An Ear For Music

[Oggy]

[quote name='velvetkevorkian' post='788043' date='Mar 27 2010, 05:34 PM']That happens because that person never learned to play by ear, not because they learned to read. The two are not mutually exclusive- learning to read is not going to make you a worse "ear" player.[/quote]

Hi velvetkevorkian,

Thanks for that, I didn't think for one moment that learning to read would make me worse, I can only see it making me a more able / musically aware 'by ear' player. I think that learning to read will have a positive effect on the 'by ear' ability and make it easier and a more fun thing to do.

I did a couple of hours practice this afternoon, using the 'by ear' method, on some Tamla Motown numbers - nothing to do with the Blues, Blue/Rock stuff I'm currently playing. I worked it out 'eventually' but the thought just kept going through my mind that being able to read a chart would make it all soooooo much easier. The timing and rhythms come naturally, it's the working out 'which notes to hit' that takes the time. Years singing in bands before I took up the bass has given me timing, a sense of rhythm I honestly think you either have or haven't got. I hear stories of professional musicians working to 'click tracks' what's that about?

Oggy

[PedalB]

Amen to that Velvetkorian- it is true that those who have learned to play from sight in a very structured environment often struggle for a while when the dots are no longer in front of them ,and they have to busk ,but its a sink or swim thing and most manage to swim after a while.
One thing I forgot to mention for Oggy was that an easy way to work on reading skills is to get hold of some orchestral scores from your library and sit there and follow them whilst playing the cd ,if you can't stand Bach , Beethhoven ,or Mahler ,try things like Booker T's Green Onions - follow the chart and you'll find it performed with absolute precision ,even Steve Croppers guitar improvisations are rythmically and harmonically precise ,none of the approximations of the 'wing it by ear brigade' .

[Jerry_B]

But sometimes you can be too precise and boring at the same time At the end of the day it really depends on what you want to play and who you're playing with.

[Doddy]

[quote name='Jerry_B' post='788026' date='Mar 27 2010, 06:13 PM']If you can get the job done by playing by ear, stick with that.[/quote]

Or you could learn to read and become a more versatile musician. Why would you not want to
improve your musicianship? You don't have to do one or the other-you can do both.

[quote name='Oggy' post='788127' date='Mar 27 2010, 08:29 PM']I hear stories of professional musicians working to 'click tracks' what's that about?[/quote]

Yes a lot of people do use click tracks. They are used in studios alot as it makes it easier to overdub
and edit tracks when they are in strict time. It also makes it easier to dance to. You would be surprised at the
number of tracks that have been recorded to a click.
Live they are mostly used when there is a sequence or sample to be played. The band need to have the time spot on
or the sequence will be out of sync.
They are not used because the players have bad time.

[quote name='Jerry_B' post='788254' date='Mar 27 2010, 11:37 PM']At the end of the day it really depends on what you want to play and who you're playing with.[/quote]

But why limit what you can do and who you can play with? The more you know and the more you can do,
the wider the range of gigs that are available to you.

[Jerry_B]

[quote name='Doddy' post='788307' date='Mar 28 2010, 03:39 AM']Or you could learn to read and become a more versatile musician. Why would you not want to
improve your musicianship? You don't have to do one or the other-you can do both.[/quote]

Yes, I know you can do both and wasn't suggesting otherwise. Perhaps one might 'merely' want to have fun with it all and not worry about doing what others consider to be the 'right way' of doing things. After all, it's not impossible to be a versatile musician and still learn and play by ear.

[quote]But why limit what you can do and who you can play with? The more you know and the more you can do,
the wider the range of gigs that are available to you.[/quote]

But it depends what one is looking for in terms of personal output. Again, I wasn't suggesting one should limit oneself.

[Major-Minor]

Music is a language - perhaps the one true global language.

But there is a multitude of musical dialects, some purely aural in nature and some with their own notation.

However, the Western Music Notation System is the best understood and most widely used "dialect", in all parts of the Global music world.

If you are happy in your own musical enclave, speaking your own musical dialect, with others who speak the same, then there is little I could say to persuade you to widen your knowledge of musical dialects.

However, if you have a desire to move on from the limitations of your musical "tribe", learning the western notation language is an excellent starting point.

Taking this language analogy further:

If you went to live in, say, China, you might pick up a bit of the language by ear - by hearing, copying and imitating the sound of the words. (This is a bit like playing by ear).
But if you wanted to fully integrate into the culture, you would need to be able to read and write the symbols that are so different to our own. This would take time and study and would not come easily. But it would open up so much more of the life and culture in your new country.
So it is with music. Why would you want to limit yourself to only one musical dialect ? Are you frightened by what is out there in the big music world ?

Just because you never see pop and rock musicians actually reading music, it doesn't follow that they can't !

You wouldn't expect to see a featured pop/rock muso reading music on a concert or tv programme, just as you wouldn't expect to see a concert pianist or opera singer reading from the music during a performance. Audiences expect these "star" classical performers to know their music inside out and from memory, but in the practise room of course they will have the music in front of them. That's how they learn their parts.

I used to run a very successful 10 piece function band (till the late nights got too much for me - poor old bugger!). We had a huge repertoire, most of which was semi-learned, but having the parts in front of us meant there was always something to refer to if the memory was failing. This also meant we could have deps coming and going with no extra rehearsals. And when we did rehearse a new tune, a 3 minute number would take ... well .. 3 minutes to rehearse ! (Maybe 6 minutes if the singers kept going wrong !)


Learning to read music proficiently takes time and effort but that effort will widen your musical world exponentially.

By the way, I'm planning some Beginner Music Reading sessions for my Bass Camp series. Coming soon to basschat !!

The Major

[Doddy]

[quote name='Jerry_B' post='788361' date='Mar 28 2010, 10:40 AM']After all, it's not impossible to be a versatile musician and still learn and play by ear.[/quote]

You can,but a if you can both read and busk you can easily step into
any situation and do the gig,whereas with 'just' an ear player you will
probably require a rehearsal or at the very least an advance copy of the
set so you can learn it.

The versatility of someone who can read will always be greater than
one who can't.

[Oggy]

[quote name='Major-Minor' post='788363' date='Mar 28 2010, 10:41 AM'][i]Music is a language - perhaps the one true global language.

Learning to read music proficiently takes time and effort but that effort will widen your musical world exponentially.[/i]

By the way, [u]I'm planning some Beginner Music Reading sessions for my Bass Camp series. Coming soon to basschat !![/u]

The Major[/quote]

Hi Major,

I'd really appreciate a 'heads-up' when you get the Beginner Music Reading sessions running.

I've ordered a couple of basic books from Amazon to get me started, looks like this week is the week to start the 'global language course'.

I'm glad this thread has drawn in both readers and non-readers, the exchange of ideas and views is enlightening.

I do know that I'll probably never stop doing the 'ear thing' even if I do manage to learn to read, I find that if I pick up any musical instrument I'll suck, blow, pluck and prod it until I get some sort of tune out of it - it's just what I do.

Oggy

[Major-Minor]

[quote name='Oggy' post='788744' date='Mar 28 2010, 07:05 PM']Hi Major,

I'd really appreciate a 'heads-up' when you get the Beginner Music Reading sessions running.

I've ordered a couple of basic books from Amazon to get me started, looks like this week is the week to start the 'global language course'.

I'm glad this thread has drawn in both readers and non-readers, the exchange of ideas and views is enlightening.

I do know that I'll probably never stop doing the 'ear thing' even if I do manage to learn to read, I find that if I pick up any musical instrument I'll suck, blow, pluck and prod it until I get some sort of tune out of it - it's just what I do.

Oggy [/quote]
Hi Oggy
I'm just finishing off a second Blues based session. I'll be doing the first Beginner Music reading sessions within the next couple of weeks.

You should certainly never stop doing the "ear thing". As musicians we need our sight, hearing, and touch senses to be working in tandem at all times. Personally, I love nothing more than turning up at a gig where there is no "proper" written music, maybe just a few chord charts. In this situation I can bring all my experience and knowledge to the fore, and, as long as the other musos are similarly minded, I usually have a great time !

I think many less experienced forum members mis-understand the meaning of "sight reading".

When you read music, you don't switch off your listening skills, you don't become an automaton, you don't ignore the other players and you don't become distanced from the creative spirit.

When you first start learning to read, of course you have to discipline yourself to follow precisely, and abide by, the written note. That's how you learn to recognise the various patterns that you will see time and time again during your musical career.

But, although we (the composers and arrangers) strive to write down as much detail as possible, it is always down to the musicality of the player to interpret those notes in a creative and sensitive way, so that the resulting performance can convey to the listener something of the writers ideas but also the performers emotions and feelings.

I'm sure many of you basschatters will be familiar with computer music sequencing. You will therefore know how dull and mechanical it can sound when the computer plays the notes you sequence.

If we, as players, approach the written note like a computer does, it will sound equally dull and mechanical.
So the written notes are only a starting point, a way of conveying musical ideas from composer to player.

We need to use our ears to know whether the way we are playing those written notes is suitable for a particular musical moment. We need to find ways to invest musicality in the lines, to make the dynamics work, and, most importantly, to make our notes fit with and compliment the other players.

Reading music is not INSTEAD of doing the "ear thing" - it is in ADDITION and COMPLIMENTARY to it.

The Major

[skampino]

In my last band I worked alongside two guitarists. One undertook lessons for 2yrs and has a hell of a lot of technical knowledge and can can play any guitar solo you throw at him. The other guitarist has never had a lesson and learned everything by ear. We began writing our own material and this is where the first guitarist came unstuck. With all his knowledge he had little creativity, whereas the one who had taught himself could produce something with a 'hook'. He would often amaze me at how when listening to the music channel he would grab his guitar and pick out the actual guitar parts that were being played in songs he'd never heard before. The other guitarist couldn't do that.

So, although there are lots of benefits in learning the technical side of music, playing by ear is a gift!

[Major-Minor]

[quote name='skampino' post='788963' date='Mar 28 2010, 10:46 PM']In my last band I worked alongside two guitarists. One undertook lessons for 2yrs and has a hell of a lot of technical knowledge and can can play any guitar solo you throw at him. The other guitarist has never had a lesson and learned everything by ear. We began writing our own material and this is where the first guitarist came unstuck. With all his knowledge he had little creativity, whereas the one who had taught himself could produce something with a 'hook'. He would often amaze me at how when listening to the music channel he would grab his guitar and pick out the actual guitar parts that were being played in songs he'd never heard before. The other guitarist couldn't do that.

So, although there are lots of benefits in learning the technical side of music, playing by ear is a gift![/quote]
Creativity is a state of mind. Think what your guitarist friend could do if he had both good aural skills AND theoretical knowledge!

The Major

[Bilbo]

Many of you know I work with offenders. One of the tools we use relates to enhancing thinking skills and to do that, it is necessary to understand how we think.

One of the interesting aspects of this relates to the ways in which people justify their behaviour (any behaviour, even murder). There are all sorts of ways; denial, self deception, minimisation (I only steal for companies not from individuals, I only drove 300 yards, I had to get home because the kids were ill), justification (everyone does it, I drive better when I have had a drink, it was only a bit of puff etc). The important thing is that most offenders don't actually know they are doing this. Anyway, in looking at the way people think, it long ago dawned on me that these traits were not just about offending but about ALL behaviours. And, as with offenders, people generally don't know they are doing it. Think about people who diet, who give up smoking, who shop with credit cards etc. They will talk themselves into it even though they know it is ultimately harmful.

Relating this to the topic under discussion, what we have here (in general terms; this is not an attack on anyone), we have a situation where many members of the musical community seek to find ways to justify their decisions so they can still feel ok about their abilities. When the likes of the Major, Doddy, Jakesbass and myself advocate for musical literacy, there are always those who respond with the 'X is great and he can't read' argument, or the 'I knew a guy who could read but couldn't groove' position, or 'readers don't play with good feel' etc etc. The arguments presented are what I would call justifications, position statements that allow individuals who haven't learned to read to justify their lack of a well established, legitimate and tried and tested skill. They avoid the simple 'I can't read because I can't read' admission in favour of 'I can't read because I don't need to', 'its a waste of time', 'it will ruin my feel', 'it will undermine my creativity', 'I don't need it', 'it will undermine my originality', 'it will make me lazy', 'it will ruin my ability to play by ear' - its all b/s.

Its not rocket science. Readers who can't improvise can't improvise because they haven't learned how, not because they can read. Classical musicians can't play funk or jazz because they haven't spent time with the genres, not because they can read. There is no causal link between reading dots and any musical shortcoming whatsoever. People who can read can do something others cannot and will get gig unavailable to others - end of. It doesn't mean that others can't do something that the reader can't do; the two things are unrelated. If you can read, you can read. No more and no less. Its a skill that is worth acquiring - and, incidentally, is of considerably more use than double thumbing, tapping, raking or crimping. You wil get calls for gigs you wouldn't have got before (of course you didn't need it before. Noone would call you for a reading gig if you couldn't read).

I can see NO reason why anyone who can read would tell someone who couldn't read to learn to do so so that they would be worse musicians. I CAN see why people are dismissive of the skill; if YOU don't learn, they don't have to feel bad about their own musical illiteracy and, more to the point, YOU won't get a gig in place of them.

Do it. Start now.

[Major-Minor]

[quote name='Bilbo' post='791611' date='Mar 31 2010, 10:11 AM']Many of you know I work with offenders. One of the tools we use relates to enhancing thinking skills and to do that, it is necessary to understand how we think.

One of the interesting aspects of this relates to the ways in which people justify their behaviour (any behaviour, even murder). There are all sorts of ways; denial, self deception, minimisation (I only steal for companies not from individuals, I only drove 300 yards, I had to get home because the kids were ill), justification (everyone does it, I drive better when I have had a drink, it was only a bit of puff etc). The important thing is that most offenders don't actually know they are doing this. Anyway, in looking at the way people think, it long ago dawned on me that these traits were not just about offending but about ALL behaviours. And, as with offenders, people generally don't know they are doing it. Think about people who diet, who give up smoking, who shop with credit cards etc. They will talk themselves into it even though they know it is ultimately harmful.

Relating this to the topic under discussion, what we have here (in general terms; this is not an attack on anyone), we have a situation where many members of the musical community seek to find ways to justify their decisions so they can still feel ok about their abilities. When the likes of the Major, Doddy, Jakesbass and myself advocate for musical literacy, there are always those who respond with the 'X is great and he can't read' argument, or the 'I knew a guy who could read but couldn't groove' position, or 'readers don't play with good feel' etc etc. The arguments presented are what I would call justifications, position statements that allow individuals who haven't learned to read to justify their lack of a well established, legitimate and tried and tested skill. They avoid the simple 'I can't read because I can't read' admission in favour of 'I can't read because I don't need to', 'its a waste of time', 'it will ruin my feel', 'it will undermine my creativity', 'I don't need it', 'it will undermine my originality', 'it will make me lazy', 'it will ruin my ability to play by ear' - its all b/s.

Its not rocket science. Readers who can't improvise can't improvise because they haven't learned how, not because they can read. Classical musicians can't play funk or jazz because they haven't spent time with the genres, not because they can read. There is no causal link between reading dots and any musical shortcoming whatsoever. People who can read can do something others cannot and will get gig unavailable to others - end of. It doesn't mean that others can't do something that the reader can't do; the two things are unrelated. If you can read, you can read. No more and no less. Its a skill that is worth acquiring - and, incidentally, is of considerably more use than double thumbing, tapping, raking or crimping. You wil get calls for gigs you wouldn't have got before (of course you didn't need it before. Noone would call you for a reading gig if you couldn't read).

I can see NO reason why anyone who can read would tell someone who couldn't read to learn to do so so that they would be worse musicians. I CAN see why people are dismissive of the skill; if YOU don't learn, they don't have to feel bad about their own musical illiteracy and, more to the point, YOU won't get a gig in place of them.

Do it. Start now.[/quote]
Bibo - just one word - BRILLIANT !

The Major

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='Bilbo' post='791611' date='Mar 31 2010, 10:11 AM']Many of you know I work with offenders. One of the tools we use relates to enhancing thinking skills and to do that, it is necessary to understand how we think.

One of the interesting aspects of this relates to the ways in which people justify their behaviour (any behaviour, even murder). There are all sorts of ways; denial, self deception, minimisation (I only steal for companies not from individuals, I only drove 300 yards, I had to get home because the kids were ill), justification (everyone does it, I drive better when I have had a drink, it was only a bit of puff etc). The important thing is that most offenders don't actually know they are doing this. Anyway, in looking at the way people think, it long ago dawned on me that these traits were not just about offending but about ALL behaviours. And, as with offenders, people generally don't know they are doing it. Think about people who diet, who give up smoking, who shop with credit cards etc. They will talk themselves into it even though they know it is ultimately harmful.

Relating this to the topic under discussion, what we have here (in general terms; this is not an attack on anyone), we have a situation where many members of the musical community seek to find ways to justify their decisions so they can still feel ok about their abilities. When the likes of the Major, Doddy, Jakesbass and myself advocate for musical literacy, there are always those who respond with the 'X is great and he can't read' argument, or the 'I knew a guy who could read but couldn't groove' position, or 'readers don't play with good feel' etc etc. The arguments presented are what I would call justifications, position statements that allow individuals who haven't learned to read to justify their lack of a well established, legitimate and tried and tested skill. They avoid the simple 'I can't read because I can't read' admission in favour of 'I can't read because I don't need to', 'its a waste of time', 'it will ruin my feel', 'it will undermine my creativity', 'I don't need it', 'it will undermine my originality', 'it will make me lazy', 'it will ruin my ability to play by ear' - its all b/s.

Its not rocket science. Readers who can't improvise can't improvise because they haven't learned how, not because they can read. Classical musicians can't play funk or jazz because they haven't spent time with the genres, not because they can read. There is no causal link between reading dots and any musical shortcoming whatsoever. People who can read can do something others cannot and will get gig unavailable to others - end of. It doesn't mean that others can't do something that the reader can't do; the two things are unrelated. If you can read, you can read. No more and no less. Its a skill that is worth acquiring - and, incidentally, is of considerably more use than double thumbing, tapping, raking or crimping. You wil get calls for gigs you wouldn't have got before (of course you didn't need it before. Noone would call you for a reading gig if you couldn't read).

I can see NO reason why anyone who can read would tell someone who couldn't read to learn to do so so that they would be worse musicians. I CAN see why people are dismissive of the skill; if YOU don't learn, they don't have to feel bad about their own musical illiteracy and, more to the point, YOU won't get a gig in place of them.

Do it. Start now.[/quote]
Very neatly put, Bilbo.

[fatback]

[quote name='EssentialTension' post='792501' date='Mar 31 2010, 09:22 PM']Very neatly put, Bilbo.[/quote]

What about chord charts then? A useful half way house or the lazy man's read?

[Bilbo]

[quote name='fatback' post='793472' date='Apr 1 2010, 04:44 PM']What about chord charts then? A useful half way house or the lazy man's read?[/quote]

Neither. They are an established shorthand that require you to have considerable knowledge and experience to draw upon in order to use them properly.

If you take a rock guitarist and put him in front of a jazz band with a chord chart saying C maj 7, Dmin7, Emin7, he will probably sound like a git, just the same as if you put a classical bassist in front of a rock band and counted her/im in. It requires more than the ability to read the chord chart i.e. recognise the chord names, but a profound understanding of chord voicings, genre traditions, groove types, harmonic theory, voice leading etc. It is not part of the hierarchy of reading at all per se but an alternative means of communicating. On their own, they are of limited value. Tied in with an experienced player, they can be a great way of making music.

[fatback]

[quote name='Bilbo' post='793502' date='Apr 1 2010, 05:07 PM']Neither. They are an established shorthand that require you to have considerable knowledge and experience to draw upon in order to use them properly.

If you take a rock guitarist and put him in front of a jazz band with a chord chart saying C maj 7, Dmin7, Emin7, he will probably sound like a git, just the same as if you put a classical bassist in front of a rock band and counted her/im in. It requires more than the ability to read the chord chart i.e. recognise the chord names, but a profound understanding of chord voicings, genre traditions, groove types, harmonic theory, voice leading etc. It is not part of the hierarchy of reading at all per se but an alternative means of communicating. On their own, they are of limited value. Tied in with an experienced player, they can be a great way of making music.[/quote]

I see what you're saying. seems to me that when you do know a genre, they're a great way of getting a lot of the advantages of reading, like efficient rehearsals, but with a lot of freedom. Especially useful for original material where you mightn't have parts worked out.

I haven't read the dots since I was a kid playing trumpet, but now I'm thinking of taking up double bass, looks like I might have to if I'm to be able to use the tutorial material that's out there. Big challenge.

[Oggy]

[quote name='Oggy' post='786783' date='Mar 26 2010, 12:41 PM'][center][u][b]Is it a gift or a curse?[/b][/u][/center]

Being able to ‘play by ear’ and ‘repetitive practice’ is one thing but it doesn’t come close to being able to pick up a sheet of music and read / play it.

I’ve never had any formal, or informal for that matter, musical training. I’ve always loved music and singing and found that I have an ‘ear’ and am able, with a bit of practice, to interpret what I hear onto a bass guitar – great, as far as it goes.

I’d love to be able to pick up a music sheet and play what I read.

What’s the best way of achieving this dream when the curse of ‘an ear for music’ is upon me? I’d really like to be able to read but every time I sit down and try using one of the many CD / book combinations available, I get bored after five mins and go off on a totally unrelated bass line that’s in my head.

Have any other Basschatters battled with the above? If you have managed to overcome the ‘ear thing’ please let me know how you did it.

Oggy [/quote]

Hi Chaps,

There were times during this thread that I wished I'd never asked the question - it got quite heated at times, not a bad thing I suppose at lease 'views were exchanged'.

Anyway I've persevered with the reading and after only a short time I'm getting somewhere. I can recognise all the notes presented on the Bass Clef and have an appreciation of the key signatures for letting me know what’s sharp or flat - this helped with learning the Clef: [url="http://www.studybass.com/tools/bass-clef-notes/"]Bass Clef Tutor[/url]. The 'common note positions' on the fret board were / are not that hard to learn, I pretty well knew what was where anyway, so I'm making progress. At least I can look at a piece of Bass music now and work out the bass line from that instead of resorting to my ears or TAB.

Still a long way to go if I want to sight read but I feel I'm getting the hang of it. The hardest thing I'm finding is to 'stick with what's written' and not to wonder off into any familiar bass riffs. I'm finding that about an hour at a time is as much as I can manage at the moment, once or twice a day - must be an age thing - I'm sure I'll up this as I get better at it. One of the tips I picked up from a web site was to 'visualize' stuff i.e. instead of day dreaming about appearing at Wembley (Tube Station that is), I visualize the note positions on the clef and corresponding positions on the fret board - sort of reading and playing without the music or the bass - hey, don't knock it until you try it - works for me.

I'm a lot happier now I'm familiar with the basics - It can only get easier, I hope.

Oggy

PS. I'll let you know down the road how I'm doing.

[JTUK]

I agree, you need both a good ear and good reading skills.
One without the other ...hmm....

I have heard plenty of great sight readers make pigs ears of things that you really wouldn't think would trip them up..and many a great gtr player..IMV .. get totally lost when you throw him a few horn keys...

That isn't a good balance, IMV..just as turning up to a session and expecting 4 or 5 run throughs just so you can get your bearings
by ear isn't endearing either.

You need a good balance of busking skills and reading skills... and be able to interpret a chart.
You might find quite a few gigs round here that people read everything....but then the notes sound right but the band sounds sooo wrong..

You need to cover as many basses as you can and jazz gigs can help out a lot here as the horns have good reading skils but the drummers tend not to read so well...so that puts the bass player on his toes as he has to make sense of everything...IMV...ha ha

[XB26354]

Going back to the original question - an ear for music - it is logical to suggest that being able to speak, read and listen to any language will make you most fluent and therefore better able to communicate. Depending on the genre, you can busk your way with one of these skills, but at some point, if you play with enough musicians, you'll come up against limitations in the other skills, which in turn will limit your success as a musician. If you stick to one genre you may only need one of these skills. It all comes down to what you want from playing bass. Also don't forget the British distaste for anyone that is actually good at something

[Rainbass]

A very interesting thread!

I've played bass for years, always by ear, in pop and rock bands, and it has been fine. But I have decided that the time has come to stretch myself, so I had my first rehearsal with a jazz band this week, and that was certainly challenging! I can read a bit, but only very slowly (think of 4 year old with Janet and John book ...)

I could follow the charts, but as someone said, to do that well, you need a full understanding of the genre and the chords etc.. I guess I got away with it (up to a point) as they didn't ask me to leave, but it's definately time to start studying!

Dave

[cameltoe]

It's definitely not a curse, so don't worry there.

Having a good ear is a gift, and has allowed you to get this far with limited knowledge, (if I interpreted your post correctly) which is not something many people could say.

I play by ear, but of course I understand my limitations when it comes to lack of theory. I'd love to read a couple chord charts and be able to throw together an awesome funky walking bass line on the spot. But I'm still learning here, (2 years) so I hope I can overcome my limitations.

Having said that, the fiddle player in our band is a theory geek. He can read music very well and knows enough scales to play pretty much anything. BUT he has no ear at all. Which means a lot of his playing is incredibly pitchy. Of course, he's just reading the notes/ playing from memory after learning the notes, so he hardly ever 'listens' to what he's playing, which means he never adjusts flat/sharp pitching, and it can happen time after time. He literally cannot hear it! As far as he's concerned his finger is in the right place, so he's playing it right.

If you WANT to learn to read, best do it! But don't question a 'good ear', it's a great thing to have and I bet many musicians who have studied and can read music wish they had your ability