started to read music.
A while back a World Renowned Composer and a Orchestra Conductor
challenged me:
" What's So Different With Your Stuff Mr. W.?" he said. "Well sir with
VOCALCONNECTION's Curriculum you can look at it . . you can listen to it
. and you can do it." "WOW! he shouted - I have never heard of that
before" I was happy to reply: " "Never have I!"
HAPPY HOLIDAYS 2002 and a great 2003. Remember, we're in it together,
let's make the most of it.
Written music in a form that is recognizable today has only been around
for about 1000 years. The men who developed the system of reading were
associated with the Catholic church. Their novices who sang were required
to learn all of their chants by rote. This was a process that often took
12-14 years. (and there were lots of problems with it) When Father Guido
of Arezzo taught his students with written music this time was shortened
to about one year.
Writing of music is what changed western music and caused it to develope
and evolve in ways that music from other cultures has been unable to do.
It became much more complex with harmonies today that would sound totally
foreign 1000 years ago. Rhythms are much more complicated, music lasts
longer (the length of pieces is longer)etc.
Reading and writing music allows music to evolve. If music professionals
don't have the ability to read music, their music doesn't change much over
the course of time. Certainly one can get paid for making music without
the ability to read, but, their music would be the same forever and who
would want to sound like Britney Spears for the rest of eternity.
Being able to move a finger in a way indicated on a piece of paper does not mean the person who is doing so is actually "musical".
I presently teach about 60+ students a week. Most of them play in bands, write their own music. Past students are now music teachers themselves at colleges and in private.
*They are doing MUSIC*. I don't teach how to read unless asked, and it has not hindered these people one bit.
ON THE OTHER HAND, I have taught *hundreds* of people who played instruments all through their grade school years, who can read pretty much anything.
*None* of them knew anything about music. Couldn't tell me how many notes there were, couldn't tune their instrument by ear, had never improvised in their life, didn't know anything about chord construction, intervals or any of the most rudimentary things that *are* the *understanding* of
music... Most don't even know that E and B do not have sharps...
Who is better being served here? Music is played on the *instrument*, NOT on the staff, and one should learn how to think on their respective instruments. Extra translation from the staff to the instrument is a hindrance. If a person finds themselves in a situation where they must be
able to read, it's likely a PROFESSIONAL situation - in which case, if the person is capable of it they can teach themselves. The only exception to this is the classical idiom, which is a *specialized* application of musical ability, it is NOT de rigeur for the notion of "playing an
instrument".
Forcing a kid to learn how to sight read 'Mary Had a Little Lamb' when he's salivating to get on with PLAYING is a morally corrupt thing to do when you're quite likely risking destroying someone's motivation.
Piano is completely different than guitar, a kid can learn basic sight reading skills on a piano an order of magnitude faster than on guitar; if the instrument being learned is guitar it is likely going to be a frustrating experience for most to the point of wanting to quit. It is also to the advantage of a child to learn at a young age (6-10) on a piano while their language skills are still developing, because after about age 12 they will both have already set their language skills in stone and will have their own ideas about what they want to do. You can take it upon yourself to think you're "educating" the kid, but if they don't want to learn to read *they're not going to*. It's better to try to inculcate as much theory as possible *within the framework of what motivates them*.
Of course, that's a little more difficult than starting a lesson off with "ok, let's open the book to page 23 and read what's there"... but your mileage may vary.
I can now make up an instant harmony to almost any song. In fact, I find
it very difficult to sing the melody to popular songs. This improvisations
have led to some gorgeous harmonies at church choir. I have no idea what
notes I am singing. I can figure it out, but it'd take too long to write
for all the hymns I know. I'd just as soon listen and sing whatever comes
to me.
I recently took up the fiddle and found that my scedule and the music
teachers' schedules just didn't jive. I had a nephew teach me the scales
and had a fiddle tune in mind that I wanted to learn. I listened over and
over, writing down my own fingering tabs because every time I'd write the
notes out, I couldn't think fiddle, only piano. It took way too long for
me to read the notes. I was getting extremely frustrated. So I just put
the CD on perennial repeat and picked up the notes from there. I have
learned soooooo many tunes this way. But I needed to learn to read violin
notes on the music staff.
I met some of the most amazing fiddle teachers at the Gaelic COllege in
Cape Breton who put the music before me, played the tune, had me sing it
and match the notes on my fiddle. I guess this is how the kids learn
Suzuki. Boy did it work for me! I am still pretty slow as reading goes but
it jogged something in my memory and I can sight read a bit now. You'd
think I'd be thrilled. *shrugs* I will practice reading every day but
since I am interested in traditional music, a lot of what I want to learn
isn't written down. Of the stuff that is, I find myself changing the
written notes and rhythms to match what my mind says is better. I change
them in my head and fingers, not on the staff. I think I can do this
forever without reading any faster than I do now. People all over the
world do just fine not reading. Look at all the traditional tunes passed
from generation to generation without being published. It's staggering and
comforting to know that you don't have to be able to afford a teacher, you
can do it with a mentor to teach you by showing.
That said, I guess I have no clear stance. Reading music has helped me
when I get in trouble remembering what to sing in. But for the fiddle? The
tunes I play best are the ones I learned by ear. I am glad I learned by
ear first. I would have quit otherwise.
I start them out in preschool and begin helping them recognize the types
of notes and the music alphabet and then from there, I start teaching them that music
notes have keys associated with them and that where those notes are on a staff
determines which keys they should press and when.
It does not make them technique-minded or "unable to get the feel of
music." Music is not about playing any old thing the way you feel like
it. It has order. It has definite harmony and melody. It has a pitch all
its own in every style. Telling parents and students that "you don't need
to learn to read the music for the instrument" is setting them up for
frustration and failure later on when it gets difficult. It is only doing
half a job. I equate it to sending a child to first grade and telling them
"you don't need to learn to read, you can just do the letters or use
pictures the way you feel like it."
Part of teaching music is the reading of music. It is the firm theory
foundation to the music. It is performing the pieces with smoothness and
skill and confidence. Students don't learn music "by feel". The feel and
artistic interpretations to music will come with maturity and study and
dedication that the student has. You can't teach a kid to "feel" music or
have talent- they either do or they don't, but sight reading and learning
to play skillfully both require reading the notes on the page.
Perhaps this isn't just a debate about reading music or not, but another
way of endorsing Suzuki or traditional teaching. These are just my thoughts
and practices, and something to think about.
Is there anyone outthere who has beaten apathy in the music classroom.
Each time I enter the class I get blank stares. Any successful strategies
would be welcome. ( and I'm not even a boring teacher)
In private lessons and in class, I teach the students a song by
numbers,letters,tab,or on Guitar a song using one chord. First you must
get them interested and then work in all the other stuff later. Each
student is different as when they will be ready to learn music reading and
how fast. Most of your students are there to have fun are are not
thinking about music 24 hours a day like we are. You just have to roll
with the pace of the student and know when to push and when back off. Try
to make it fun for the student as well as yourself.
Two years of answers on this question. enough already! How about -- "How
do you teach kids to have "their own voice" on their instrument?
To have one's own voice on an instrument in my opinion, one must be
confident in other areas of life. I find it nearly impossible to not to
attempt to live up to what I perceive to be what others expect from
musicians. There is no logical reason for this to be true because I am
comfortable on my instrument. I do have rare students who have their own
selves being shown on their instrument. Seeing that let's me know how
little I am able to instill that in a student. Kinda like practicing;
students will practice what and when they darn well feel to.
Can anyone recommend a ROTE METHOD book? For years, I've taught hundreds
of students from Alfred, Bastien, Schaum, Faber, etc with much success.
I'd like to try something different, specifically, the first 4-6 weeks of
lessons just playing songs, then going to note reading. My idea is to
"hook" students on piano, then delve into the mechanics of it.
Most people who love music always remember that music is there to express
our feelings and thoughts. It can be used in ANY way...and it's important
to FEEL the music and make it YOURS before anything else. The only reason
we learn to read music is so that the above process that I've mentioned is
easier to catch up on. But you can become successful even if you don't
read music.
But realistically you've got to catch up on the fact that if you're going to perform in a concert a composer is going to show you their notes on
paper because that's the most precise way of making sure the musician
understands what the composer is trying to say. To be able to read music
is one huge part of being able to play any instrument, sing and express
yourself. It's also an amazing way of making sure people understand and
take interest in music.
If anyone is really in love with music I'm sure they'd learn to read music just because it's got anything related to music rather than making it any more comfortable for themself to 'play'. ^^
I once had a flat tire on a busy super-highway. For safety's sake, I had
to drive off the highway, only about a mile at the most. I made it, but it
would have been so much easier with a full tire!
Reading music may not be absolutely, completely necessary. But it just
makes the journey so much easier.
Would an actor expect to be successful without the reading skills to study
his own scripts? Any deficiency which limits one's talent should be
remedied. I get the same type of "I don't want to learn that" reaction
when I ask my classical students to improvise the returning A sections of
their baroque arias instead of writing in a version of embellishments. All
musicians should be able to read AND improvise from a chart/by ear.
Anything less is not complete training. Stop your defensiveness and get to
work on your cross-training.
There should be a balance between playing an instrument by ear and
learning to read music.Both aspects are very important for all players.If
an individual can read music he or she has an advantage-but creativity and
improvisation are the very root of music-to be fluent in both would be
wise!!
I don't believe it is necessary to know how to read and write music to
become a successful musician. In fact, the majority of my students could
care less about reading music. All they want to do is learn how to play
music. Reading/writing music is not bad it's just real boring in the
beginning. It was for me anyway. It would be a good idea to learn if your
heading in the classical or jazz direction. Tabulature is quick and easy
and has come a long way. In my opinion it doesn't matter how you learn
your instrument as long as your making progress as a player. If it sounds
good, it is good regardless of how you learned it.
In my experience, people can sight-read or play by ear. A mixture of the
ability to sight read and play by ear well is few and far between.
If a student wants to read--take lessons from a classical trained teacher,
or if you want to play by ear and improvised based on chord reading--see a
jazz teacher. Either way can lead to a successful musician.
The word "Successful" is, in itself, such a subjective word. To a seven
year old child just dying to play the violin, just mastering the Suzuki
twinkle variations is success. To a twenty-something trying to make money
as a free-lance artist-weddings, etc- being able to sight read a piece of
music on the spot is success. And of course, to someone who has waited
all of his/her life for their band's first CD to come out, being able to
express what is in their emotions through improvised music is success.
When I was taking lessons as a young child, I used to say to my teacher..."can you play it for me first?"
Some of the pieces I had to learn were quite challenging and I always considered myself a decent pianist. Then
we moved and I couldn't find a teacher right away and decided to continue on my own. It was then that I realized that I was a poor sight reader, and that my muscial skills were very limited because I had been playing much by ear. Today, I am a piano teacher and refuse to play a number for my students when they ask. I tell them, you play it first. They have to count. I spend a few lessons having them write in their own timing. When they have learned a piece, it's because they really KNOW the music. I introduce ear training, chord method, composing, actual writing of notes so they do learn their timing well. We even do composing at the computer. They definitely have to count to do that. I will encourage them finish their composition, then we record it and produce their own CD's. I like versitility in teaching music. I don't consider myself a great teacher, but one who has learned that certain 'shortcuts' can be a hindrance to the student. Playing by ear is a gift, but can also hurt the student in the long run. Many students are very content with never reading, content to play by ear. Other students I have are very diligent to "learn" and they spend lots of hours practicing. There is no definite yes or no to this question. I believe you should teach as much as you can leaving the rest up to the student.
Wow, what a discussion! I think the person that said "successful musician" is subjective was right on the money. Since the word musician is defined as "one who conducts, composes or performs music" it is possible to be successful and not read music…for example Madonna (seems like a read somewhere that she did not have any musical training) among others and
those rare people with amazing talents.
In my personal opinion, the word musician encompasses much more...passion,
creativity and COMPETENCE.
Although it is POSSIBLE to be successful without reading music, I find the debate as to whether or not a person should LEARN to read music is preposterous.
I have always been an "ear" person. I began playing the piano at a very young age by ear. When I finally did take lessons I would literally BEG my teachers to play a piece for me so that I could simply reproduce it. This has been a disadvantage for me to this day (I am not a teacher by the way...I don't even know how I came across this site!) While I know how to read music, it is still hard to break the habit of imitating what I hear. Basically, a parallel argument would be "Can a person be a successful poet
without being literate?" I think most logical people would say NO! But then again, there isn't a huge market for pop poetry like there is pop music...but nevertheless... Like I said, there are some truly gifted people out there that can be successful without reading a note...but they are rare. There are many more that are not so talented yet successful. So I guess you can be successful without reading music...but how good of a musician are you really? At times I have to look at Britney Spears and think...I'm the idiot...but then again it's all subjective.
I don't think a lot of people are reading the question properly. It
states, "Do students need to learn to read music to become successful
musicians?" The average "successful" musician is, in my opinion, someone
who performs and records regularly and/or teaches a private studio of
musicians or at a conservatory. The pop star is a lucky musician. I don't
think that there's a teacher in this room who would disagree that "average
'successful'" musician could probably read music.
Most performing musicians teach music in some capacity. I agree that the
average student does not need to learn how to read music, but in order to
become a successful musician in this day and age, one simply must.........
SURRENDER TO THE MUSIC STAFF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
and please people, when you're teaching students, don't cheat your
students. Show them something related to written music-anything, just try.
Even if it's just rhythms or chord changes (especially if that's all you
as a "teacher" can do) If the person does not take an interest in
learning to read music, they will most likely not become this "successful"
musician we speak of. The days of the Alan Lomax field recordings and
hidden geniuses are over. Everybody's talented and we all have to help
each other.
Thanks,
Kevin Hildebrandt
4/14/01 charan
dhaliwalc@hotmail.com
Awesome site!
I am an adult student of the violin. I love it; it is the best thing I've
ever done. However - I have extreme difficulty learning to read the music.
I think it's a sequencing problem for me (probably because of weak math
ability) and for some people, it's very difficult. I would love to be able
to play in a quartet someday BUT!!! without being able to read music, it's
just not possible. I had my teacher fooled for about 4 months thinking I
could read the music because my ears are good. YOU MUST LEARN TO READ THE
MUSIC, TRUST ME!!!!
Thanks for letting me share
Well, I don't think it's really *necessary* but I like to make people do
it anyway because:
* it helps people understand the structure of music
Well, you censored my last post so I guess this isn't really an open
forum, nor will I be surprised if this one dies on the vine. What are you
people at this site, a bunch of damned socialists, or just afraid to look
in the metaphorical mirror? I'll reiterate. Some of you reading this
should loosen your deathgrip on arcane musical practices. Understanding
tonal harmony is critical. Communicating musical ideas accurately even
more so, but I am deeply concerned at some posts earlier in the thread
that state that those incapable of reading standard notation are not real
musicians. Horses***, that's what I have to say. Musical history itelf
answers the question posed here so enough with this mental mastubation.
Get back to work.
We didn't knowingly omit any of your previous comments.
Why would anyone choose ignorance? Is there such a thing as knowing too
much? Is a student in a position to predict what he will need to know? Why
not learn as much as you can, as many skills as possible? And why not
learn them as soon as possible?
Congrats on the nifty forum.
I have to say if it wasn't for reading the page I would not have had half
of the studio gigs I have played. TV and radio jingles are written, not
just thrown together.
Ray Sword
While I think it makes for a better understanding of your instrument,
reading is far from essential. The invention of audio recording reduced
the need for music on the written page. Watching a live musical
performance where the musicians are reading is comparable to watching a
play where all the actors read their lines. Forcing students to work on
their reading skills is a good way to make them hate music lessons.
Please, this is not rocket science, let's not scare our students by making
them think it is. I teach my students to hear and understand chord
progressions, scales and phrases as they play real songs of their own
choosing. They look forward to each lesson and they play well sooner.
They also learn new songs by themselves without having to wait for a
transcription. Musicians who cannot play "by ear" and cannot improvise
are far more handicapped than those who cannot read. I have worked with
scores of professional musicians and I estimate about 2% of them actually
read.
oiehorhov5710uljweljdff/ljsdjtljq[34utj'klehrtkehrkrehwlkehrtkhw
ekrtlkhkdsmnbgerhhwegndfhghwega
tl4qjt;j34;tjlesjljoum4pi5cq43kv6avt'4'k6tkt's;attq4t'erjt34tlj
We do indeed have a common methodology of communication. It's called
MUSIC and it is heard and felt, not necessarily seen. We cannot know with
100% certainty exactly how Mozart would have wanted the Andante in
Symphony No. 29 but we can listen to a CD and HEAR exactly how Eric
Clapton played the solos in Crossroads.
Just a few random thoughts...
Not learning to read music is like not being able to read. You may know how to communicate but will never be able to partake of mighty works that have been put to pen.
99.999999999% of music students are not the slightest bit interested in partaking of those mighty works. Those that are surely have learned to read. I am continually amazed at watching professional symphony musicians with years & years of training and experience who must read the music during their performance. To me, that would be like going to a play and
watching the actors read their lines.
DO YOU NEED TO READ MUSIC!?? DO YOU NEED TO READ MUSIC!!!??? My god. Music is
a language. If you sincerely think of youself as a musician, you need to
speak the language. Reading music enables you to learn in an organized
manner where things are on your instrument. It teaches you to recognize
Rythmns (Isn't that a good portion of what it's all about?) Developing
reading skills takes a lot of hard work and effort. Unfortunetely Guitar
players are the only ones who pose the Question "Should I or shouldn't I
learn to read music." After all, you can play 5000 songs knowing only 3
chords.
If "success" means catering to the mass....then reading is unnecessary...as heard everyday on CD's,
television, radio. Requirements are a poor voice,an untuned instrument (usually a guitar) and unkempt attire.
When instructing youth or adults, it is important to teach all aspects of
music. Including how to read. Music is just like numbers, it is another
way to communicate. If you don't have all the tools, can you communicate
well? Most likely not. You can't teach a child the alphabet and leave
out the vowels. There would be to many words he/she could not say. Music
is the same. You have to teach them all areas of music. It is the only
way to communicate fully.
Reading music is indeed a useful aid for a beginner. It helps everything
fit together logically, which in turn makes it easier to learn and
remember. All my beginners learn to read and my advanced students are
strongly encouraged to if they don't already. However, after 30+ years of
teaching and performing, it is increasingly obvious to me that music enters
the brain through the ears and not the eyes. The best musicians hear and
react to/with music intuitively without the impediment of watching a
written score. What if you had to read every word you spoke? What if you
had to mentally spell every word you spoke while you said it? Playing
music should be as natural and effortless as speaking is. Before the
advent of audio recording, reading music was more of a necessity. Let's
not chain our students to the past.
I think that it is a mistake to teach young children (especially string
players) to read immediatly. As a violin teacher, I inherit many kids from
the school systems who have hurrendous posture, poor intonation, and a
phobia about memorization. Some of them have never even stood up to play!
I grew up in a music system where vocalists were not taught to read. That
was fine when I was young. However, when I started playing with bands and
working in musical theatre I was at a distinct disadvantage. It was
difficult to learn the music on my own. I was always one of the last ones
to understand the music. In addition, I eventually lost studio jobs
because I could not read. No one wanted to continue to teach me the music
by rote in order to get my talent. I force myself to go back to school,
so I could learn to read. What a pain in the butt!!! It was well worth
it. I got better jobs, I got repeat jobs and I was appreciated as a
musician not a singer. Students need to learn to read music.
3/07/02 Denis Bach denisbach@juno.com
Having been an 'ear' musician for years before learning to read gives me
perhaps a different perspective on this 'hot button' issue. One of the
coolest things about knowing how to read is to read a song without having
heard it and then 'hearing' all sorts of ideas for arranging that are not
influenced by the version of a song that drew you into it in the first
place. You can often bring a fresh perspective to a song this way. An
example that comes to mind is when I read 'How Can I Keep From Singing' in
a Hymnal (I'd never heard it before) and interpreted it as a blues
arranging it that way on guitar (accompaniment to voice). This feels
authentic to me but has struck some others (who'd obviously heard it
before) as strange. If it's 'that' different then I might use it on an
upcoming CD I'm now producing. I still think it sounds great with a
I7-IV7-V7 blues style yet keeping the melody intact.
4/02/02 Gwen Weaver gwendoug@bellsouth.net
Unless God has give the special gift of playing by ear, I definitely
believe reading music is a must..even if a person plays by ear, it
enhances their ability and broadens their talent. Composers put their
life into their music and we should respect that. I encourange my
students to read music and express themselves in their playing.
4/11/02 Magibob magibob@yahoo.com
The question is like, does a storyteller need to be able to read to be
able to tell a story? No, just ask any child who hasn't learned to read
yet if he can tell you a story that perhaps his mother or father have read
or told to him. Yes it can be done, and that was the way information was
transmitted for thousands of years before we as a species learned to read
and write. But, does it help his repertoire, his technique, his wealth of
knowledge if he can read when no one is around to tell him a story other
than books? And if he can creat original stories from his fertile mind,
does it give him a broader audience if he can write?? If he has a true
passion for his art would he deny himself the tools of the trade which
lead him to greater understanding, greater technique, and a greater well
of ideas to create from????
4/30/02 Rebekah F. Whitelock scottisheather@yahoo.com
I feel that confidence stems from the root of knowledge. If you provide
the proper foundation, the structure will remain strong and easier to
adapt to different layouts. To learn the basics of 'reading' music enables
one to focus on the 'what' of their learning; then the 'why' aspect of
their desire to become a musician becomes much more clear to them. Besides
all that theoretical stuff, lol, the twinkle in the students' eye when
they realize they can play anything put in front of them and/or write
anything that they have created by ear, is simply priceless :-)
5/3/02 Wilson chuanky@hotmail.com
hello, i'm a new fan of john pizzarelli.. so, anyone could tell me where
can i get his guitar tabs or chords? plss.. thanx
5/16/02 Matthew Goldenberg goldymonster@hotmail.com
I'm a student who is going to private instruct other students on the
violin/viola next year. I personally believe that students need to learn
how to read music, but while they learn that they need to be able to
express themselves throughout the pieces that they play to get the full
aspect of music. Like one of the other people wrote, 'music is a language'
the language has to be learned, but at the same time the language has to
be expressed throughout the peronallity and love the person has for music.
Hopefully if my email works (I tried but my computer won't let me in)
maybe you guys, if my email ever works, can email me some suggestions on
teaching kids who are switching instraments, or just starting the violin
or viola, or in teaching in general.
5/16/02 kmoore kjazz2jazz@hotmail.com
First there was music, then someone devised a way to communicate to others
in written form what had been played. Learning to read music dramatically
INCREASES one's chances of becoming a successful musician, if we are
defining "successful" as that which is deemed acceptable to others. If we
define it in an individual sense, then any musical utterance is in itself
"successful". Hence, reading is not necessary, but it is preferred, much
the same way that an orator would benefit from learning to read.
9/3/02 Gunther Schadow schadow@gusw.net
Anyone care and dare to summarize this thread? It doesn't seem to narrow
down on anything since 1999.
9/4/02 Alicia Nicole SirenMelody7@aol.com
i think learning to read music is a part of learning your bacic technique.
Though we should learn enough of it to be able to learn the piece of music we
are learning/teaching, it is not completely necessary. I have been
plaing the piano since i was 8 but i played by ear, not with instruction
or knowledge of how to read music, until i took formal lessons when I was
12. In that period of time I composed, as well as played, quite a few simple
melodys proficiently. Now that I know how to read music, it enhances my
abilities, but I dont enjoy reading a piece as much as I do listening to a cd
and figuring it out myself. Now I play 5 instruments and have only
technically been taught 1.
9/24/02 David M. McLean sdmusiclab@netscape.net
I think "kjazz" put it very well - well enough that I have little to add,
except that it behooves us to remember the instrument and style of music a
student is pursuing.
9/25/02 BJWoodruff fastwaypianomethod@yukontel.com
My students learn 3-5 years in 6 months or less, advanced in 1 year, and
they DO NOT READ NOTES, for the first 6 months or less. They learn all the
Music Patterns, and its theory, work on their performance, then go to note
reading. By that time the see the COMPLETE PICTURE! They can rapidly
sight-read, improvise in any style, and compose, so note-reading is easy
for them! This is the way Chopin and others learned and taught. I just
happened to have their European Courses handed down through a family for
many generations.
11/11/02 Heather Thomson canbooks@nbnet.nb.ca
Hmmm...teens are tricky. I'm a piano teacher, but have spent time as a vocal coach and accompanist throughout my career and teach many teens. In fact, I HAVE a teen of my own who just quit both her instruments, so I know you have to be careful in what you say. They are generally above the kind of rewards you might give to younger students (bonus bucks, stickers, free concert tickets, etc), but respond well to peer pressure. Do you give masterclasses? I'd sign her up for a performance in front of her peers in the near future (give her a month or so to whip herself into shape), then see if she is motivated by the thought of public humiliation. As a singer she will have to become used to performing anyhow, and even if she fails to hone her skills and makes glaring mistakes and technical faux pas at the performance, her peers might be able to communicate this to her in a more direct way than you have. Just listening to other students, both those who practice and those who do not, is extremely telling to a young student.
12/20/02 Ode Wannebo Odew@aol.com
Thank you for allowing me to share my experience with you. Now-a-days in
our quick-fixism "click-on-the-computer-mouse-gadget" society, learning to
read music is often both scary and a turn-off for many. It's like having
to learn a new language.
1/2/03 Sarah slyngra@hotmail.com
The comments on to read or not to read have been very interesting. As a
piano teacher, of course, I think that this shouldn't even be a question.
A piano student without the ability to read is extremely limited in what
he or she is able to play. He is limited by both his ablilty to remember
and how well he is able to listen. In my experience as music gets more
complicated, the amount a student remembers is less.
1/19/03 Valerie dari826@yahoo.com
It seems to me that if someone is imaginative they can make up a bedtime
story for their children, or they can tell one from memory. However, if
they want to tell a story they have not written or heard before, they
would have to "read" it. Doesn't this apply to musicians as well? It's
wonderful to have the skill to play by ear, and also to be able to invent
beautiful music of your own- but if you want to pick up something you've
never heard before and be able to play or sing it- being able to read
music is the key. The truth is- there are many many fine musicians who
can't read music- but they have limited their repertoire by not learning to
read. Hopefully this hasn't been said already by someone, if so- sorry to
be redundant!
3/7/03 Linda Gilchrist jlglfg@mb.sympatico.ca
My father plays by ear. I read music. What would be the greatest would be to be accomplished in both.
Children who have great ears are the hardest students to teach to read music. They don't see the need to read when they can already play without doing so. But it is like travelling on both sides of the same street to be able to do both.
3/13/03 Chip McDonald lessons@chipmcdonald.com
Written music on the staff IS NOT THE MUSIC ITSELF. That is NOT the language of music; the language of music is communicated through SOUND, not sight.
4/29/03 Anne Tenaglia anne@gbsfanatic.com
As a former piano student and present chorus member and novice fiddle
player, I can address both ends. I am thankful for learning how to read
the staff during piano lessons at ages 7 and 9. But where I feel I learned
the most music was in college where I was challenged to make up harmonies
for a six-member group. Not written ones -but "on the fly" harmonies. We
didn't sing Doo Wop but sang popular songs in six parts, each making up
our own harmony.
5/17/03 Mimi Butler mimibutler@aol.com
Two great books for the private music studio teacher. Money-making ideas, checklists,
sample letters and flyers, business tips. Everything you need to know to run a successful music studio business. "The Complete Guide to Running a Private Music Studio" and "The Complete Guide to Making More Money in the Private Music Studio" by Mimi Butler. Check out www.privatemusicstudio.com for more information on the books and book reviews. Mimi has been conducting workshops on the books all over the United States and Canada. Contact Mimi Butler at mimibutler@aol.com or 856-795-4285 for a marketing packet with information on these workshops.
6/10/03 Lynda Fish keys@naisp.net
There are plenty of successful musicians who don't read music, but if you are teaching a beginner, why would you NOT teach note reading? It's a concept that can be taught in ten minutes.
I want my piano students to be able to pick up any piece of their choice and learn it on their own. To that end I teach reading and theory right from the start.
Once they have basic knowledge, I often refer them to local teachers who teach improv or jazz, if that's something of interest. And believe me, the teachers are glad to have a student who knows scale and chord theory!
There, now I feel better!
12/20/2003 Bob Tabone
btabone@frontiernet.net
Absolutely. The key word here is "complete". If you can't read music you
still can play songs but you'll never be a "complete" musician!
1/7/2004 Ed edgded@yahoo.com
1. When I was a freshman in college, I played guitar in Jazz band II. I
asked the director a question about a Dmin7 chord, to which he responded
"I can't help you, I'm a trumpet player... Ask the guitarist in Jazz band
I."
I found the very brilliant guitarist of Jazz I practicing alone, on the
stage of the auditorium, where the Jazz I ensemble had most recently
dismissed from rehersal. After watching the master at work for about 10 or
15 minutes, I approached the stage pompously to announce that I was the
guitarist in Jazz II. I continued to make a point that my newfound friend
was practicing from a sheet of music, and that he was reading music. I
informed him that I did not need to read music, I could just "play
whatever I needed to" as I "heard" the music. His response was that he
also "played whatever he heard". I once again pressed the issue that he
was "reading music", and I didn't need to. Again, he responded that he
also did not "need to read music". After a few seconds in silence, he
returned to his practicing. Upon completion of the piece on the music
stand, he paused, had a sly giggle, looked me in the eye with a sparkle,
and said "But I can read music also."
That hit me hard. I thought I was the big shot, didn't need to read. He
had two skills. I had only one. I studied for a few years with this
instructor, but learned more in my first session than in all of what was
to come.
2. When I play music with non-reading musicians, I always make it clear
that I do not read music so well that it gets in the way. That does not
imply that I do not read music well.
3. I have noticed that usually the individual who reads music does not
question the skill, but rather the non-reader insists that it is not
important. How would he know? He/she can't read.
4. As for creativity, whatever works for you is best for you. There are
numerous blind musicians who play beautifully. There are also numerous
trained reading musicians who play beautifully. This does not imply that I
wish I were blind, nor that I need to see the music clearly to play
beautifully.
5. The unobvious answer is hidden in what a successful musician (not
entertainer) actually is. Every individual must answer the question for
himself/herself as to what "success" at "music" is. I suppose you do not
have to know the alphabet to become a great writer. Part of reading music
is about communication. Part of reading music is about knowledge. This
does not imply that I have any answer at all, only thoughts.
1/13/04 Kelly Penn MIpianoteacher@yahoo.com
ABSOLUTELY!
I have all my students learn to read the notes. I don't want them learning
canned programmed music arranged for a method that requires no reading. I
want them to be able to play ANYTHING- not just lesson stuff.
3/1/04 Chazz autochazz@yahoo.com
I was successful for 10 years before I learned how to read music.
Although helpful in a studio situation, reading music is not what makes
the player.
You gotta feel it.
3/8/04 Ronnie ronnymuk@hotmail.com
The presence of the word "need" in the question means the answer must be
no. There have been successful musicians in the past who have not been
able to read music. Which came first - music or music notation? The brain
will learn how to play without the dots. The only stumbling block might be
doubt in the minds of producers, etc in the music industry. And I would
certainly recommend learning to read music to any aspiring musician.
4/11/04 Dave haddinpop@yahoo.com
As an actual musician and composer who has actually worked as a musician
and composer for many years, I am choosing to find this question and
consequent celebration of ignorance by various respondents hysterically
funny rather than pathetically sad.
For the generation of musical simpletons who have been reared to think of
rock songs as the sum total of the world of "music", I suppose this
question actually has some sort of meaning, but even then, not a one of
them would have graduated from the Berklee College of Music, the premiere
school of music dedicated to "commercial" music. I can say that with
certainty, because I did.
There are, to be sure, no shortage of delightfully ignorant mini-minds who
love to spout the claim that Paul McCartney didn't want to learn to read
or write music because it would have hindered his musical ability. Much
like, one supposes, learning to write English hindered Shakespeare.
Anyone who would hold up Paul McCartney as a sage of music is already
revealing themselves to be spectacularly ignorant, and their opinions on
"music" should be taken with about three truck-loads of salt. While the
Beatles may be considered by many to represent the pinnacle of rock music,
that is not exactly a phenomenal accomplishment, to put it mildly.
Referencing them in this discussion is like holding up the champion
finger-painter in the third grade and referencing said individual as an
authority on art and painting.
The smallest of Beethoven's sneezes has more musical merit than all of the
world of rock music combined, and even in terms of "popular" 20th century
song-writing, Richard Rodgers or Jerome Kern would be spinning in their
graves if they were forced to look through a catalogue of Beatles' songs
and told that they were looking at genuine "art". Rodgers and Kern, you
see, actually knew how to write music. Heck, they could even read it!
And what are the jazz "standards" of today? The works of true
song-writers, like Rodgers, Howard Arlen, and others from the golden age
of the Broadway musical.
To any educated musician, or, for that matter, to any educated human, this
"debate" over the pros and cons of ignorance is shamefully embarassing and
utterly pathetic.
One of the chief ways that slave-owners held power over their slaves was
by refusing them the RIGHT to become literate. Why? And why was literacy
so integral to the gaining of freedom? If you have the small amount of
intelligence required to answer those two questions, you obviously need
not bother with the one asked here.
|
|