Playing by ear Vs. reading music

[maxrossell]

[quote name='dlloyd' post='479755' date='May 5 2009, 11:21 AM']I agree 100% that the ability to read is crucial if you want to pursue a course of academic study in music. I think it's bizarre that there are Universities that are offering degrees in music where reading is not compulsary... again, no personal slight intended towards Max.[/quote]

This is the thing, though - the key here is that they [i]offer[/i] the degrees.

By the time you get to university, you're supposed (in theory at least) to be smart enough to decide for [i]yourself[/i] what you want or need to learn, not to have it told to you like you're some thirteen-year-old who would rather be playing XBox than be there at all. Not that I picked the course specifically because it [i]didn't[/i] require standard notation, but had I wanted the course to force me to do it, there were others i could have chosen. And as I've oft repeated, the course I took did [i]offer[/i] standard notation training.

Despite what some people here might say, it's entirely possible to be a functional, successful professional musician without knowing how to read standard notation. The course I took takes that into account. And ultimately, the fact that I didn't learn standard notation while on the course pales into insignificance compared to the massively useful professional skills I [i]did[/i] learn - which some others have been alarmingly quick to dismiss as being about as useful as knitting.

[dlloyd]

[quote name='maxrossell' post='479772' date='May 5 2009, 11:38 AM']But you've not contradicted what I've said.

I'm not claiming that ALL readers think that everyone should have to read, and similarly I don't think [i]anyone[/i] genuinely has the viewpoint that there is some sort of [i]benefit[/i] to not reading.[/quote]

Okay, your post wasn't clear.

[quote]What I'm saying is that some of the non-readers are saying that it doesn't bother them that they don't read, and some of the most vociferious advocates of reading have made comments along the lines of you can't be a genuinely good musician if you don't read. That's what I seem to be getting from this argument.[/quote]

I think the argument is that refusing to learn to read [i]can[/i] deny you some opportunities for expanding your horizons as a musician, so learning to read is a logical step if you want to avoid limiting yourself.

Being 'limited' as a musician isn't necessarily a bad thing.

[dlloyd]

[quote name='maxrossell' post='479776' date='May 5 2009, 11:50 AM']This is the thing, though - the key here is that they [i]offer[/i] the degrees.

By the time you get to university, you're supposed (in theory at least) to be smart enough to decide for [i]yourself[/i] what you want or need to learn, not to have it told to you like you're some thirteen-year-old who would rather be playing XBox than be there at all. Not that I picked the course specifically because it [i]didn't[/i] require standard notation, but had I wanted the course to force me to do it, there were others i could have chosen. And as I've oft repeated, the course I took did [i]offer[/i] standard notation training.

Despite what some people here might say, it's entirely possible to be a functional, successful professional musician without knowing how to read standard notation. The course I took takes that into account. And ultimately, the fact that I didn't learn standard notation while on the course pales into insignificance compared to the massively useful professional skills I [i]did[/i] learn - which some others have been alarmingly quick to dismiss as being about as useful as knitting.[/quote]

I can't think of anything in music that's as useful as knitting.

[maxrossell]

[quote name='dlloyd' post='479777' date='May 5 2009, 11:52 AM']I think the argument is that refusing to learn to read [i]can[/i] deny you some opportunities for expanding your horizons as a musician, so learning to read is a logical step if you want to avoid limiting yourself.

Being 'limited' as a musician isn't necessarily a bad thing.[/quote]

Well sure, I agree with you there.

What I find interesting here is that theoretically at least, not reading music isn't the only way to limit yourself as a musician. Depending on how you look at it, there are hundreds of separate skills that anyone could learn as a musician, and from that basis you could argue that someone who doesn't know one of them is more limited than someone who does. You look hard enough at [i]any[/i] musician, I guess you could find something that they haven't learned that many others have.

[dlloyd]

[quote name='maxrossell' post='479791' date='May 5 2009, 12:12 PM']Well sure, I agree with you there.

What I find interesting here is that theoretically at least, not reading music isn't the only way to limit yourself as a musician. Depending on how you look at it, there are hundreds of separate skills that anyone could learn as a musician, and from that basis you could argue that someone who doesn't know one of them is more limited than someone who does. You look hard enough at [i]any[/i] musician, I guess you could find something that they haven't learned that many others have.[/quote]

I don't think you'd have to look that hard.

[Rich]

[quote name='dlloyd' post='479755' date='May 5 2009, 11:21 AM']I agree 100% that the ability to read is crucial if you want to pursue a course of academic study in music. I think it's bizarre that there are Universities that are offering degrees in music where reading is not compulsary... again, no personal slight intended towards Max.

But I cannot regard reading music as an absolutely necessary tool for a popular musician, nor a fundamental requirement for being a 'great musician'. There's too many examples of musical greats who could not read or who had limited reading skills, particularly amongst guitarists and bass guitarists, even those famous for playing jazz (since jazz almost inevitably gets dragged into any discussion of theory on popular music forums).

Django Reinhardt, Wes Montgomery and Charlie Christian were all musically illiterate, and I can't imagine any way you could question their greatness as musicians and retain credibility.[/quote]
A hearty +1 to all of this.

[size=1]Or perhaps as a moderator I shouldn't have an opinion..?[/size]

[Bilbo]

I agree with everyone. No, really, I do.

There has been some great debate here and we can all gain something from reading the whole thread. Several people have made the point the there are great musicians/artists who can/can't read and others have countered with examples of those that can't/can - superficially futile but. looking deeper, there are lessons to learn. More importantly, there is plenty of evidence that any barriers to writing, creating, composing, transcribing, orchestrating, producing, conducting and enjoying music can be overcome with time and effort, tenacity and will. Everyone here is testimony to that fact and those who are particularly heavily involved in music (pro or semo pro) have all had to overcome some pretty substantial hurdles in achieving their goals; learning to read, developing a good ear, communication skills, putting together a band, arranging for solo instruments, small groups, orchestras, film and tv, even computer games - reader or not, that's some tough stuff to deal with.

I have my own views on reading music (already posted) but cannot negate Jakes argument about the 1,000s of musicians the world over who have developed astonishingly sophisticated musics without reading. Its a quantifiable fact.

I guess my own thoughts relate to the specific challenges of being a musician in my own little piece of the world. Because I live in a quiet corner of the country, miles from anywhere where there are great improvising players I would love to work with, the only way I can see of creating anything of value is to do as much of it as I can myself and write it all down so, when I do get the chance to play it, I can do so without a lot of work. Working with readers means that I can get the job done quicker because that's how I work best. If you can do without, cool.

As a semi-pro with a full-time day job, I just think its marvellous to be able to play really good, sophisticated stuff without hours of rehearsals and without having to fall back on tedious old covers all of the time. And I still think its a great learning tool.

One other point to debate: the value of learning to read vs that of learning to SIGHT read a gig.

[BigBeefChief]

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='480047' date='May 5 2009, 04:20 PM']One other point to debate: the value of learning to read vs that of learning to SIGHT read a gig.[/quote]


Now that's an incredible skill. If you want to take this music lark seriously and make a living from it, I can see a small benefit in learning to read to an average standard, but a huge benefit in learning to sight read a gig. Its something that I will never be able to do that's for sure!

[BottomEndian]

I agree with Bilbo: there's been some really interesting stuff in this megathread, if you pick through the sniping .

One little thing I want to pick up on is the distinction between [i]learning to read music[/i] and [i]learning music theory[/i]. Granted, there's some overlap, but they're quite different things that people have been mixing up a bit. To go back to the parallel that OutToPlayJazz used (back on page 3406 or something...), if you think of musical notation as like English or any other written language, then learning music theory could be compared to studying linguistics.

So, sorry BBC -- learning to read music doesn't propel you down the whitewater rapids of the river to jazz-w**k noodlery and appreciating how "clever" things are. It's music theory that does that!

[51m0n]

[quote name='BigBeefChief' post='480053' date='May 5 2009, 04:26 PM']Now that's an incredible skill. If you want to take this music lark seriously and make a living from it, I can see a small benefit in learning to read to an average standard, but a huge benefit in learning to sight read a gig. Its something that I will never be able to do that's for sure![/quote]

+1 and BBC thats the most sensible post you've ever made I think - whats going on?

[BigBeefChief]

[quote name='BottomEndian' post='480086' date='May 5 2009, 04:55 PM']So, sorry BBC -- learning to read music doesn't propel you down the whitewater rapids of the river to jazz-w**k noodlery and appreciating how "clever" things are. It's music theory that does that! [/quote]


Don't get me wrong, learning too much theory (and I include learning to read in this) sends you down a path of jazz-w***ery. However, if you want to make money out of playing bass, the most likely avenue is session work. I've never disagreed that learning to read is great for a session musician. However, a side-effect will be a hideously self-indulgent originals side project churning out jazz muzak.

Personally, I have no desire to be a session musician, but if that's your bag, then learn to site read.

[dlloyd]

[quote name='BigBeefChief' post='480102' date='May 5 2009, 05:10 PM']Don't get me wrong, learning too much theory (and I include learning to read in this) sends you down a path of jazz-w***ery.[/quote]

You need a bit more than that.

[BottomEndian]

[quote name='dlloyd' post='480112' date='May 5 2009, 05:17 PM']You need a bit more than that.[/quote]
You need a beret and a pack of Gauloises.

Edited May 5, 2009 by BottomEndian

[lowdown]

[quote name='BottomEndian' post='480117' date='May 5 2009, 05:18 PM']You need a beret and a pack of Gauloises. [/quote]

And the Real ale guide.


Garry

[endorka]

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='480047' date='May 5 2009, 04:20 PM']One other point to debate: the value of learning to read vs that of learning to SIGHT read a gig.[/quote]

Are they not the same thing, just to different degrees? For example, one may be able to sight read a gig where the music is relatively simple (or familiar in style), but have to prepare more complex music (or music in an unfamiliar style) in advance?

Jennifer

[rslaing]

[quote name='BigBeefChief' post='480102' date='May 5 2009, 05:10 PM']Don't get me wrong, learning too much theory (and I include learning to read in this) sends you down a path of jazz-w***ery. However, if you want to make money out of playing bass, the most likely avenue is session work. I've never disagreed that learning to read is great for a session musician. However, a side-effect will be a hideously self-indulgent originals side project churning out jazz muzak.

Personally, I have no desire to be a session musician, but if that's your bag, then learn to [s]site[/s] YOU MEAN SIGHT read.[/quote]

Why bother to learn to read at all when you always hum, whistle or sing your ideas to your band mates, and they can then spend an inordinate amount of time trying to interpret what you are going on about? Then you can build a library of stale numbers (well they will be by the time you have learned them via the humming, la-la-la, "let's listen to the cd again lads" method) that everyone in the band will be bored with and then you can start on the cycle again

Hopefully I won't start off another war here, but SIGHT reading is an essential skill too. If not just for the purpose of learning music that is important to you - very quickly. It's also cheaper than having to source the number you are trying to learn, maybe by buying the cd, or more than likely pirating it and copying it to all your band-mates and thereby scoring a double whammy by depriving the copyright owners/record company - who have provided the facility and financing - of any income?

"However, a side-effect will be a hideously self-indulgent originals side project churning out jazz muzak." What is that supposed to mean?

If it wasn't for people producing original music and sounds (whatever the genre), and having the ability to transmit their ideas by either technology, or more importantly by the WRITTEN element (for posterity and accurate reproduction of their ingenuity) you wouldn't even have heard anywhere near the amount of music you might have listened to.

Maybe you could give us an idea of your preferred choice of music, and reasons for it, so we can have a greater understanding of your critical posts? That would be very interesting.

[rslaing]

[quote name='endorka' post='480268' date='May 5 2009, 07:07 PM']Are they not the same thing, just to different degrees? For example, one may be able to sight read a gig where the music is relatively simple (or familiar in style), but have to prepare more complex music (or music in an unfamiliar style) in advance?

Jennifer[/quote]

Yes, they are the same thing but to differing degrees. Good point IMO.
I suppose the analogy would be that the complex stuff is not as easily interpreted because you don't come across it as often so when the sheet music it stares you in the face it takes a bit more working out.

I did mention earlier, and was ridiculed accordingly, that a musician should really stretch themselves as much as possible in all areas of the craft, if not only for the purpose if making the easy stuff even easier. But that would depend on how much you want to develop yourself. Learn to sight read difficult stuff and the not-so-difficult stuff becomes easier???..................

Pastorius, for example, reckons that his superior skill (and he wasn't shy in mentioning consistently that he was the "greatest bass player in the world" - perhaps he wouldn't think so if he was around today) was because he studied Simandl, books 1 and 2, and made a habit of sitting down regularly and transcribing the most difficult pieces music that he heard. His abilities from these studies led him to studying Bach and other classical composers, which greatly influenced his playing and style. A great example of the benefits of being able to read and write music if ever there was one. Transcribing improves your aural skills no end.

If the music of the classical greats was not written down, we would not have been blessed with Jaco's contribution to musical history, as brief as it was. His interpretation of Bach is unique, yet the parts he studied before applying his individualism were only available because they were written in standard musical notation.

Without doubt, and in spite of the protestations of people who don't read music, this approach produced a very innovative and brilliant musician. And the present standard of many of the great players we listen to today is in no small way due to how Pastorius educated himself and made the bass more than just a backing instrument. Of course, this is just my humble opinion.................

Edited May 5, 2009 by rslaing

[dlloyd]

[quote name='endorka' post='480268' date='May 5 2009, 07:07 PM']Are they not the same thing, just to different degrees? For example, one may be able to sight read a gig where the music is relatively simple (or familiar in style), but have to prepare more complex music (or music in an unfamiliar style) in advance?[/quote]

Yes.

[maxrossell]

[quote name='rslaing' post='480298' date='May 5 2009, 07:39 PM']Why bother to learn to read at all when you always hum, whistle or sing your ideas to your band mates, and they can then spend an inordinate amount of time trying to interpret what you are going on about? Then you can build a library of stale numbers (well they will be by the time you have learned them via the humming, la-la-la, "let's listen to the cd again lads" method) that everyone in the band will be bored with and then you can start on the cycle again

Hopefully I won't start off another war here,[/quote]

I don't get it. If you don't want to start stuff, then why make comments like that? You KNOW there are people on here who primarily transmit their musical ideas aurally (and have no problem doing it), so why belittle it or make fun of it?

Or maybe [i]you[/i] find it really hard to work that way, so you genuinely think it's that hard for other people?

[dlloyd]

[quote name='rslaing' post='480308' date='May 5 2009, 07:50 PM']Pastorius reckons that his superior skill (and he wasn't shy in mentioning consistently that he was the "greatest bass player in the world" - perhaps he wouldn't think so if he was around today)[/quote]

He probably would... vastly inflated self esteem/delusions of grandeur are part and parcel of hypomanic episodes. The guy was ill.

[url="http://www.webmd.com/bipolar-disorder/guide/hypomania-mania-symptoms"]http://www.webmd.com/bipolar-disorder/guid...-mania-symptoms[/url]

[rslaing]

[quote name='maxrossell' post='480316' date='May 5 2009, 07:56 PM']I don't get it. If you don't want to start stuff, then why make comments like that? You KNOW there are people on here who primarily transmit their musical ideas aurally (and have no problem doing it), so why belittle it or make fun of it?

Or maybe [i]you[/i] find it really hard to work that way, so you genuinely think it's that hard for other people?[/quote]

Sorry to disappoint..........I spend a huge amount of time transcribing, for ongoing personal developmental purposes as well as occasionally to earn a crust - so I do have a very good ear. It is much EASIER to learn aurally, which IMO is why most people (as I mentioned earlier) take the course of least resistance and don't bother to learn to read or write music. However, it is a major benefit to any musician to be able to read music..period.

And I have not seen an argument yet in this thread that could convince me otherwise.

Don't take it personally please, or get abusive. It is just my opinion.

[maxrossell]

[quote name='rslaing' post='480323' date='May 5 2009, 08:03 PM']Sorry to disappoint..........I spend a huge amount of time transcribing, for ongoing personal developmental purposes as well as occasionally to earn a crust - so I do have a very good ear. It is much EASIER to learn aurally, which IMO is why most people (as I mentioned earlier) take the course of least resistance and don't bother to learn to read or write music. However, it is a major benefit to any musician to be able to read music..period.

And I have not seen an argument yet in this thread that could convince me otherwise.

Don't take it personally please, or get abusive. It is just my opinion.[/quote]

You still haven't clarified why you feel your opinion licences you to openly criticise large sections of the musical community.

It's one thing to advance that you think yours is the superior method. It's quite another to take the piss out of those who don't follow it.

[rslaing]

[quote name='dlloyd' post='480319' date='May 5 2009, 08:00 PM']He probably would... vastly inflated self esteem/delusions of grandeur are part and parcel of hypomanic episodes. The guy was ill.

[url="http://www.webmd.com/bipolar-disorder/guide/hypomania-mania-symptoms"]http://www.webmd.com/bipolar-disorder/guid...-mania-symptoms[/url][/quote]

Many great musicians and artists produced their best work (and their worst) because they were mentally ill - particularly if bipolar II (as we know it now).

Not least because when hypomanic, they slept less and were able to produce an inordinate amount of work as a result of their "abnormal" creative instinct.

[rslaing]

[quote name='maxrossell' post='480328' date='May 5 2009, 08:08 PM']You still haven't clarified why you feel your opinion licences you to openly criticise large sections of the musical community.

It's one thing to advance that you think yours is the superior method. It's quite another to take the piss out of those who don't follow it.[/quote]

I have the right to express my beliefs and opinions, as do you. I don't make them personal or offensive. Get over it please and just give constructive argument. And take the p**s if you like............as I said (paraphrase) earlier, no one can make you you feel inferior/insulted/whatever without your consent.

If you have a problem with my opinons/theories... just ignore them. I won't feel offended.

Edited May 5, 2009 by rslaing

[maxrossell]

[quote name='rslaing' post='480331' date='May 5 2009, 08:12 PM']I have the right to express my beliefs and opinions, as do you. And at least I don't make them personal or offensive. Get over it please and just give constructive argument. And take the p**s if you like............as I said (paraphrase) earlier, no one can make you you feel inferior/insulted/whatever without your consent.

If you have a problem with my opinons/theories... why don't you just ignore them?[/quote]

Sorry, what part of this are you not getting?

I don't have a problem with your opinions or your theories on how reading music is a benefit. I have a problem with you using that as a platform to slag off people who don't read music. If you don't think you've been doing that, I invite you to check back through your own posts in this thread.