Reading Is Fundamental

officermayo · by **officermayo** » 2023-09-09 8:26 p.m.

I see posts in other trombone forums at least once a week where someone posts a photo of a piece of music asking "How does this go?".

Other experienced players will respond with links to videos. Are kids not being taught the basics of reading music? I ran into this while working at a community college. Folks with four years of high school band who cannot read.

What's going on in our schools?

JohnL · by **JohnL** » 2023-09-09 9:05 p.m.

[quote="officermayo"]I see posts in other trombone forums at least once a week where someone posts a photo of a piece of music asking "How does this go?".

Other experienced players will respond with links to videos. Are kids not being taught the basics of reading music? I ran into this while working at a community college. Folks with four years of high school band who cannot read.

What's going on in our schools?[/quote]
Some (not I said "some", not "most" or even "many") school music programs don't do a whole lot of reading. Rhythms are learned by rote.

Crazy4Tbone86 · by **Crazy4Tbone86** » 2023-09-10 8:11 a.m.

The rhythm problems have always been there. As a teacher of 38 years, I can assure you that there has been and always will be a certain percentage of the population that struggles tremendously with rhythm. This includes people who participate passionately and regularly in music ensembles.

Rhythm issues are as wide and varied as a large buffet. Some have no internal metronome, others have an internal metronome but it can never synchronize with the people around them. Many, many people never understand the mathematics of rhythmic values (example: no matter what the meter or tempo, a quarter note is ALWAYS twice as long as an eighth note). Many don’t understand how a time signature works. For so many, there are mysteries that don’t ever make sense…..for example, why is a dotted half note worth 1 beat in fast 3/4, 2 beats in fast 6/8, 3 beats in 3/4 and 6 beats in slow 6/8?

Yes, rhythm and rhythmic accuracy can be taught. I have a system of subdividing that I use with all of my students. It is effective for the majority, but there are some that cannot understand it. I have found that a person who struggles with the fundamentals (holding half notes and whole notes full value in 4/4 time) as a teenager within the first few years of experience, will usually struggle with rhythm for most of their life. However, these musicians can still be taught and will improve.

I don’t believe a struggle with rhythm is an indicator of overall intelligence. I have had college students who really struggled with “fundamental rhythmic material” like the syncopation section of the Arban’s book. However, a couple of these students graduated with highest honors and went on to Ivy League grad schools for sciences.

I had a couple of students in my studio the last few years who really struggled with rhythm. These kids were highly intelligent and they worked hard…..it’s just that rhythm was tricky for them. With both of them, I kept going back and reviewing the material that was tough for them. It was not until the 4th or 5th time of reviewing syncopation and dotted rhythms that they were able to play them comfortably. That’s just the way some musicians are!

As an educator, I have seen many cycles of ebb and flow with rhythm…….both in my lesson teaching and my ensembles. When the sailing is easy and my students understand rhythm well, I enjoy the ride and try to give them rhythm challenges to make things interesting. When I have students who struggle with rhythm, I try to be patient and do exercises to help them understand the logic and mathematics. As long as the level of their playing improves, it is all good.

As far as the question…..”what’s going on in our schools?” Well…….there is a lot going on! Just like at any other time in history, there are highly effective teachers out there and rather ineffective teachers out there (and the entire spectrum between those). No matter how effective they are, the teachers are at the mercy of the students they teach (especially concerning rhythmic ability). Another thing to consider is that bands and orchestras were some of the hardest hit classes during the pandemic. Chances are that the students you are seeing have been shortchanged in their rhythmic education by a year or two…..that’s huge. Be patient with them and encourage them to practice and try to give them some tips to improve their rhythm.

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2023-09-10 10:03 a.m.

It's always been this way. It'd a hard skill to teach and learn.

GabrielRice · by **GabrielRice** » 2023-09-10 10:39 a.m.

I agree this is nothing new.

Quite frankly, I would rather students learn to hear clearly and reproduce what they hear FIRST, and THEN learn how to notate and read the notation of what they are hearing.

I would rather students sing and dance and play percussion instruments FIRST, and THEN choose the instrument they would like to play in band or orchestra.

All that said, there is a book I use - sometimes even with college students - that practices the essential fundamentals of reading rhythmic notation and translating it into instrumental sound: <LINK_TEXT text="https://www.jwpepper.com/101-Rhythmic-R ... 09725.item">https://www.jwpepper.com/101-Rhythmic-Rest-Patterns/4509725.item</LINK_TEXT>

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2023-09-10 11:26 a.m.

The "think system" is finally blossoming!

<YOUTUBE id="DE8xJpqazOM">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DE8xJpqazOM</YOUTUBE>

tbdana · 2023-09-10 11:53 a.m.

[quote="officermayo"]I see posts in other trombone forums at least once a week where someone posts a photo of a piece of music asking "How does this go?".

Other experienced players will respond with links to videos. Are kids not being taught the basics of reading music? I ran into this while working at a community college. Folks with four years of high school band who cannot read.

What's going on in our schools?[/quote]

It might be schools, but really I think it's just people and isn't really a new problem.

I agree with Gabriel Rice that playing by ear is fundamental and should be learned (first?), and think it may actually be more important to overall musicianship than reading well. But in practice we need to do both well.

However, I played with Buddy Rich back in the day, and that rat bastard couldn't tell a quarter note from a pickup truck, but he was still an incredible instrumentalist. Being unable to read music didn't hold him back. Whenever we got a new chart, Buddy would have his roadie play the drums the first time through in rehearsal, then Buddy would play after that, and he never missed a beat, cue, setup, fill, or accent. As terrible a human being as he was, his playing by ear was infallible. But for most of us, we need to read well.

And I also agree with Brian Hinkley that reading rhythms is just tough for some people, and also agree that some lack an inner metronome. I keep harping on this, but the most important element of music is time, not notes, and you have to be able to read rhythms and feel them in your soul to play any kind of music.

One problem is that we have to learn to walk and chew gum, in the sense when we are learning we need to juggle reading notes and rhythms at the same time. Students and amateurs focus first on notes and will sacrifice rhythm and time to get the notes right, but when reading something professionals focus first on time (which includes rhythm), even if it means missing some of the notes. Students are often struggling so hard to get the notes right that they don't learn to read and feel rhythm at the same rate, and that element falls behind. For some, it's so hard to learn both, they direct their entire focus to pitch (often spurred on by their teachers), and might even mentally give up trying to learn rhythm.

Humans have a tendency to want to practice what they do well rather than what they suck at most, so if reading is too hard, it often goes by the wayside. One of the hardest things I had to learn when I was a student was to practice the stuff I was terrible at (which was frustrating) rather than the stuff I was good at (which was fun). I don't think students today are any different. We all like to do what's fun and avoid what's frustrating.

Crazy4Tbone86 · by **Crazy4Tbone86** » 2023-09-10 12:02 p.m.

[quote="GabrielRice"]I agree this is nothing new.

Quite frankly, I would rather students learn to hear clearly and reproduce what they hear FIRST, and THEN learn how to notate and read the notation of what they are hearing.

I would rather students sing and dance and play percussion instruments FIRST, and THEN choose the instrument they would like to play in band or orchestra.[/quote]

You bring up some very interesting points Gabe. When I think about my own upbringing, my interest in rhythm and performing rhythms accurately began with listening. As a middle schooler in the mid to late 1970s, there was a wealth of syncopated and interesting rhythms in the pop music of the time. I found myself figuring them out, writing them down and playing them on my horn all of the time. The interest in rhythm developed through listening and curiosity.

Another topic that you brought up was movement and dance. Several years ago, a middle school teacher friend of mine was frustrated because his 6th, 7th and 8th graders could not play simple rhythms like quarter notes together. He took several workshops to brainstorm solutions and figured out that dancing and body percussion was the best solution. Thus, almost all of his rehearsals start with some type of dance/movement activity. His students love it and rhythm is now a strong skill at his school.

GabrielRice · by **GabrielRice** » 2023-09-10 12:43 p.m.

[quote="Crazy4Tbone86"]Another topic that you brought up was movement and dance. Several years ago, a middle school teacher friend of mine was frustrated because his 6th, 7th and 8th graders could not play simple rhythms like quarter notes together. He took several workshops to brainstorm solutions and figured out that dancing and body percussion was the best solution. Thus, almost all of his rehearsals start with some type of dance/movement activity. His students love it and rhythm is now a strong skill at his school.[/quote]

There is an entire music education system based on principles of body movement, pioneered by a Swiss educator named Emile Dalcroze. I took a Dalcroze workshop in college that helped me tremendously. There are pockets around the US of schools with Dalcroze teachers: Carnegie Mellon in Pittsburgh, Longy School of Music in Cambridge, MA, I think Cleveland Institute of Music. At Oberlin we had a music education teacher, now passed away, who taught the workshop I took. Not sure what Oberlin does now.

Doug_Elliott · by **Doug_Elliott** » 2023-09-10 12:56 p.m.

I haven't taught much recently besides the mechanics of playing and coaching musical interpretation, but years ago when I did work with beginners and high schoolers, I had good success teaching conducting (relating to the movement idea) and counting.

I think dance is taught the same way, counting steps in rhythm. Of course some people get it and some don't.

Sort of the way solfege relates pitches (or scale degrees) to specific syllables, conducting relates specific numbers to specific movements.

Does anybody else use that?

GabrielRice · by **GabrielRice** » 2023-09-10 1:04 p.m.

My trumpet colleague at Kinhaven recently started using conducting a lot to help sort out rhythmic issues and help students navigate complex rhythms. I noticed him doing it a lot more this summer, and I think it's no coincidence that the previous school year he started a beginning and middle school band program and had to do a lot of conducting himself. I think he gets classes full of kids working this way as well.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-09-10 1:58 p.m.

It depends on the piece, I guess. If you're taking about certain big band charts with really interesting rhythms, even if you can read the music on the page you won't be able to play it until you listen to the recording and get the tune in your head. You can play the rhythm "right" and it will still be "wrong".

The is nothing wrong with supplementing a preliminary reading with a preliminary listen.

Crazy4Tbone86 · by **Crazy4Tbone86** » 2023-09-10 2:05 p.m.

The Kodaly system of learning rhythms is everywhere and our school district chose to implement it in the elementary schools decades ago. The problem is that the “Ta, Ta, ti-ti Ta” method of learning rhythms reaches its limits very quickly. For example, how does a student versed in Kodaly perform an accent on the and of three? Well, they usually struggle with it.

For this reason, another instrumental music teacher and I proposed that the 4th and 5th graders learn to count rhythms in general music classes saying “1 and 2 and 3,” etc…. In addition to the Kodaly method. It works well if students whisper the pulse and accent the counts that have notes beginnings on them. This has helped tremendously in our band and orchestra classes.

I don’t think that any singular method is the complete solution for rhythm or any aspect of music. True understanding comes from being able to demonstrate or explain a concept in numerous ways. The same is true of our students.

Crazy4Tbone86 · by **Crazy4Tbone86** » 2023-09-10 2:28 p.m.

[quote="GabrielRice"]<QUOTE author="Crazy4Tbone86" post_id="219641" time="1694361725" user_id="8392">
Another topic that you brought up was movement and dance. Several years ago, a middle school teacher friend of mine was frustrated because his 6th, 7th and 8th graders could not play simple rhythms like quarter notes together. He took several workshops to brainstorm solutions and figured out that dancing and body percussion was the best solution. Thus, almost all of his rehearsals start with some type of dance/movement activity. His students love it and rhythm is now a strong skill at his school.[/quote]

There is an entire music education system based on principles of body movement, pioneered by a Swiss educator named Emile Dalcroze. I took a Dalcroze workshop in college that helped me tremendously. There are pockets around the US of schools with Dalcroze teachers: Carnegie Mellon in Pittsburgh, Longy School of Music in Cambridge, MA, I think Cleveland Institute of Music. At Oberlin we had a music education teacher, now passed away, who taught the workshop I took. Not sure what Oberlin does now.
</QUOTE>

Hey Gabe,

Was that Herb Henke, or was he retired by the time you got to Oberlin? If it was Herb, he was one of my teachers as well.

I enjoyed his classes and felt that the Dalcroze system was a great way to outwardly feel and show the expression in music. I guess that’s why I don’t get too worried when I see a student start busting some dance moves in the middle of a rehearsal. Unlocking that joy is part of the Dalcroze system.

AndrewMeronek · by **AndrewMeronek** » 2023-09-10 3:39 p.m.

With what little teaching I've done, I've had success getting students to understand accidentals better by forcing them to learn the piano keyboard layout. But reading rhythms - I've had less success when a student comes from having problems already.

Cmillar · by **Cmillar** » 2023-09-10 6:54 p.m.

A book such as Robert Starer's "Rhythmic Training' can take students from the pure basics all the way to being ready to play something by Stravinsky.

Catch is, the teacher better really know they're doing. But, a student can work through it themselves if they have patience and are serious about music.

His method is all about subdivisions of the mean beats ('pulses') and how it's notated.

It involves tapping or clapping the 'pulse' (which is notated and shown) and then the student should try to vocalize or sing the upper line of rhythm which is notated above the basic 'pulse' notes.

From what teaching I've done, and lucky enough to have been exposed to, you have to get students 'physically involved' in music and learning rhythms'.....clapping, playing a pencil like a drumstick, singing, moving, tapping their toes.....anything physical!!!.....in order to get some kind of kinesthetic response and awareness to rhythms.

Getting students to be 'extroverted' is the challenge as well.

It helps that my wife is a seriously trained dancer! As a student, she had to take drumming lessons as well as classes as to how music is counted and notated. Dancers have been well taught. They get the music 'in their bodies'.

We should all take dance lessons at some point in school, beginning at the elementary school level.

We're humans! We move, we dance, we tap our toes, we walk, we run. We're meant to move.

And many people in different cultures sing and move at the same time while performing much more complicated rhythmic concepts than is being created in most Western music these days.

Anyways, rhythms and reading CAN be taught and learnt by most people. And for sure, some people just aren't innately musical and won't get it.

But, the methods are there to be used.

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2023-09-10 7:19 p.m.

[quote="officermayo"]Folks with four years of high school band who cannot read.

What's going on in our schools?[/quote]

I believe that to be the norm in public schools.

I recall getting to my first (and only) band directing job, handing out some music, giving a downbeat and... not much happened! A few got started but after about four measures all had dropped out... baffled, confused, or not able to keep up.

Ha, ha, ha... I know you're all rusty... lets start again... 1, 2, 3, 4... same result.

Everything we played that year had to be taught about two measures at a time to every section part.

Consider that a substantial fraction of of high schoolers can't read... regular text! Estimates range from 15-25% are illiterate for any useful purpose and that is for a skill that has been in play all day, every day since kindergarten.

Reading music won't get a tenth of that time devoted to it.

I hear some voices above saying that rote learning music is really better anyway.

That may work adequately for an SATB church choir but even a simple high school band arrangement will have 20+ distinct parts. While you are teaching one out of twenty their part, the other 19 out of twenty have to politely sit idle... which doesn't happen. It is a recipe for distraction and disorder and disaffection.

BORING!

It is an unworkable situation except that... It's all you've got since none can really read music and there's a performance at a football game at the end of next week.

officermayo · by **officermayo** » 2023-09-10 8:09 p.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]I guess. If you're taking about certain big band charts with really interesting rhythms, even if you can read the music on the page you won't be able to play it until you listen to the recording and get the tune in your head. You can play the rhythm "right" and it will still be wrong[/quote]

I totally disagree.

I was introduced to swing charts in 8th grade. We learned to play straight eighths as dotted eighth - 16th notes on day one. This was 1974 in a small town. No local record stores carried these recordings and of course this was pre internet days. We learned how to count by playing the charts repeatedly.

At 64 I can sight-read anything because I was taught how to read and the different interpretations based on style (classical, Swing, Rock, etc).

BTW - the very first chart our band director passed out was "Everything's Alright" from Jesus Christ Superstar - in 5/4 no less. We learned it in one rehearsal. Not because we were child prodigies, but because our band director took the time to teach us and broaden our musical horizon.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-09-10 8:36 p.m.

You're either really advanced or we're talking about different things.

Not being able to read music at all is definitely bad, but I dunno, there are some charts or styles within the dance band genre or even some rock tunes where you gotta listen to the chart to know what was going on with it. Not how to read the rhythms, but the rest of it.

Count Basie and Stan Kenton wrote with the same ink but they aren't the same thing. I didn't know that until I really got smacked over the head with it by someone really passionate about dance band and big band music. Lil Darlin, is a great example. I could never play that "easy" chart in a million years without digging into recordings of it.

hyperbolica · by **hyperbolica** » 2023-09-10 9:27 p.m.

[quote="Crazy4Tbone86"]The rhythm problems have always been there. As a teacher of 38 years, I can assure you that there has been and always will be a certain percentage of the population that struggles tremendously with rhythm. This includes people who participate passionately and regularly in music ensembles.[/quote]

This is really interesting to hear someone say this out loud. I've had a lot of problems with rhythm. My teacher in 2nd year of music school drilled me in Bitsch, which is a rhythmic wonderland. I never totally overcame my troubles, but I learned how work through rhythmic issues. My high school music program (35 years ago) never really emphasized sight reading, and unfortunately I learned most of my musicianship in church, which meant everything was easy and rubato.

One of the most effective things that combines the rhythm and reading problems are all of the patterns in Arbans or Mantia. Once you learn to look ahead and recognize those rhythmic and scale patterns visually, reading becomes reading words and phrases instead of individual letters.

Rhythm issues are as wide and varied as a large buffet. Some have no internal metronome, others have an internal metronome but it can never synchronize with the people around them. ...

This is also interesting. I have an internal metronome, but it is variable - I was always taught to follow what was going on around me, so I often wind up waiting for others to do whatever, so the tempo ALWAYS slows down. I was never really taught to lead or to keep the music steady. Slowing down to read the key signature, slowing down to figure out the rhythm, etc, practicing never focused on keeping time steady. It took me a long time to learn this.

officermayo · by **officermayo** » 2023-09-10 10:11 p.m.

To those who claim they must hear a recording before being able to play a chart, what would you have done if you were in a band in the 1940s and they handed out an original tune arrangement? What did orchestra players do in the 17th century?

Do you watch a movie so you can read the book it was based on? Of course not. Reading music is the same as reading words. You translate the symbols in your mind as you read them. I'm no genius and if I can do it, anyone can. The problem is that it's become acceptable in modern times to play by rote. That's great if you're a solo act, but what happens when playing with an ensemble?

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2023-09-10 11:59 p.m.

[quote="GabrielRice"]There is an entire music education system based on principles of body movement, pioneered by a Swiss educator named Emile Dalcroze. I took a Dalcroze workshop in college that helped me tremendously. At Oberlin we had a music education teacher, now passed away, who taught the workshop I took. Not sure what Oberlin does now.[/quote]

Would that have been Inda Howland? My wife adored her and her teaching (long ago)! She knew Herb Hanke, who also taught Dalcroze at Oberlin after Inda, but she says Howland was the best! This helped to inspire her (and give her some of the skills) to become a very successful elementary school music teacher. She was lucky enough to teach alongside some other very wonderful music educators. It still gives me goosebumps to remember some of their successes with their students.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-09-11 12:27 a.m.

The Bach Cello suites are another great example I think. I think anyone would be hard pressed to play this:

<YOUTUBE id="mGQLXRTl3Z0">~~[media]~~https://youtu.be/mGQLXRTl3Z0?feature=shared</YOUTUBE>

If there was not a huge number of performances, recordings, pedagogy, etc, about 'how that piece goes '.

If no one had ever heard of Bach and that sheet music was magicked into existence, we probably would not play it that way. You can't just learn the style from a sheet. The sheet is there to tell you what to play and sometimes how to play it, and if you delve in and do a serious study everything is in the score. But I don't think you can just find it doing a sight reading.

Listening is so important. You could almost say that listening is fundamental, not reading.

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2023-09-11 1:02 a.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]The Bach Cello suites are another great example I think.

If there was not a huge number of performances, recordings, pedagogy, etc, about 'how that piece goes ...[/quote]

Johann Sebastian Bach wrote those pieces on a piece of paper. And handed that paper to a cellist - who was (somehow) expected to play those pieces without ever having heard them, listened to them, or imagined them. The first time through certainly didn't sound like the amazing Mischa Maisky, but I expect the cellist had a pretty good idea of what Bach expected him to play, just from what was printed on the pages. Just as you could read aloud a Shakespeare sonnet and a listener could (more or less) comprehend it. The better the player of the written music / reader of the sonnet, the more you would comprehend and appreciate the composition. :idk:

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2023-09-11 1:26 a.m.

[quote="officermayo"]To those who claim they must hear a recording before being able to play a chart, what would you have done if you were in a band in the 1940s and they handed out an original tune arrangement? What did orchestra players do in the 17th century?[/quote]

I presume recording-only players weren't getting hired but... that's what rehearsals are for and what conductors do at them... bridge the gap, if any, between what is read (or misread) on the page and what needs to come out in performance.

what would you have done if you were in a band in the 1940s and they handed out an original tune arrangement?

Those bands must have had some rehearsal, even if it might just be time stolen from warmup before the show.

I recall a newspaper interview with Jack Benny at a stop with some of his crew on an entertain-the-troops tour near the end of WWII. They're using some subset of the military band at this camp as "the band" for their stage show and the reporter observes that Jack's bandleader (Phil Harris!) was having to do quite a bit of detail work on the music they were preparing.

"They're good, but it's a tricky arrangement", Jack explains diplomatically.

So there was a band of some competence... I hope they didn't need every two measures spooned out to them... but a new tune still needed, and got, rehearsal and got lines sung out to them

To those who claim they must hear a recording before being able to play a chart...

OTOH, that's kind of how the Beatles worked at the outset. One of them would bare-bones demo his new song for the others to hear, they'd all figure out what everyone's role was going to be and then they'd hit "record". No written music among the four of them and yet even their simplest songs have peculiar details that needed to be done just right.

But, of course, those were four unusually talented people who managed to find each other at the right time and place.

Doug_Elliott · by **Doug_Elliott** » 2023-09-11 2:41 a.m.

I have played lots of gigs with my own band where most of the players were totally sightreading on the gig. I hire people who can do that. And I don't hire people who can't.

baileyman · by **baileyman** » 2023-09-11 7:41 a.m.

[quote="Posaunus"]<QUOTE author="harrisonreed" post_id="219714" time="1694406422" user_id="3642">
The Bach Cello suites are another great example I think.

If there was not a huge number of performances, recordings, pedagogy, etc, about 'how that piece goes ...[/quote]

Johann Sebastian Bach wrote those pieces on a piece of paper. And handed that paper to a cellist - who was (somehow) expected to play those pieces without ever having heard them, listened to them, or imagined them. The first time through certainly didn't sound like the amazing Mischa Maisky, but I expect the cellist had a pretty good idea of what Bach expected him to play, just from what was printed on the pages. Just as you could read aloud a Shakespeare sonnet and a listener could (more or less) comprehend it. The better the player of the written music / reader of the sonnet, the more you would comprehend and appreciate the composition. :idk:
</QUOTE>

All the tunes in the Suites are dances, aren't they? How does one dance to this man's interpretation? Did he not read on the page the dance styles? At the time, the dance rhythms were "in the air" and well-known, just as the 1940 swing style someone else mentioned. Anyone familiar with dance at both times could have sorted out the spots on the page. Those who no longer know the dance, well that's a problem.

Cmillar · 2023-09-11 8:23 a.m.

If anyone is going to play music from the Western musical traditions, then...

READING IS FUNDAMENTAL

I have a huge complaint about how the schools in the USA and Canada 'train' their band and orchestra students from ages 12-18.

Due to such an intense focus on entering band competitions, festivals, and other time/money wasting events such as marching band competitions, most band directors spend 90% of the school year getting the students to learn only a handful of pieces of music. They don't see much music at all, and certainly don't get any practice in reading any music except what they're expected to play 'perfectly' for a competition.

They rehearse these pieces to death, or in the case of marching bands, half the kids won't even bother to learn how to read music. They just learn the music by ear by listening to a music link on the internet their band director posts for them. And then, once they can play it, they think that they're geniuses or something.

But then, stick an easy to read piece of music in front this typical USA/Canadian high school band, (say, some piece of music that a Japanese elementary school band could sight-read perfectly) and the North American bands 'fall all over their faces'.

That's my factual observation from having been a guest clinician, master-class teacher, guest conductor, and sub-band teacher in both countries over many years.

harrisonreed · 2023-09-11 8:35 a.m.

I thought we were talking about kids, not pros with decades of experience showing up and getting paid.

[quote="Posaunus"]

Johann Sebastian Bach wrote those pieces on a piece of paper. And handed that paper to a cellist - who was (somehow) expected to play those pieces without ever having heard them, listened to them, or imagined them. The first time through certainly didn't sound like the amazing Mischa Maisky, but I expect the cellist had a pretty good idea of what Bach expected him to play, just from what was printed on the pages. Just as you could read aloud a Shakespeare sonnet and a listener could (more or less) comprehend it. The better the player of the written music / reader of the sonnet, the more you would comprehend and appreciate the composition. :idk:[/quote]

Interestingly, the major mystery of these pieces is that there are no markings or indications on how to play the pieces, no bowings, minimal slurs and accents. When they reemerged in the late 1800s, it took Pablo Casals 13 years before he was comfortable recording them and did not often play them in public. No one was playing them until the recordings came out. That isn't sight reading.

If people could do it in the 1700s, it's only because they listened to similar pieces and styles to help them interpret what was on the page. But there is very little evidence that anyone performed them even in the 1720s, besides possibly the composer.

Look I totally get that I'm playing the devil's advocate here. Learning your band concert by rote is probably a terrible idea and kids need to learn music. But comparing kids with seasoned pros or getting upset if they want to hear how something goes first before they dig into it is silly. Especially in light of the fact that it took thirteen years for a seasoned pro to learn to perform a piece that is now seen as standard rep, and literally no one would play it until they could hear his interpretation of it.

afugate · by **afugate** » 2023-09-11 8:47 a.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]You're either really advanced or we're talking about different things.

Not being able to read music at all is definitely bad, but I dunno, there are some charts or styles within the dance band genre or even some rock tunes where you gotta listen to the chart to know what was going on with it. Not how to read the rhythms, but the rest of it.

Count Basie and Stan Kenton wrote with the same ink but they aren't the same thing. I didn't know that until I really got smacked over the head with it by someone really passionate about dance band and big band music. Lil Darlin, is a great example. I could never play that "easy" chart in a million years without digging into recordings of it.[/quote]

Interesting discussion.

Reading rhythms is vastly different from interpretation.

For better or worse, modern big band writing is filled with articulations and extraneous info for this very reason. But even so, the nuance isn't there on the printed page.

--Andy in OKC

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-09-11 8:54 a.m.

(My error, it took Pasals 13 years before he was performing them publicly and about 40 to record them)

GabrielRice · by **GabrielRice** » 2023-09-11 9:24 a.m.

[quote="Crazy4Tbone86"]Was that Herb Henke[/quote]

It was. What a great spirit. I learned so much, and I use the basic principles often.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2023-09-11 6:58 p.m.

I'm probably gonna make people mad (again), but if you can't read music and read it well, then go home and practice until you can, and let someone who can read it have that chair.

As for not being able to play things without hearing a recording first, my goodness but that strikes me wrong. It's the wrong ethic, and everything about it is wrong. Students should never, ever be given that message. The message they should be given is to learn to read or they don't get to play with others until they can. That's like not being able to play your instrument. The place to learn is at home and with your teacher, not in an ensemble.

Almost everything I play I've never heard before (except in symphony orchestras). Just last Friday I had a big band gig with all original charts. The band showed up to the "sound check," ran through some transitions and a few tricky passages, then we broke for dinner. The whole thing took less than an hour and we never even saw all the tunes we would play that night.

Then the band went on stage and freaking nailed every chart. Started with a blazing fast tune and it just got more intense from there. And it was pretty close to perfect with the whole band sight reading brand new, original material of varying styles. There was swing, funk, rock, ballads, and Latin tunes, with many of the tunes switching styles, meters and tempos in the middle of them. One tune was Latin, and started rubato, went to a samba, changed to a songo, returned to samba, and finished out rubato again. And it was perfection. Tight. Accurate. In tune. Tremendous musicality. All on charts that had never been played before. How were we able to do that? Because everyone could read music well. Part of reading music is learning styles. You can listen to recordings to learn styles, but you had better learn them and be able to translate them to music you've never seen before.

This is especially true in the recording world, where you almost never see the music before walking into the studio. And the music can be any style, and you've got to be able to sight read it perfectly and play it perfectly the first time, and exactly the same every time, in the right style, without ever having heard a recording of it (you are the recording of it!).

No, in the gigs I mention above we aren't students, we are all professionals. But reading is fundamental; as fundamental as pitch and time and technique. And anyone who professes to play in an ensemble at any level needs to be able to read at a level commensurate with the level of music being played. Anything less is failure, and as I said at the top of this if you can play it, then just play it. But if you can't, then go home and practice until you can, and let someone who learned how to read have the chair.

All these excuses are super annoying. No participation trophies in music. You gotta play what's in front of you, even if it's a middle school band. Learning to read music is part of learning to play the instrument.

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2023-09-11 7:38 p.m.

[quote="GabrielRice"]There is an entire music education system based on principles of body movement, pioneered by a Swiss educator named Emile Dalcroze. I took a Dalcroze workshop in college that helped me tremendously. Oberlin we had a music education teacher, now passed away, who taught the workshop I took. Not sure what Oberlin does now.[/quote]

My wife (older than Gabe and Brian Hinkley) also attended Oberlin as a Music Education major/oboe Performance minor, and loved the Dalcroze classes she took from an inspiring woman named Inda Howland. She also knew Howland's successor, Herb Henke. They had a profound influence on her, and I'm sure contributed to her success as an outstanding elementary school music educator (even though she mostly taught instrumental music!). Every time I watched her teach, and communicate with her students, it brought tears to my eyes.

Ozzlefinch · by **Ozzlefinch** » 2023-09-12 9:25 a.m.

[quote="tbdana"]I'm probably gonna make people mad (again), but if you can't read music and read it well, then go home and practice until you can, and let someone who can read it have that chair.

As for not being able to play things without hearing a recording first, my goodness but that strikes me wrong. It's the wrong ethic, and everything about it is wrong. Students should never, ever be given that message. The message they should be given is to learn to read or they don't get to play with others until they can. That's like not being able to play your instrument. The place to learn is at home and with your teacher, not in an ensemble.

....

All these excuses are super annoying. No participation trophies in music. You gotta play what's in front of you, even if it's a middle school band. Learning to read music is part of learning to play the instrument.[/quote]

Words of the Prophet. There is no daylight between us on this matter.

The biggest lies I was ever told was that "you don't need music theory", "music theory is hard to teach and hard to learn" and "learning music theory will ruin your creativity". All lies, and I believed them over 40 years. All that toxic message did was hold me back for decades. When I finally decided to unlock the mystery of theory, I discovered that it WAS music, and it made everything EASIER for me since I was now able to understand HOW music worked- it made learning new pieces far easier and advanced my skills immeasurably in a very short time. I struggled for years because of people who lauded themselves for being ignorant and proudly wore it like some kind of badge of honor.

Look at it this way, you are reading my post. Did you have somebody read it to you first, or did you read it on your own using your knowledge of the alphabet and a few grammar rules? Did you read it in your own voice, or in Morgan Freeman's? Since I mentioned Morgan Freeman, are you now reading it in his voice? That, my friends, is what music is. The notes on the page are the writings of the composer on how the music should be: the tempo, the accents, inflections, and rhythm etc. If you play what is on the page accurately, then you are indeed playing the music as the composer intended. But you can still give it your own interpretation (or voice) if you desire, there is nothing saying that you can't.

It's not just about the dots and footballs on the page, it's about the relationship between the chords and the keys and then the notes. It's about reading in another language: the language of music. It has an alphabet, and it has grammar rules. From that you can "read" any story, write your own, or do whatever you want. Music is just another form of communication. Having the knowledge of how music theory works doesn't "stifle creativity", it enables it.

Never tell anybody that they should stay ignorant because the knowledge is too hard to learn. That is utter, complete, and absolute nonsense and nobody will ever convince me otherwise.

Ok, rant over.

Kbiggs · by **Kbiggs** » 2023-09-12 12:04 p.m.

^^^this^^^

Ozzlefinch · by **Ozzlefinch** » 2023-09-12 2:59 p.m.

[quote="Crazy4Tbone86"]

........ I have found that a person who struggles with the fundamentals (holding half notes and whole notes full value in 4/4 time) as a teenager within the first few years of experience, will usually struggle with rhythm for most of their life. However, these musicians can still be taught and will improve.

[/quote]

Finding the right pedagogy or andragogy is key to the learning process. I struggled with my timing until I bought a drum machine. As it turns out, the click of the metronome did nothing of value for me, but an actual drum rhythm made everything fall into place in my brain. I could "feel" where I should be in the music rather than guessing like I was doing with the metronome. I think it's because it felt more "musical" with the drums.

Whatever works at the end of the day, I guess.

timothy42b · by **timothy42b** » 2023-09-13 7:12 a.m.

[quote="tbdana"]No, in the gigs I mention above we aren't students, we are all professionals. But reading is fundamental; as fundamental as pitch and time and technique. And anyone who professes to play in an ensemble at any level needs to be able to read at a level commensurate with the level of music being played. Anything less is failure, and as I said at the top of this if you can play it, then just play it. But if you can't, then go home and practice until you can, and let someone who learned how to read have the chair.
[/quote]

Aren't you mixing a couple of different skill sets there?

You spent a lifetime learning the nuances of style that aren't completely in the notation. I'm not sure someone can go home and practice any of that. Yes they can and should get very good at playing the notes on the page, but at your level that's probably almost trivial.

timothy42b · by **timothy42b** » 2023-09-13 7:16 a.m.

[quote="Ozzlefinch"]

Finding the right pedagogy or andragogy is key to the learning process. I struggled with my timing until I bought a drum machine. As it turns out, the click of the metronome did nothing of value for me, but an actual drum rhythm made everything fall into place in my brain. I could "feel" where I should be in the music rather than guessing like I was doing with the metronome. I think it's because it felt more "musical" with the drums.
[/quote]

Maybe this will help <smiley>

<YOUTUBE id="17_fj-kKulw">https://youtube.com/shorts/17_fj-kKulw?feature=shared</YOUTUBE>

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2023-09-13 1:07 p.m.

[quote="Ozzlefinch"]Finding the right pedagogy or andragogy is key to the learning process.[/quote]

Wow! I just learned a new word! Out with pedagogy, and in with andragogy for us older students.

Thanks, Ozzie.

Bach5G · by **Bach5G** » 2023-09-13 1:09 p.m.

“Pedagogy is the teaching of children, or dependent personalities. Andragogy is the facilitation learning for adults, who are self-directed learners. Heutagogy is the management of learning for self-managed learners.”

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2023-09-13 1:19 p.m.

[quote="Bach5G"]“Pedagogy is the teaching of children, or dependent personalities. Andragogy is the facilitation learning for adults, who are self-directed learners. Heutagogy is the management of learning for self-managed learners.”[/quote]

How about gerontagogy for us slow-learning really old folks? :idk:

Ozzlefinch · by **Ozzlefinch** » 2023-09-13 1:22 p.m.

[quote="Posaunus"]<QUOTE author="Ozzlefinch" post_id="219853" time="1694545147" user_id="14653">
Finding the right pedagogy or andragogy is key to the learning process.[/quote]

Wow! I just learned a new word! Out with pedagogy, and in with andragogy for us older students.

Thanks, Ozzie.
</QUOTE>

You're welcome. It's a bit of a pet peeve of mine when the word "pedagogy" is used in the context of teaching adults, but I can understand why it's used that way. For the most part our learning experiences have all been when were children, so when we grow into adults, we just assume that those teaching methods are the only ones and that they naturally work in all circumstances. Using a pedagogical approach to teaching adults is generally counterproductive and won't yield the results you expect. Adults (mostly) don't think as children or experience the world as children; therefore, they don't learn and retain information as a child does either. The learning outcome that an adult expects to achieve from the learning process is also radically different, therefore the teaching methods must be altered to fit.

I could go on, but I'll leave it there. No need to sidetrack the thread more than it is already.

(My other big pet peeve is when people call a lectern a podium. :idk: )

timothy42b · by **timothy42b** » 2023-09-14 8:09 a.m.

[quote="Posaunus"]<QUOTE author="Ozzlefinch" post_id="219853" time="1694545147" user_id="14653">
Finding the right pedagogy or andragogy is key to the learning process.[/quote]

Wow! I just learned a new word! Out with pedagogy, and in with andragogy for us older students.

Thanks, Ozzie.
</QUOTE>

New to me too, and that's the kind of nitpick I obsess over. Kudos!!!!!

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-09-14 9:54 a.m.

Last try on this one. Again playing devil's advocate:

I don't think that Alessi is really "reading" music much during a concert. Lindberg definitely is not reading music when he plays a recital. No one is reading music on the stage for an opera. Jon Anderson wasn't reading music playing "Close to the Edge" back in the 70's, and neither was anyone else on the stage.

<YOUTUBE id="BcDU-vilgic">~~[media]~~https://youtu.be/BcDU-vilgic?feature=shared</YOUTUBE>

Reading is great. But I don't think it's the best way to arrive at a great performance. Memorization is.

Ozzlefinch · by **Ozzlefinch** » 2023-09-14 10:38 a.m.

You think that because you are judging by the performance only. You don't see the hours of practicing from written scripts that went on behind the scenes, you are seeing the end result.

Nobody is trying to imply that memorization is bad, not in the least. What the discussion is about is the ability to read and understand fundamental concepts of music. Do opera performers read and memorize a script, or do the have somebody who knows the play tell them the words to say over and over again until its been memorized?

Reading is fundamental. Literally. Learn to read music and understand basic music theory if you don't already. It will open up a glorious new world to you.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-09-14 11:55 a.m.

[quote="Ozzlefinch"]Do opera performers read and memorize a script, or do the have somebody who knows the play tell them the words to say over and over again until its been memorized?
[/quote]

Highly doubt they go into an opera for the first time blind unless it's a new work. How many people have memorized whole movie scripts just by watching their favorite movie.

I might be pinching a nerve, lol. I definitely do know how to read music to a high level, but I do a lot of listening too. I don't think you can have reading down without being a good listener first. The ink is just ink

Redthunder · by **Redthunder** » 2023-09-14 12:18 p.m.

Harrison is 100% correct in what he's trying to get at. There has been a decent amount of research into how children best learn music, and much of that is synthesized on this page.

~~[url]~~https://giml.org/mlt/skilllearningsequence/

The comparison between learning to read language and reading music is apt, but what really needs to be emphasized is that reading written words is not "Translating" or any kind of active process where you have to think of the words as you read. Once you know how to read, you are recalling words that you recognize by sight. But you can't start with reading words, you need to be exposed to a ton of language by listening others speak, then imitating, then forming your own thoughts and phrases that have meaning. Then you can start the process of building a symbolic association with words that YOU ALREADY KNOW first. Reading music is the same way. And you can't learn how to read symbols or patterns until you have repeated exposure to them aurally, and then performing them some way yourself first.

This process starts wayyyyy before high school band, which is not geared towards teaching these skills.

Additionally, the best sightreaders are NOT the ones that can instantly decode brand new rhythms or tonal patterns. They are the ones that have been exposed to so many different combinations of these patterns before that they recall them by sight immediately. They may be sightreading a brand new piece or composition or arrangement, but they absolutely will have seen most of the smaller combinations of notes and rhythms before.

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2023-09-14 1:23 p.m.

Both sides are right here. In order to read well, you need to read a lot... but also listen a lot.

Redthunder · by **Redthunder** » 2023-09-14 1:37 p.m.

[quote="Burgerbob"]Both sides are right here. In order to read well, you need to read a lot... but also listen a lot.[/quote]

I think the rub here is that both things are true, but the order in which you do things matters a lot. Once you know how to read it's easy to get better at it by doing it more. But if you don't...? The process of how matters a ton. A lot of kids get frustrated and quit because they are often expected to just know how to do it even if they haven't had great instruction in it.

Also worth considering in the case of more advanced musicians who have a ton of experience playing their instrument but aren't great readers... they are probably developmentally at a mismatched level of skill between the music they are capable of performing once learned vs. their ability to read the notation of that music.... in which case they need to back up and read simpler things first. Not many HS or college band directors are willing to do that because of the things they are expected to do musically with ensembles.

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2023-09-14 2:41 p.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]I thought we were talking about kids, not pros with decades of experience showing up and getting paid.[/quote]

Yes, this discussion has gotten side-boggled with assertions of one standard for many levels of player.

[quote="harrisonreed"]<QUOTE author="Posaunus" post_id="219718" time="1694408573" user_id="158">

Johann Sebastian Bach wrote those pieces on a piece of paper. And handed that paper to a cellist - who was (somehow) expected to play those pieces without ever having heard them, listened to them, or imagined them...[/quote]

Interestingly, the major mystery of these pieces is that there are no markings or indications on how to play the pieces, no bowings, minimal slurs and accents...
</QUOTE>

I suspect the expectations for exactness on these matters back then was far less demanding than today. I suspect that, absent a specific indication in the notation or rehearsal, performers did as they pleased or stuck to basic conventions.

I note that music publishing was a big thing at least as early as the 1700s. The major portion of Beethoven's income was sales of sheet music. So quite early on, people were buying music, taking it home and putting it together on their clavecin or lute without benefit of recordings or radio.

Many classic paintings attest to this activity...

.
<ATTACHMENT filename="lute.jpg" index="3">~~[attachment=3]~~lute.jpg</ATTACHMENT>

<ATTACHMENT filename="vlnflt.jpg" index="2">~~[attachment=2]~~vlnflt.jpg</ATTACHMENT>

<ATTACHMENT filename="company.jpg" index="1">~~[attachment=1]~~company.jpg</ATTACHMENT>
.

.

.

Even the angels were reading music...
<ATTACHMENT filename="angel.jpg" index="0">~~[attachment=0]~~angel.jpg</ATTACHMENT>
.

However, working out a piece on one's keyboard is rather different than sight-reading and keeping up in an ensemble, although both are "reading music".

[quote="Cmillar"]I have a huge complaint about how the schools in the USA and Canada 'train' their band and orchestra students from ages 12-18.

Due to such an intense focus on entering band competitions, festivals, and other time/money wasting events such as marching band competitions, most band directors spend 90% of the school year getting the students to learn only a handful of pieces of music. They don't see much music at all, and certainly don't get any practice in reading any music except what they're expected to play 'perfectly' for a competition.

They rehearse these pieces to death...[/quote]

Very much so. Everything in Texas is about a competition at the end of the year.

When I said we were going to do a Christmas concert in December, everyone was baffled.

"No, no, no... Contest is in April!"

The competitions are needed to validate that some goal has been accomplished and yet, many things are never accomplished because of them.

I'm glad I don't need to worry about it anymore.

Cmillar · by **Cmillar** » 2023-09-14 3:06 p.m.

[quote="Ozzlefinch"]Reading is fundamental. Literally. Learn to read music and understand basic music theory if you don't already. It will open up a glorious new world to you.[/quote]

Yes... I've often told younger musicians, or students, when they say they don't 'need' to know how to read music:

..."Why limit yourself? You want to be a musician and be able to fit into all kinds of different musical situations? Or do only want to limit yourself to playing with other musicians that have placed limitations on themselves by being unable to read music and aren't even able to understand how to follow a simple lead/rhythm sheet?"

..."If you're only going to play in a blues band your whole life, or just want to be in blues bands, then sure...you probably don't need to read music. Just don't expect to get called for any gigs where you might have a chance to make more money where you just might have to read a lead sheet, like in a wedding band, a show band, or some other band that might pay you more."

..."So you're in a garage band now with your friends, and none of you read music. OK. Are you guys going to be friends forever and never move away from each other forever? You better like these friends, because if your band of 'non-readers' ever breaks up or quits, what are you going to do? Who are you going to play with?"

..."Ever heard of the great rock/pop guitarist Steve Lukather? Ever heard of bassist Will Lee? Keyboardist Paul Shaffer? Heard of drummer Peter Erskine? Vinnie Coliuta? These guys could go and play any music with any band in the world on a moments notice! Do you why they're all filthy rich from playing music? They can read, write, play any style of music, and probably play better than anyone you can imagine. Not a bad life, right? Being able to read music in any style and get paid well for it?"

..."You're a horn player and you don't think you need to know how to read music? What are going to do? Be just another blues player? Try to find bands that might need a horn player that doesn't read charts? Good luck. Well, you better start your own band, because no one will hire you for anything if you can't read any music!"

It all comes back to: WHY LIMIT YOURSELF?

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-09-14 3:11 p.m.

Rob, 100% agree with everything in your post.

But...

<ATTACHMENT filename="vlnflt.jpg" index="0">~~[attachment=0]~~vlnflt.jpg</ATTACHMENT>

You can almost hear how bad these guys are through the paint..

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2023-09-14 5:46 p.m.

I agree with Aidan here, both are equally important.

There is a music theorist and ear training professor who is legendary in Montreal who created, developed and taught an analysis modem that works for any piece of tonal music. Fascinating theory. Beyond that, her teaching included as much listening as reading, a she very aptly described to overarching principle (and goal) of her approach "The eye that ears and the ear that sees", the idea being that you should be able to know and understand exactly what's going on just when hearing tonal music, and at the same time be able to know how the music would sound just by glancing at the page.

[quote="harrisonreed"]

Interestingly, the major mystery of these pieces is that there are no markings or indications on how to play the pieces, no bowings, minimal slurs and accents. When they reemerged in the late 1800s, it took Pablo Casals 13 years before he was comfortable recording them and did not often play them in public. No one was playing them until the recordings came out. That isn't sight reading.

If people could do it in the 1700s, it's only because they listened to similar pieces and styles to help them interpret what was on the page. But there is very little evidence that anyone performed them even in the 1720s, besides possibly the composer.[/quote]

It's not really a mystery, that's just how music was back then. There were conventions on how to do things, but also a lot more freedom for the performer. It was expected that the musician would come up with their own ideas about articulation, phrasing, dynamics, etc (in respect of the conventions and rules of "good taste", which of course not everyone agreed on!), and also add quite a bit of ornamentation. You need to train the ear to do all of this. You also do need to know how to read what's on the page in order to add what's not on the page, and access a vocabulary of ornaments and expressive devices that you've both heard and seen before. Both skills are essential and fundamental.

If you go further back in time there is even less on the page. If you go back far enough (not that much further back than Bach), some (and far back enough, most) accidentals are missing.

An interesting story: in the Sistine chapel, there was a big argument between singers about whether the sopranists should add a G# or the basses a Bb at a cadence to A that was in whatever piece they were working on. They bitterly argued for hours and had to bring in an arbiter to decide who was right. The funny part of that story is that the composer was one of the members of the chapel, and in the room the entire time. Nobody asked them what was correct, because this was not a compositional problem, it was a performance decision.

You go far enough back, and all you have on the page is monophonic chant. No rhythm. But that doesn't mean they were only singing in unison until someone starting writing down polyphony. They could improvise polyphonic music (that respected the rules of counterpoint!) from just one staff of monophonic and rhythm-less notation. Some people could individually improvise 4-part music, by singing one part while using the syllables corresponding to a second part, and showing two more voices using the Guidonian hand. You can't do that unless you have both a very well trained and learned ear, and a complete mastery of the theory.

[quote="harrisonreed"]You can almost hear how bad these guys are through the paint..[/quote]

I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but I'm curious what you see that makes you think that.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-09-14 5:51 p.m.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]<QUOTE author="harrisonreed" post_id="220065" time="1694718693" user_id="3642">
You can almost hear how bad these guys are through the paint..[/quote]

I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but I'm curious what you see that makes you think that.
</QUOTE>

I think it is because it looks like they are reading that sheet music so intently! They don't look like they are having fun at all.

elmsandr · by **elmsandr** » 2023-09-15 7:22 a.m.

To go a slightly different direction.. Reading is fundamental, but also completely unnecessary. It is a visual solution to an auditory problem. There have been many professional bands that didn’t use a lick of printed music. Raymond Scott comes to mind (CBS orchestra, composed a lot of the songs later used in cartoons). Would it have saved him time to simply write things down and hire people who read well? Probably. But his band was pretty darned tight.

For a quite random diversion on him and especially his later years:

~~[url]~~<LINK_TEXT text=" https://99percentinvisible.org/episode ... ranscript/"> https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/player-piano/transcript/</LINK_TEXT>

Cheers,

Andy

timothy42b · by **timothy42b** » 2023-09-15 8:37 a.m.

When I was in high school, graduated 1971, reading was considered standard. I sang in a small ensemble that could sightread madrigals.

When my younger daughter was in high school, 2008 or so, they learned all their choir music by rote. I was initially a little skeptical about the instruction, but had to admit that their performances (all memorized) were at a very high level musically.

On trombone I always needed sheet music and assumed I could never play by ear, until in my 50s when I started to understand it a little. (and since I can no longer memorize, it becomes more important)

Not sure what the point is beyond maybe the approach you get locked into when young is hard to shift out of.

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2023-09-15 10:44 a.m.

Most of the groups I have played in for the last 30 years have required me to be able to read. Often the show goes on either after one rehearsal or with maybe a rundown of tough spots just before the gig. Without being able to read I'd be toast.

Reading is also how I prepare things like solos (with concert band).

I often run into players who can't read music and in the genres I play they are at a severe disadvantage.

Note that there were many players in the Bad Old Days who didn't read music. But they had a very strong understanding of the type of music they were playing and could improvise their parts on the fly. That kind of knowledge comes from a lot of training.

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2023-09-15 2:08 p.m.

Printed music and the reading of it is an organizing tool, much like a conductor.

The need for it rises as...

the number of performers increases

the number of distinct parts increases

the complexity of the music increases

the length of the music increases

the rehearsal time decreases

the opportunity to previously hear the music decreases

None of those factors incorporates a clear boundary line.

Yes, you can issue sheet music around the campfire for Kumbayah, but probably not necessary.

Yes, you could rehearse and perform Mahler's Symphony of a Thousand without music, but... ouch.

I recall going to a chamber orchestra concert in NYC. Everything was memorized, they had no stands, no chairs (except for the cellos), no conductor. They were directly engaged with the audience in a way most ensembles are not. BAM!

But... they were playing Baroque and early Classical standards. It wasn't a heavy lift to commit those to memory and do the same song list at every stop on their tour.

sf105 · by **sf105** » 2023-09-15 3:27 p.m.

The Aurora orchestra just did the Rite of Spring at the BBC Proms from memory. I believe there was a pre-concert where they spread the players out in the audience. Sounds fantastic.

tbdana · 2023-09-15 4:45 p.m.

[quote="elmsandr"]Reading is...completely unnecessary.[/quote]

In extremely limited situations, perhaps. But try telling that to the conductor of a symphony orchestra. Or even a high school band.

There have been many professional bands that didn’t use a lick of printed music. Raymond Scott comes to mind (CBS orchestra, composed a lot of the songs later used in cartoons). Would it have saved him time to simply write things down and hire people who read well? Probably. But his band was pretty darned tight.

Perhaps. But Raymond Scott had a sextet, not the CBS Orchestra. And he never actually created any cartoon soundtracks. Carl Stalling adapted Scott's tunes for Warner Bros. Looney Tunes, and you can be sure he did it by writing them down, and every player in the recording orchestras read music extremely well. As one who has recorded cartoon music for Warner Bros (Tiny Toons, not the old Looney Tunes), I can tell you that reading extremely well is a prerequisite to doing that kind of work. It is misleading and unfair to use Raymond Scott's music existing in cartoons as an example of reading being "completely unnecessary."

Like all of us who have recorded music for TV including those who recorded Scott's music for Looney Tunes, the folks recording cartoon music in the videos below had no idea what music they would be playing when they woke up that morning, nor what style(s). Studio time cost thousands of dollars a minute. They had to sight read the music when they showed up to the 3-hour recording session. Imagine showing up to play this if you can't read music well! Anyone who wants to do this kind of work must be able to read flies on flypaper, and play it perfectly the first time through and exactly the same every time.

<YOUTUBE id="rh8X3UIE6hs">https://youtu.be/rh8X3UIE6hs?si=VqwNBgBcXvtPc5NW</YOUTUBE>

<YOUTUBE id="hogqcQoOlNE">https://youtu.be/hogqcQoOlNE?si=tLiWpltDrsrQ5KL_</YOUTUBE>

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2023-09-15 4:48 p.m.

In studio work now, though, most of the time the parts are sent out via PDF expressly so they don't have to sight read on the soundstage.

tbdana · 2023-09-15 4:51 p.m.

[quote="Burgerbob"]In studio work now, though, most of the time the parts are sent out via PDF expressly so they don't have to sight read on the soundstage.[/quote]

Sometimes they are. And increasingly, but not always. And still, when you open the PDF file you'd better be able to read them!

I posted those examples because of the Raymond Scott narrative. And PDFs were far less common when this was recorded. But even today, most musicians might open the PDFs and look them over for anything weird or challenging, and they might run those passages by themselves a couple times, but for the most part in practicality they still sight read them on the gig. It's not as if they sit at home and woodshed the parts on their own time, like an unpaid rehearsal, unless they know there is something unusual that they've been told to watch out for. They play it when they are being paid to play it.

Posaunus · 2023-09-15 5:05 p.m.

[quote="Burgerbob"]In studio work now, though, most of the time the parts are sent out via PDF expressly so they don't have to sight read on the soundstage.[/quote]

And the contents of the PDFs are ... READ by the players!

And then they all have their PDFs in front of them as they record on the soundstage.

Can't happen without music reading skills.

GGJazz · 2023-09-15 5:20 p.m.

Hi all .

I think that a musician have to be able to play both by memory and sight reading .

If you are performing solo works ( like the Tomasi Concerto) , or playing improvised solo with a jazz 4et ( in which you choose the tunes you want to perform) , I think playing by memory is the best choice.

If you play in Symphony Orchestra , or in a Big Band , ecc , a prerequisite is that you have to be a very very good reader .

Sometimes you have to play in some last-minute substitution , so you arrive on stage , open the book , and the show starts . People call you for this kind of work only if you are very very very good at sight reading music charts ...

So , I think that both things , reading music and playing by memory , have to be developed at the high level you can .

Regards

Giancarlo

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2023-09-15 5:20 p.m.

well... yes. As I said already, you have to be able to read, and you have to listen a lot. You're not going to play any style correctly if you can read everything but don't listen a ton too. The reason the Incredibles soundtrack sounds so great is because everyone recording it knows what to do to the music instinctively, because they are so aware of the styles they are asked to emulate.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2023-09-15 7:03 p.m.

[quote="Burgerbob"]well... yes. As I said already, you have to be able to read, and you have to listen a lot. You're not going to play any style correctly if you can read everything but don't listen a ton too. The reason the Incredibles soundtrack sounds so great is because everyone recording it knows what to do to the music instinctively, because they are so aware of the styles they are asked to emulate.[/quote]

Of course this is true. You have to understand whether you're playing a Bach chorale, a 1040s swing tune, a polka, or a funk chart, and you have to know what the musical differences are between them. Aside from being able to read the notes on the page, we always have to know what universe we're playing in.

But to me, this is separate from being able to read music, and we should not conflate the two. Knowing how to read and knowing how to play a style are two different things which, like being able to play the notes and knowing the keys, are ingredients for the finished musical stew.

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2023-09-15 7:13 p.m.

Yup! That's why i want kids to do both.

To be clear, it also weirds me out when advanced high school students ask for recordings for etudes they are working on for all-state, etc. This happens ALL the time on the trombone reddit and the trombone discord.

But I can't say that I would probably be a better player now if I had heard a professional playing through it a few times, if not for the notes, then for the style and sound.

ithinknot · by **ithinknot** » 2023-09-15 8:23 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]a 1040s swing tune[/quote]

Is that when you tripletize your tax return?

elmsandr · by **elmsandr** » 2023-09-15 10:15 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]

In extremely limited situations, perhaps. But try telling that to the conductor of a symphony orchestra. Or even a high school band.[/quote]
Would work just fine with the right band leader.. perhaps if we had more that worked this way we would still be a dominant music form. Try sitting in a jam session and asking for lead sheets for everything. I agree that you need the right tools for the right situation in reality, but when discussing the way the world “should be”, I reject that constraint.

Perhaps. But Raymond Scott had a sextet, not the CBS Orchestra. And he never actually created any cartoon soundtracks. Carl Stalling adapted Scott's tunes for Warner Bros. Looney Tunes, and you can be sure he did it by writing them down, and every player in the recording orchestras read music extremely well. As one who has recorded cartoon music for Warner Bros (Tiny Toons, not the old Looney Tunes), I can tell you that reading extremely well is a prerequisite to doing that kind of work. It is misleading and unfair to use Raymond Scott's music existing in cartoons as an example of reading being "completely unnecessary."

Might want to look up Scott…. He had a a weekly radio show with the CBS Orchestra (a big band) for MANY years. It was a thing. Really. The whole thing about not writing it down gets a paragraph in his wiki! His tunes were made to be popular, and they were. The band was tight and the sound is good to this day. The cartoon reference was just so you knew that this was a real person and a real band. Sure, Stalling transcribed them for use by Warner Bros, but others used Scott’s own recordings. I think the example of leading one of the premier gigs in all of music at the height of the big band era is a decent example.

Like all of us who have recorded music for TV including those who recorded Scott's music for Looney Tunes, the folks recording cartoon music in the videos below had no idea what music they would be playing when they woke up that morning, nor what style(s). Studio time cost thousands of dollars a minute. They had to sight read the music when they showed up to the 3-hour recording session. Imagine showing up to play this if you can't read music well! Anyone who wants to do this kind of work must be able to read flies on flypaper, and play it perfectly the first time through and exactly the same every time.

…

Dunno, he did his way… got away with it for years and recorded the living daylights out of his life and rehearsals to boot…. There are different ways to get to the same thing. There are millions of folks who can pick up a guitar and improvise and pick their way around folk songs and pop tunes for hours at a campfire. Many of them can’t read printed music at all. Heck, as a species we’ve made music for eons with the vast majority of that time where virtually all of the population was completely illiterate. Reading a common notation makes it easier, but it isn’t the only way to get to our ends.

FWIW, I’m a great reader. I also think that an overemphasis on the reading part gets in the way of making an auditory experience for others part sometimes. People are particularly interested in watching others read. There’s a reason most theatrical performances don’t involve the actors reading from the script onstage. Getting a bit far over my skis here on how far I want to defend this position. In general, one must be able to read quickly and proficiently to have any success on the trombone…. But perhaps not always and I think we could learn from the examples that succeed other ways.

Cheers,

Andy

brassmedic · by **brassmedic** » 2023-09-16 3:53 a.m.

[quote="Burgerbob"]In studio work now, though, most of the time the parts are sent out via PDF expressly so they don't have to sight read on the soundstage.[/quote]

If you're lucky.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2023-09-16 4:01 a.m.

Playing from memory doesn't contradict the premise that being able to read music is fundamental. I guarantee you that anyone playing a concerto in front of an orchestra has learned the piece from a score and not by ear...

harrisonreed · 2023-09-16 8:41 a.m.

As if you can't study the score WITH a recording.

The whole reason I took issue with the premise of this thread is that it is pretentious to look down on a young kid asking how a piece of music goes and expecting them to immediately be able to deduce that from looking at the solo part or their individual "Trombone 2" part . For those All State competitions you usually don't get the piano part. And I guarantee you that 9/10 high school trombone players don't play the piano anyways.

You can do both.

For example, the exact same situation as the OP -- I often go and work with kids for this sort of thing, doing a basic un-masterclass on the District solo piece. Maybe it's Barat, Andante/Allegro. Well, the first thing I'm going to do is hear what they've worked on, especially if it's a small class. Then after we've heard some of the kids playing, I'll run the piece myself with piano accompaniment (if I've sequenced it).

This is usually eye opening for the kids. Ohhh that's how it goes! It's not just that the kids can't read the solo part notes. They usually can. They just have no idea how the piece goes because they don't play piano, and the piano part (or band score) is 90% of "how the piece goes". You guys seriously can't be suggesting that the average high school kid is supposed to read the conductor's score or piano reduction without listening to the piece somehow.

Some here are talking about how acoustic or band music is diminishing. Yet when a young kid reaches out for help on how to play something, because they are interested in getting better, we look down on them. What the heck.

(Edits are for dumb typos, only)

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2023-09-16 8:52 a.m.

Listening to a piece for interpretation is one thing. Great classical soloists listen to other interpretations of a piece for ideas for their own interpretation.

On the other hand, if you can't work out 'how the piece goes" from the sheet you will be at a disadvantage for times where you are not told in advance what is to be played.

AndrewMeronek · by **AndrewMeronek** » 2023-09-16 9:22 a.m.

[quote="officermayo"]What's going on in our schools?[/quote]

To circle around to the OP, the question is not just about being able to read music. It's about what should be taught in our school music programs, which is a bit different from what people would have to deal with on gigs.

Imagine an algebra class that is entirely spoken, where students don't write down the formulas or even the Arabic numerals. Or a science class where students talk about trends and patterns but never have to actually draw or read a plot.

Ozzlefinch · by **Ozzlefinch** » 2023-09-16 11:11 a.m.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]Playing from memory doesn't contradict the premise that being able to read music is fundamental. I guarantee you that anyone playing a concerto in front of an orchestra has learned the piece from a score and not by ear...[/quote]

Say that again and a little louder so that the people in the back can hear it.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2023-09-16 11:16 a.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]As if you can't study the score WITH a recording.

The whole reason I took issue with the premise of this thread is that it is pretentious to look down on a young kid asking how a piece of music goes and expecting them to immediately be able to deduce that from looking at the solo part or their individual "Trombone 2" part . For those All State competitions you usually don't get the piano part. And I guarantee you that 9/10 high school trombone players don't play the piano anyways.

You can do both.

...

Some here are talking about how acoustic or band music is diminishing. Yet when a young kid reaches out for help on how to play something, because they are interested in getting better, we look down on them. What the heck.[/quote]

I'm in 100% agreement with this post.

I don't think anyone is saying don't listen to recordings, don't use recordings to understand a piece. My understanding of this thread is that it began with lamenting the inability to read, with people then saying that reading music is unnecessary and even that school bands would be better off if taught their parts by ear, and then others came in to push back against that notion.

In case I've mislead anyone in my rather strong opinions on reading, let me be clear: We need to use every appropriate tool in the tool box to help students make good music and become good musicians. Reading is fundamental to that. But so is learning styles, understanding context, hearing other people interpret the same or similar things, etc.

I don't think anyone is saying that reading is the only skill students should have. Reading is vital, but I can make the argument that learning to play by ear is also vital. These skills must all be learned; we don't learn one to the exclusion of the others.

I've always believed that to be a good musician you have to be good at everything your instrument does. You have to play the entire horn well, you have to read, you have to play by ear, you have to know every style, etc. You're not a good musician if you can only do one thing.

Ozzlefinch · by **Ozzlefinch** » 2023-09-16 11:27 a.m.

If you can't "figure out how it goes" from a written score, then that means you need more training and education on the basics of rhythm, chords and scales.. The entire purpose of a written score is to communicate "how it goes" without having to listen to it first - same as any other written language. How you end up performing the piece is open to interpretation.

And with that, I've said everything I'm going to on the subject. But remember, none of you had someone tell you how my words "go", you read and understood them all by yourself. Pretty cool, isn't it?

Doug_Elliott · by **Doug_Elliott** » 2023-09-16 3:13 p.m.

~~[size=200]~~^^^^^^^^^^

Bach5G · 2023-09-16 5:07 p.m.

I have to admit that, on occasion, such as reading 16th note phrases à la Tower Of Power, it is easier to play a phrase once you’ve heard it, than trying to suss it out based on what is written.

Doug_Elliott · by **Doug_Elliott** » 2023-09-16 6:18 p.m.

A lot depends on the notation that was chosen by the arranger... There are ways to write rhythms clearly so they CAN be read easily. Note spacing, flags or bars, articulations...

Anybody remember the Andre LaFosse School of Sightreading books? Messy manuscript with lots of clef changes. That taught you how to sightread anything.

Cmillar · by **Cmillar** » 2023-09-16 11:04 p.m.

[quote="Doug Elliott"]A lot depends on the notation that was chosen by the arranger... There are ways to write rhythms clearly so they CAN be read easily. Note spacing, flags or bars, articulations...

- For sure, plus a big factor can be the actual music notation font that is used for the genre of music.

Music note fonts and the history of music copying is a fascinating study all to itself. Classical fonts versus commercial 'hand-written' fonts, etc. etc.

NY trombone players will know a friend of mine, music copyist Russ Anixter (part of Rice/Anixter Music Services).

Those guys developed their own font I believe back in the '90's to use with Finale for all their Broadway and other work. I think their font has obtained 'cult status' and is hard to get hold of.

(I like the 'Rhapsody' font for Sibelius. You can get it from Philip Rothman and NotationCentral. A nice 'hand-written' old-school LA/NY studio /Broadway / Clinton Roemer type look to it; as if the music was copied and the text written with a Pelikan fountain pen (Remember those?)

Anybody remember the Andre LaFosse School of Sightreading books? Messy manuscript with lots of clef changes. That taught you how to sightread anything.[/quote]

- Yeah! Love the etudes where he'll write the same note on different clefs within the same bar! Those pieces are eye/brain twisters.

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2023-09-17 10:55 p.m.

It is interesting, yet unsurprising, that the credibility of a piece of music can depend on the notation font it is in.

A jazz "chart" needs to have the hip, hand-copied look but if you're wanting the philharmonic to perform your new concerto for garden implements and orchestra it needs to have the most prestigious-publishing-house-engraved appearance to it possible.

It shouldn't matter but it does.

Someone should make a font for fake books that looks like a tenth-generation photo-copy.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2023-09-18 1:19 a.m.

[quote="robcat2075"]It is interesting, yet unsurprising, that the credibility of a piece of music can depend on the notation font it is in.

A jazz "chart" needs to have the hip, hand-copied look but if you're wanting the philharmonic to perform your new concerto for garden implements and orchestra it needs to have the most prestigious-publishing-house-engraved appearance to it possible.

It shouldn't matter but it does.

Someone should make a font for fake books that looks like a tenth-generation photo-copy.[/quote]

In my experience this isn't true. The "manuscript look" for Jazz scores is disliked by many and not a recommended practice anymore for new charts.

Yes, if you want the philharmonic to play your piece, it needs to be well-engraved, to a professional standard. Nothing elitist about it, it's for practical reasons. Well-engraved material is easier to read without making mistakes, the information is conveyed more accurately, clearly and efficiently. It should matter, and that's why it does.

The availability of Sibelius, Finale and now MuseScore gave everyone the tools to make good editions, but the software being so good now sadly also gives everyone the wrong idea that merely inputing notes into the software is what making an edition is about. Preparing material at a professional level is an artform in itself, with its own set of good practices and conventions.

Doug_Elliott · by **Doug_Elliott** » 2023-09-18 1:45 a.m.

I have known some copyist manuscript that is far easier to read than any computer font, unless it is meticulously edited and well spaced. Which is rarely done.

Incidentally, "Jazz Font" was written and developed by Rich Sigler, one of the trumpeters in the Airmen of Note during the first year or two we were both in the band. At the time, big band and jazz players were totally accustomed to reading manuscript much more that engraved music. Mike Crotty, the arranger for the Note at the time, would frequently be hand copying his new charts immediately before a recording session or during breaks on gigs. Mike's manuscript was so good you almost couldn't make reading mistakes.

officermayo · 2023-09-18 8:54 a.m.

Sat in with the Coosa Phat Katz Saturday - because I was taught to read.

<LINK_TEXT text="https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/u4e8p266 ... 15x51&dl=0">https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/u4e8p266astivi41ygd3u/CPK-0916123.MOV?rlkey=clyrv32rtv2ljcyd3jwx15x51&dl=0</LINK_TEXT>

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-09-18 10:00 a.m.

I think the font is extremely important -- if well-engraved in the right font, you are getting a ton of information about how you are supposed to play the chart. A BQ I play in just had some "professional" arrangements come in for "jazz" charts. All engraved in the standard Finale font. It's hard to read. If it says "swing" or "bop", use an appropriate font and size. We saw this in Japan, too. The bands there love big band stuff arranged for wind ensemble, and they also love the lame Finale font. Somehow our joint group would always swing better on our charts, which were in jazz font and engraved properly. The Japanese charts sounded square, because you were missing the tiny details you get from the spacing and use of flags in well engraved jazz font charts.

The new style NOLO brass band charts don't use "jazz font", but that doesn't bother me because that style of music isn't played like big band music. It's not pretending to swing.

Jimprindle · by **Jimprindle** » 2023-09-18 10:47 a.m.

Probably been said, but lots of practice and lots of methods, etudes, solos, ensembles, and a solid grasp of music theory. When I was at Cal State Northridge the jazz band director (Joel Leach) was chair of the NAJE new music committee. We would start each rehearsal sight reading 20 or so charts he had been been sent by publishers. We would read 25-50% of each tune while he recorded to send to the rest of the committee. By the end of that semester that band could read anything and make it sound like it had been rehearsed. Word got out and LA arrangers (Nestico, Menza, Bellson and others) would bring in their new things to hear how they sounded. Savvy Joel Leach would say, “Sure, as long as as you give it to us for our book.” That and other experiences sharpened my reading and helped to make me 1st call in my area (all styles) in my 50 year career.

BYW, Gordon Goodwin was an undergrad in that band and always bringing in his “experiments” as well as full charts.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2023-09-18 11:24 a.m.

[quote="Jimprindle"]Probably been said, but lots of practice and lots of methods, etudes, solos, ensembles, and a solid grasp of music theory. When I was at Cal State Northridge the jazz band director (Joel Leach) was chair of the NAJE new music committee. We would start each rehearsal sight reading 20 or so charts he had been been sent by publishers. We would read 25-50% of each tune while he recorded to send to the rest of the committee. By the end of that semester that band could read anything and make it sound like it had been rehearsed. Word got out and LA arrangers (Nestico, Menza, Bellson and others) would bring in their new things to hear how they sounded. Savvy Joel Leach would say, “Sure, as long as as you give it to us for our book.” That and other experiences sharpened my reading and helped to make me 1st call in my area (all styles) in my 50 year career.

BYW, Gordon Goodwin was an undergrad in that band and always bringing in his “experiments” as well as full charts.[/quote]

Blast from the past! I remember Joel Leach. He was at CSUN when it was still called Valley College. Lotta good players went through that band. (I was recently gifted with a music stand stamped CSUN, which I'm told found its way off campus 35+ years ago when Joel Leach was still there.)

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2023-09-18 5:08 p.m.

I agree the font shouldn't matter. I'm going to set the text for my next sacred oratorio in Comic Sans.

I'd be curious to hear from people who are playing very recently-composed musicals.

When I was playing in pit ensembles for musicals the parts all had the same hand-scribed look. It was not easier to read but you felt like you were touching a piece of Broadway every time you turned a page.

Those were all old warhorses, like "Oklahoma" and "Music Man", that had been around for decades, however.

What does modern "Broadway musical" music look like now? Surely they are setting it on computer now. Are they still keeping the "pit orchestra" look?

Wilktone · by **Wilktone** » 2023-09-19 10:52 a.m.

It seems as if everyone here agrees that reading is a fundamental skill that needs to be learned. Of course, there are some fine musicians who never learned to read and get by very well. By and large, however, you will severely limit your abilities if you go that route. Again, that doesn't seem to be controversial.

Teaching sound before sight is the standard for working with young students, for what it's worth. That doesn't mean that elementary school students don't learn how to read music, just that it comes after they learn how to mimic the sounds.

Sight reading skills can be developed by simply sight reading a lot, but if you target the component parts of sight reading you can develop sight reading abilities faster.

Learning scales and chord arpeggios solidly is extremely helpful. Sure, there's atonal music, but by and large music is made up of scale and chord fragments. Having scales and chord memorized is great, of course, but in order to recognize the patterns by sight you should also practice reading them from time to time.

Learning rhythmic patterns is the other side of sight reading. There are some books and etudes that are designed to practice rhythmic patterns (and other sight reading skills). Learning a lot of different pieces is also a good way to practice reading. If you're just sight reading them, you need to go back and work on fixing your mistakes too. Sight reading in a rehearsal or on a gig is good practice, but if you're making mistakes you don't get the chance to fix them. That's what individual practice time is for.

I don't think anyone has yet mentioned transcribing as good practice for learning to sight read. If you spend a lot of time working out how to notate something from sound to paper then you're going to assimilate those patterns faster than simply trying to learn to read them first. It goes back to sound before sight. It's not just a good way to practice for young students, but it does need to be balanced with reading and writing music.

Personally I don't care what the font is, as long as it is notated appropriately with a good layout. To me, making sure that the rhythms are correctly beamed and notes are spaced appropriately is more important than if the font looks handwritten or engraved or whatever.

Dave

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2023-09-19 12:25 p.m.

To follow Dave on learning to sight read well, a good thing to do is to practice (1) reading as many notes at once as possible, and (2) reading as far ahead as possible.

1. Reading as many notes at once as possible.

Lots of folks, especially students, tend to read one note at a time. That's like reading a book one letter at a time. The more info we can understand at once, the easier it will be. With English, we start learning words by sounding out each letter, but we graduate to reading entire words at once, then entire phrases. We can do the same thing with music. And like Dave alluded to, recognizing patterns and fragments of scales and arpeggios can take us a long way in the journey to read big clumps of notes at once rather than one note at a time.

2. Reading as far ahead as possible.

We're at a reading advantage if we can read ahead of where we are playing. And it's really not that hard, once we kind of get the hang of it. We can practice this progressively. Start by reading one note ahead, then two beats, then one measure, two measures, four measures... Learning to read ahead lets us get passages in our head before we have to actually play them. No surprises! And it expands our view so that we're understanding and "hearing" multi-bar phrases rather than just the note or couple notes we're playing, and that enhances our context and understanding. It gives us time to figure out hard passages before we get to them. Also helps with page turns, finding signs and codas, watching the conductor for cues, etc. Reading ahead takes away the "tight rope" experience of sight reading and makes the experience much more relaxed.

These two techniques work in tandem to enhance the whole sight reading experience. Each technique makes the other easier, and a gestalt is attained.

dbwhitaker · by **dbwhitaker** » 2023-09-23 1:29 p.m.

This topic made it into the NY Times today in an opinion piece: <LINK_TEXT text="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/23/opin ... =url-share">https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/23/opinion/teach-music-better.html?unlocked_article_code=zqKvlW9FQBV_-r3WG16TJuS0oJcnGA5wb7Kt3Rl4kcJOXi02iBctNoVbirqAdgMwTukERQ_hFzRamr9AiXn2W4WiUPANIRJpFgWj5m_PsxVByOzpbqBmbTqGUPbvt_NpnkqQ2JmiSbak1LdUMiceRHSJE2zANIQgUfCxfC9gILcpzs5k_GqgoPpJoL9iLhfLfbgDSvVtSfwRxpLGxcsxlrw6tNakhWzH0ol22iMiX3RGbKvBH6XiXaQil59kmV4GIap-0u_7va36sFXqpl-78sxMvea37OpY1tR7txvc3K3rQalJm3u6-aJz--vAviuusDQMs-k8OjvA82M&smid=url-share</LINK_TEXT>

Excerpts:

We need to abandon that approach and bring play back into the classroom by instructing students how to hear a melody on the radio and learn to play it back by ear...

...we need to let kids be terrible. In fact, we should encourage it.

GGJazz · by **GGJazz** » 2023-09-23 8:45 p.m.

Hello all.

I think ( and hope) this thread' topic " Reading is Fundamental" was referred to serious intermediate/ advanced students , and to who want to become a professional musician . For these players , reading ( very well) is a must , in my opinion . Regardless the Music' style they perform .

To me , with absolute beginners , is much better to start without sheet for some months , then gradually introduce them to reading . Also in theory class , a better start could be singing , clap hands on simple rhythms by ear , listen basic chord' quality and recognize it , listen different kind of music , ecc , then introducing the written music very slowly .

About the NY Times article , I do not much agree with it , because it seems to me that the writer want to find a guilty in a supposed "common wrong way to teach music" . There were teachers that also 60 years ago was teaching a play-by-ear approach as a fundamental thing , also in classical music . To me , the main problem is the TEACHERS' quality ! I sadly can say that quite a few teachers are people that can barely strum their instrument , or fresh graduated students , with no experience at all . So , these people can just put a sheet in front of the student , and good luck..

Also , i do not agree with the statement " we need to let kids be terrible" ...

Regards

Giancarlo

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2023-09-28 3:29 p.m.

[quote="dbwhitaker"]This topic made it into the NY Times today in an opinion piece: <LINK_TEXT text="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/23/opin ... =url-share">https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/23/opinion/teach-music-better.html?unlocked_article_code=zqKvlW9FQBV_-r3WG16TJuS0oJcnGA5wb7Kt3Rl4kcJOXi02iBctNoVbirqAdgMwTukERQ_hFzRamr9AiXn2W4WiUPANIRJpFgWj5m_PsxVByOzpbqBmbTqGUPbvt_NpnkqQ2JmiSbak1LdUMiceRHSJE2zANIQgUfCxfC9gILcpzs5k_GqgoPpJoL9iLhfLfbgDSvVtSfwRxpLGxcsxlrw6tNakhWzH0ol22iMiX3RGbKvBH6XiXaQil59kmV4GIap-0u_7va36sFXqpl-78sxMvea37OpY1tR7txvc3K3rQalJm3u6-aJz--vAviuusDQMs-k8OjvA82M&smid=url-share</LINK_TEXT>

Excerpts:
<QUOTE>We need to abandon that approach and bring play back into the classroom by instructing students how to hear a melody on the radio and learn to play it back by ear...

...we need to let kids be terrible. In fact, we should encourage it.[/quote]
</QUOTE>

How does that work in any other subject. Math? Science? Reading?

But if you had heard my beginner band or just about any other in this country you wouldn't worry that there was some shortage of freedom to be terrible for kids.

I read that op-ed. I think we could go through every paragraph of it and point out an assertion that is either inaccurate, misleading or impractical.

Kids learn best when they’re part of communities filled with people of all skill levels for them to play along with, listen to music with, mess up with and just be silly with. Parents, this means you. Don’t let instrument instruction simply be something you nag your kids to endure. Music was never meant to be a lonely vigil. Play together. Make noise together. Find joy together. Take out an instrument and learn a song that you and your child both love.

He's invented the Suzuki Method! But impractical in a school band program.

I wonder if the writer is aware that he's regurgitating notions from an (unfortunately) influential 1970s book ~~[url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/42924062?typeAccessWorkflow=login]~~"Schools Without Failure". Whatever its good intentions, it tended to get implemented as classes without grades and assignments without goals. Exploring and experiencing was good enough somehow.

The recurring aspect of these discussions about how to better-do Music Education is a lack of certainty as to what it is for. Is it for...

Awareness?

Enjoyment?

Participation?

Discipline?

Self-expression?

Mental development?

Physical fitness?

Performance skill?

Public exposure?

Individual empowerment?

Team thinking?

Diversion from idleness?

Rehabilitation?

School spirit?

Community service?

Travel?

Contests?

Any of those, in various combinations, have been touted as reasons for a school band program. Some music educators would have you think that they will all be accomplished.

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2023-10-01 10:54 a.m.

Apropos of the above discussion... learning by ear v. learning by music... is this letter/horror story to the Slippedisc blog from a university teacher of a string instrument:

~~[url=https://slippedisc.com/2023/09/dear-alma-the-college-wants-me-to-give-a-concert-and-i-cant-just-cant/][color=#800000]~~Dear Alma, The college wants me to give a concert and I can’t. Just can’t

... I grew up in the Suzuki Method, and my teacher was very specific. She would keep me on pieces for a very long time, meticulously working on details. I moved away from Suzuki when I was 16. I got into a solid music school for college but was absolutely overwhelmed by learning any new repertoire. Orchestra was a nightmare. I just sat in the back and faked it...

The whole tale is so extreme I find it implausible, but there it is.

officermayo · by **officermayo** » 2023-10-09 5:59 p.m.

Another request from a high school student asking "Can you play this for me?" on this audition prepared piece.

Bet his band got all "ones" at last month's marching band contest.

BrassSection · by **BrassSection** » 2023-10-09 8:24 p.m.

As most of my “Music” is a chord chart, reading actual music for me is rare, maybe an occasional ensemble or piano/euph duet with my daughter. During Covid when most schools and churches were closed, my trumpet playing high school grandson and I would practice his band music several times a week together here at home to keep our chops in shape. 99% of my actual music reading is bass clef, so here I am sight reading treble clef trumpet music. Ok, not too bad first day, but after a few days it all came back to me. Point: At least for me, use it or lose it, just like your chops. Daughter playing in her old high school alumni band soon,French horn. Took a look at her music, figured it right out. Practice I use various studies and scales, mostly memorized from repetition. Usually I practice on trumpet, if trumpet works everything else seems easy…since I’m mostly using chord music, practice is generally in bass clef even on trumpet, so a Bb is truly a Bb to my ears. If I haven’t played TC for awhile, within the first measure it easily comes back, even for trombone. Joked with my trumpet buddy that I use the same practice music for trumpet and tuba, I just turn trumpet music upside down!

AndrewMeronek · by **AndrewMeronek** » 2023-10-10 6:57 a.m.

On a slightly different take:

Who has invited friends over to sight-read trombone quartet charts? That can be tons of fun, and the more ridiculous the parts, the more fun!

It's a bit of work to set up for a large ensemble, but more school bands/orchestras should have a sight-reading session every once in a while, just to have fun.

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2023-10-10 8:15 a.m.

You know you are in trouble when they have problems reading the Bach Chorales.

I remember in High School we had a day with individual rehearsals and I had a copy of the Peeters quartet borrowed from the library. I invited 3 section mates to sit and read with me. All of a sudden the sound got weird. I had the 1st part that was all in tenor clef (which I could read), but the guy on 2nd didn't read tenor clef and when the part went into tenor clef he was still reading it as bass clef! There's a problem when you don't have people skilled enough to play the parts they have.

timothy42b · by **timothy42b** » 2023-10-10 8:42 a.m.

[quote="officermayo"]Another request from a high school student asking "Can you play this for me?" on this audition prepared piece.

[/quote]

That's a bit lazy, I think. If I couldn't read it, I'd type it into a notation program and hit playback. Probably take 5 minutes.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-10-10 10:43 a.m.

[quote="officermayo"]Another request from a high school student asking "Can you play this for me?" on this audition prepared piece.

Bet his band got all "ones" at last month's marching band contest.[/quote]

Not everyone is cut out for it I guess. That is a very easy thing to sight read, but not every kid is like that. Some are privately taught and educated, and others are forced to do it. There have always been people who just like music but aren't good at it, too.

Why are you still hating on kids, lol? We're heading into a half century where the will be drastically less kids than you grew up with. Each one will be working much harder than you or I had/have to to support an aging population. They're going to be pretty precious.

<YOUTUBE id="LBudghsdByQ">~~[media]~~https://youtu.be/LBudghsdByQ?feature=shared</YOUTUBE>

officermayo · by **officermayo** » 2023-10-10 11:10 a.m.

1. Not hating on kids. Now band directors? That's another issue.

2. This is not sight reading, but given to the student in advance of their audition.

We keep lowering the standards and this is the result.

3. Future demographics have nothing to do with the current situation. Let's keep it on topic, shall we?

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-10-10 1:09 p.m.

I mean, the general discourse of this topic is basically the age old complaint that the younger generation is not up to snuff like kids in the "good old days" used to be. Fair enough if you're aiming the disappointment to the directors, but I keep reading mostly comments about kids asking for help, not band directors. Would you rather the kid reach out for help on how to play an audition piece or just have them not care at all?

I think future demographics are important to this discussion, since it already has been comparing the current dominant generation with the current younger generation thoughout all three pages of posts. We are headed to a society that will be composed of mostly 60+ year old people complaining about how kids in high school aren't up to snuff in any given field, or how they were taught differently when they were kids, and how things used to be better in the good old days. Except in this case, the 60+ year old people will be the majority of the population. I'm sorry, but this is not going to make anyone want to play ancient acoustic music or learn to read it off a page.

The way to keep kids interested and get them to want to learn to read music, and keep any sort of connection at all with the old people they will have to support is probably.... to have the older generation demonstrate how the piece is played and help them out.

We are already past the point in time where acoustic music is relevant to any measurable percentage of American society. I think what we're seeing in schools is a response to that -- we still have band because that's what we've always done, and not everyone can play basketball. The directors will keep kids in however they can because that is their job and participation is tied to keeping their job. And best case, that's assuming the kids aren't like the ones in that video on the other thread (physical fighting, etc, during rehearsals). Some school band programs are apparently like zoos, if those videos are even halfway accurate.

So... it could be that the system of learning by rote and keeping it "fun" is already the superior alternative to being a zoo keeper.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2023-10-10 5:56 p.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]I mean, the general discourse of this topic is basically the age old complaint that the younger generation is not up to snuff like kids in the "good old days" used to be. Fair enough if you're aiming the disappointment to the directors, but I keep reading mostly comments about kids asking for help, not band directors. Would you rather the kid reach out for help on how to play an audition piece or just have them not care at all?

[/quote]

Hey, we agree on something. :)

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2023-10-10 6:03 p.m.

Part of this exercise (the one officermayo posted) is to see if the student can "figure out" how it goes on his own. I think we should teach him/her how to work out the piece, marking beats and playing VERY slow but in time. Just demonstrating how you would play it sorta bypasses the intent.

Now I have no problem playing an etude or lick in a piece to demonstrate how it should sound, but this still should be aimed at having the student recognize a pattern and associate notes on a page with sounds.

Wilktone · by **Wilktone** » 2023-10-12 11:13 a.m.

I'm not sure that I agree that this is suddenly more of a problem than before, but perhaps it is. There are many pressures on band directors and unfortunately many have to quantifiably justify their programs to their administration. That means contest awards and trophies. Not to mention the emphasis on marching band performances for half the school year, which requires the entire band to memorize their music as quickly as possible.

Sure, many band students aren't getting as much reading instruction and practice. For those of you who aren't band directors, what advice would you give a less-experienced band director to help get students reading more? Imagine a hypothetical scenario where the fall semester is devoted to marching band, concert band starts in January and runs to the summer. I have my own thoughts here, but I'm curious what some of you come up with.

I think most band directors are doing the best they can under the circumstances they have been given.

Dave

officermayo · by **officermayo** » 2023-10-12 12:03 p.m.

[quote="Wilktone"]I'm not sure that I agree that this is suddenly more of a problem than before, but perhaps it is....[/quote]

My perspective is from spending a lot of time with HS and 1st year college students. I do realize that a only small percentage of HS band students will pursue higher musical education, but we don't send kids to college to study literature who cannot read. Why do it to musicians?

This is not an isolated occurrence.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-10-12 1:45 p.m.

I would question the intent of a college admitting a Freshman into a music program who cannot read music. I'd also question the HS counselor or parent who is not doling out a heaping portion of realism and skepticism to anyone applying for a music degree, let alone a HS kid who didn't learn to read music or take private lessons of their own accord (as in, begging to take private lessons and taking them seriously).

There is no shortage of qualified applicants to music school these days. Some have said the level is higher now than it has ever been.

Doug_Elliott · by **Doug_Elliott** » 2023-10-12 2:23 p.m.

College and even high school is far too late to be getting good at reading. It's a language like any other and pretty much requires early learning to be effective.

I almost never have occasion to read alto clef these days, but I learned tenor and alto when I was in 8th grade and still can read it fairly fluently

Kbiggs · by **Kbiggs** » 2023-10-12 2:48 p.m.

I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately. Sorry for the rant:

I recently started playing in a community college concert band (helping the director, who’s a friend). I was initially surprised that of the 7 trombones, 4 of them have some degree of difficulty reading the music (one other community member, and one student who has no difficulty), and with basic technique. Some of the tell-tale signs: marking parts with position numbers rather than notes; stopping to find one’s place while the rest of the band plays; slow slide movement or “fishing” to “find the notes”; etc. That’s to say nothing about breathing, embouchure, right hand posture, tone quality, intonation, phrasing, etc.

I have to remind myself:

*These 17 to 20-year-olds have spent about 3 years under quarantine or partial quarantine. A significant period of their early musical developed was playing via zoom, FaceTime, etc.;

*I am 60, and have +/- 48 years of musical experience, roughly 45-50 more years than they do;

*Only one of them (the one student) is a declared music major; the rest are undeclared, acquiring credits for transfer, or are pursuing an AA or a certificate;

*This generation grew up just after 9/11/01. They’ve grown up knowing that the US is always in a state of war. They’ve grown up with the squeeze of the middle class, and the celebration of rich, wealthy people (and pretenders to rich and wealthy) flaunting their wealth. They’ve grown up with constant political polarization, and a million other little things.

*They’ve grown up with the internet as the norm—which is something no other generation has experienced. Gutenberg’s press, Pony Express, telegraph, telephone, etc., pale in comparison to the power, attractiveness and deception of what’s on the interwebs. It has instant gratification and ever-present source of entertainment, distraction, and escape.

These kids look and behave different because they ARE different.

(For those who grew up during WWII or Vietnam, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are different: They have been a constant source of news and a drain on personnel and resources for 20+ years. While the Vietnam war seemed (and was) long and dragged on forever, active US involvement was about 15 years, from 1961 to 1976. Yes, news on the war was broadcast at night on the TV, which is completely different from the 24/7 news cycle and it’s parade of horribles.)

Most importantly:

*They are doing the best they can.

Yes, I wish they could read and play better. Yes, I get frustrated (internally) when I see one of them fishing for notes, and just barely reading the music. My job while playing in this band is to get along with them (be friendly and approachable), play my part as well as I can, be an example for them, and—if they ask or it’s glaringly apparent—provide information about better reading and playing earned from experience.

Kbiggs · 2023-10-12 2:52 p.m.

I think we all agree that both reading and playing by ear are fundamental regardless of what kind of music you’re playing. (Folk musicians are an exception that proves the rule. So are The Beatles.) Those of us with more experience are obliged to help those with less experience. But most important of all: we have to get along, regardless of skill level.

Yes, it’s hard playing music with kids, and teaching them when their skills are deficient. I also know and believe that these kids (and a lot of other kids with deficient musical, math, reading, or other skills) don’t want to fail. They don’t want continue to play while sounding bad. They don’t like being put into a position where they won’t have some measure of success, whether it’s a C- or an A+. They don’t want to experience inadequacy, disappointment, or shame. Just like the rest of us.

Their motivation (if there really is such a thing as motivation, but that’s another post) may be to fill time in their schedule, obligation (parental, teacher, or peer pressure), or something else. But does it matter? No—they are right in front of you, asking for help (even though it may not look like it at times).

Regardless of someone’s developmental stage or skills acquired as a music student, I believe it’s important for those of us who teach (or who are in a position to teach by example) to encourage them to read better, and to stress the importance of both reading AND listening AND playing by ear.

***

End of rant.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-10-12 3:08 p.m.

[quote="Kbiggs"]I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately. Sorry for the rant:

Some of the tell-tale signs: marking parts with position numbers rather than notes; stopping to find one’s place while the rest of the band plays;
[/quote]

This is me reading tuba parts in my current ensemble on bass trombone. Sometimes I want to just flip the music upside down. It would probably be better.

JohnL · by **JohnL** » 2023-10-12 10:23 p.m.

[quote="Wilktone"]Imagine a hypothetical scenario where the fall semester is devoted to marching band, concert band starts in January and runs to the summer.[/quote]
Around here, the high school football regular season is over by the end of October (October 27 is the cutoff this year), but field show comps run into the second week of November (11/11 this year). Once that's done, they're into concert band and working on holiday music. If the football team goes deep into the playoffs, that might extend marching season, but only for a handful of schools.

I used to work as a computer tech at a high school. If I got tired of hearing the field show music by the third week of school, I hate to think how tired some of the kids got of it over a whole season.

Cmillar · by **Cmillar** » 2023-10-16 10:42 a.m.

Controversial, but here it is....

There are a lot of music/band teachers out there who are just not very good at what they do.

In an ideal world, no one should be allowed to teach band unless they have some experience outside of just growing up in high school band/marching band, playing in college band/marching band, and then getting a teaching gig without ever having done any other music jobs in their short life. (...or without even leaving their home town in order to see that there actually is a wider musical world out there.)

There are many, many, many music teachers out there that just don't have any 'real world' experience. And, unfortunately due to cutbacks in educational spending, too many 'music teachers' have to try to teach everything and every instrument, most of which they don't know anything about.

And, worse, many music teachers don't know that they could probably bring in some outside musician/teachers to at least do a masterclass/group lesson once in awhile.

Too many music students having nothing to relate to as far what their instrument could possibly even sound like, and they just learn their marching band music by wrote or from memory.

A lot of music/band directors 'live' for marching band and other music competitions throughout the year.

The students actually just learn to play a couple of pieces of music during the year, and they play them to death in order to sound perfect at a festival competition. They just end up memorizing the music and aren't introduced to very much music at all.

That's a huge weakness in the 'music education system'.

Sure, there are a few enlightened music educators out there who have a balanced view of the music world.

As I see it.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-10-16 10:58 a.m.

[quote="Cmillar"]

In an ideal world, no one should be allowed to teach band unless they have some experience outside of just growing up in high school band/marching band, playing in college band/marching band, and then getting a teaching gig without ever having done any other music jobs in their short life. (...or without even leaving there home town in order to see that there actually is a wider musical world out there.)
[/quote]

Those numbers don't add up. It's not a one for one, zero sum game like apprenticeship was in the Renaissance. There are far more people who want to do art (music) than people who get paid to do art, and even if there were enough jobs in the arts to produce teachers for every program, a lot of times those people aren't going to stop making art just to take a teaching position as a qualified candidate.

For that matter, a teacher in any position could be in the same boat. Imagine if the requirement to teach physics at the college level was that you needed to have worked at CERN for a few years. The only positions that would be filled would be at MIT and schools at that level, where they could still be researching, and they would really have to pay well to attract the qualified staff.

The key with music is that it almost entirely on the student, not the teacher, to get to whatever level they have the potential to achieve. I think that's the case for any field. You don't become an astronaut working for NASA because your teacher went out of their way to teach you even when you you wanted to be lazy. You become an astronaut because you weren't lazy, not even one single day, and challenged your teachers every day.

Cmillar · by **Cmillar** » 2023-10-16 11:05 a.m.

I'm just saying "in an ideal world" for music education as it is in US/Canada (what I've seen and know)

VJOFan · by **VJOFan** » 2023-10-16 11:39 a.m.

This thread started with an observation that it seemed weird that a person would post sheet music and ask, "How does this go?"

I don't think the question necessarily reveals anything about the fluency of the reading of the asker. As has been acknowledged, there is a difference between accurately transferring notated pitches and rhythms to sound, and playing a piece with full fidelity to stylistic or composer intent.

(I still don't know why a digital native wouldn't just google it and find 25 interpretations- but that probably is more about getting validation on social media.)

The question put me in mind of the summer after first year university when I was preparing for my jury to get into the performance stream. I had a stack of repertoire and no idea what any of it was. I was also 500 miles away from my teacher or a music library where I could get information. I laugh when I think of preparing that great Baroque sonata by Hindemith. I desperately needed to aske someone, "How does this go?"

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2023-10-16 12:22 p.m.

[quote="Cmillar"]Controversial, but here it is....

There are a lot of music/band teachers out there who are just not very good at what they do.

In an ideal world, no one should be allowed to teach band unless they have some experience outside of just growing up in high school band/marching band, playing in college band/marching band, and then getting a teaching gig without ever having done any other music jobs in their short life. (...or without even leaving their home town in order to see that there actually is a wider musical world out there.)

There are many, many, many music teachers out there that just don't have any 'real world' experience. And, unfortunately due to cutbacks in educational spending, too many 'music teachers' have to try to teach everything and every instrument, most of which they don't know anything about.

...

The students actually just learn to play a couple of pieces of music during the year, and they play them to death in order to sound perfect at a festival competition. They just end up memorizing the music and aren't introduced to very much music at all.

That's a huge weakness in the 'music education system'.[/quote]

That kind of begs the question: What is the purpose of music education in schools? Is it to groom future professional musicians? Is it to survey music and give students a chance to dip their toes in the water, without any real expectations from them? What exactly should be the goal of a school music program, and does that require fluency with reading music?

Serious music students need a vehicle to launch them into college with a music scholarship. A future electrical engineer benefits from a glimpse into a part of the world he will never experience after HS. Is one of those the purpose? Or both? Or neither?

If 90% of HS music students never intend to do anything with music (performance or education) beyond HS marching band, should the teacher or students really care whether or not they can read music? And should anyone care whether the teacher has real life experience as a performer in the music business?

tbdana · 2023-10-16 12:35 p.m.

At a local college, the music department chair (a friend of mine) has brought in three professional musicians to fill holes and stack performance ability in its jazz ensemble. One of the student trombone players in our section can't functionally read music. He doesn't practice, he doesn't have a teacher, and he's "just there to have fun." He's not interested in learning to read music well.

That college also pays some of us to fill principal positions in its symphony orchestra, bringing us in for the last couple rehearsals and the performances. Some of the folks in that orchestra can't read, either. One trumpet player just seems to sit there and fart out a few notes now and then in random places, and gives up once he realizes he's screwed it up. The conductor just pretends not to hear, and spends no time trying to bring that trumpet player along, leaving any improvement up to the ringer hired to play principal.

How important is it that these students read music? And if they can't, what are the professors to do about it?

I'll tell you that both of these professors are talented, knowledgeable, experienced musicians, with real world experience. Indeed, the conductor of the school symphony is not only paying me to play in it, he has gotten me onto gigs this upcoming holiday season that he usually does, because he has conflicts. And the jazz ensemble professor works as a saxophonist and flautist, and is also music director for a local musical theater company, where he plays piano and conducts the orchestra. These guys are real world musicians.

But what the heck are they supposed to do with those students who in college still can't read music but are in the music program? What is it we're expecting from these teachers?

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2023-10-16 12:38 p.m.

They're almost definitely not music majors.

Doug_Elliott · by **Doug_Elliott** » 2023-10-16 12:50 p.m.

If those students were in any other curriculum they would be expected to do SOMETHING, but music is just a fun activity so they get to do nothing.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-10-16 1:29 p.m.

I mean, there is no real objective way to quantify the quality of music. So as long as people keep paying money to be in the music program, they will keep "teaching" them. Who are the teachers telling kids to find a new calling? I'm sure they exist but they are probably rare. And the ones in programs where they would tell you to take a hike are probably at schools like NEC and Juilliard. The bar to enter is already really high, and if you aren't working out there are hundreds of others waiting for a slot.

Cmillar · by **Cmillar** » 2023-10-16 9:22 p.m.

From having been a music 'sub-teacher' as well as a guest conductor/masterclass/teacher at a lot of middle schools and high schools over the years, what I see more and more is that music and art classes are becoming the 'dumping grounds' for kids that might otherwise be sent home for poor behavior or that don't have the academic standards to choose anything that might require actual 'reading/writing' for another class.

So, kids that don't have any patience, that don't have any aptitude for respect and listening to teachers, that don't respect their fellow students, that don't respect how to treat school equipment, etc. etc. ...are sent to the band room, and most of them end up becoming percussion majors because they get to make some noise. (Art teachers have the exact same problems, except the damage to their computers and other equipment is sometimes even worse)

On the bright side, a few of those kids actually find out that they like music and music will could actually help change a few lives here and there and turn their attitudes around.

But anyways...that's just another reason why a lot of US/Canadian music students can't read (or don't want to bother) to read music. They're just thrown into a music program where the band director has to deal with what he or she is given.

The public music education system needs some work, and district art/music supervisors should do some actual consulting with their band directors to help make things better in some areas.

Half the kids just treat music as a joke class in order to get a passing grade at something.

JohnL · by **JohnL** » 2023-10-17 2:40 a.m.

[quote="tbdana"]But what the heck are they supposed to do with those students who in college still can't read music but are in the music program?[/quote]
Are they in the music program (i.e., majoring in music) are they just taking music classes?

In a situation where a class is just barely making the minimum enrollment to avoid being cancelled, any warm body is welcome - even one who basically just occupies space.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2023-10-17 10:36 a.m.

[quote="JohnL"]<QUOTE author="tbdana" post_id="222737" time="1697474118" user_id="16498">But what the heck are they supposed to do with those students who in college still can't read music but are in the music program?[/quote]
Are they in the music program (i.e., majoring in music) are they just taking music classes?

In a situation where a class is just barely making the minimum enrollment to avoid being cancelled, any warm body is welcome - even one who basically just occupies space.
</QUOTE>

Yeah, as far as I can tell, they're just taking music classes. They can't possibly be music majors....I hope! LOL!

Doug_Elliott · by **Doug_Elliott** » 2023-10-17 11:38 a.m.

Maybe not so different from voice majors who were only there because they had a nice singing voice and knew nothing about music. They were always the worst at sight singing and anything related to theory.

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2023-10-18 10:38 p.m.

In a discussion elsewhere on the web someone made the point that music notation is one of the defining characteristics of western music.

The ability to write it down such that it can be duplicated, distributed, learned, performed, preserved, rediscovered... without absolutely needing to hear it from another performer... is something that sets western music apart from and bestows upon it great possibilities that other musical traditions, wonderful though they may be, didn't have.

If you're not reading music you are locked out of part of what has made the music what it is.

.
[quote="JohnL"]<QUOTE author="tbdana" post_id="222737" time="1697474118" user_id="16498">But what the heck are they supposed to do with those students who in college still can't read music but are in the music program?[/quote]
Are they in the music program (i.e., majoring in music) are they just taking music classes?

In a situation where a class is just barely making the minimum enrollment to avoid being cancelled, any warm body is welcome - even one who basically just occupies space.
</QUOTE>

At my college one of the music profs was a freshman advisor to randomly assigned incoming students. If any of them admitted to ever playing any instrument they got signed up for music theory 101 to satisfy their music requirement.

They were completely at sea, having to read and write music on the first day.

officermayo · by **officermayo** » 2023-10-20 7:05 p.m.

Perhaps this would be useful.

VJOFan · by **VJOFan** » 2023-10-26 5:21 p.m.

This is amazing! A primary music teacher could go to town with this and a box of rhythm instruments.

JohnL · by **JohnL** » 2023-10-26 8:33 p.m.

Ham-bur-ger for triplets.

SGH · by **SGH** » 2023-10-27 11:53 a.m.

I knew a beginner program that used “pie”.

Works well

Pie

Apple pie

Coconut pie

Strawberry pie

Huckleberry pie

Chocolate pie

Wilktone · by **Wilktone** » 2023-10-30 9:44 a.m.

Using rhythmic solfege is an excellent way to help students learn to read rhythms better. The music teachers at the elementary school that hosts the El Sistema program I direct uses the following rhythmic solfege, so we do as well to be consistent.

<ATTACHMENT filename="Takadimi_Syllables_(companion_to_rhythm_guide_I).pdf" index="1">~~[attachment=1]~~Takadimi_Syllables_(companion_to_rhythm_guide_I).pdf</ATTACHMENT>

A former teacher for us used this food-based approach with her bucket band students to develop the students' rhythmic fluency. It worked very well.

<ATTACHMENT filename="music-notes-rhythm-guide.jpg" index="0">~~[attachment=0]~~music-notes-rhythm-guide.jpg</ATTACHMENT>

The basic idea with these approaches is to learn the sound of the rhythm and develop the connection with how it looks on the paper. Our students don't just learn how to read these rhythms, they also get taught how hear it and then write it down. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, learning to transcribe notes and rhythms is excellent reading practice and is something that isn't often emphasized enough.

Dave

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2023-10-30 12:13 p.m.

I dunno, but after looking at that chart, I'm hungry! :D

Doug_Elliott · by **Doug_Elliott** » 2023-10-30 12:37 p.m.

Chart? I thought it was a menu.

JohnL · by **JohnL** » 2023-10-30 2:04 p.m.

I'd avoid the use of "chocolate" (yeah, I know, I love chocolate, too). Some people pronounce all three syllables, so there's the potential for confusion (even worse for those in whose native language it has four syllables).

brassmedic · by **brassmedic** » 2023-10-30 10:15 p.m.

[quote="JohnL"]I'd avoid the use of "chocolate" (yeah, I know, I love chocolate, too). Some people pronounce all three syllables, so there's the potential for confusion (even worse for those in whose native language it has four syllables).[/quote]
"Harvey Wallbanger" would work.

Wilktone · by **Wilktone** » 2023-10-31 10:54 a.m.

[quote="JohnL"]I'd avoid the use of "chocolate" (yeah, I know, I love chocolate, too). Some people pronounce all three syllables, so there's the potential for confusion (even worse for those in whose native language it has four syllables).[/quote]

In my experience this isn't an issue. 5-10 year olds are quite capable of following the correct number of syllables. Maybe some adults would have trouble, but young students are much more adaptable than most of us give them credit.

VJOFan · by **VJOFan** » 2023-10-31 11:17 a.m.

Ta Ta ti ti ta tiri tiri ti ti ta.

How many of us are good with that?

AtomicClock · by **AtomicClock** » 2023-10-31 12:56 p.m.

[quote="VJOFan"]Ta Ta ti ti ta tiri tiri ti ti ta.

How many of us are good with that?[/quote]

I had to google it.

Oslide · by **Oslide** » 2023-10-31 1:10 p.m.

[quote="VJOFan"]Ta Ta ti ti ta tiri tiri ti ti ta.

How many of us are good with that?[/quote]

Easy-peasy for great tits (Parus major). In springtime, they do it all day long.

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2023-10-31 5:14 p.m.

This food thing substitutes learning one rhythmic analog for another, but is it superior?

Some students will learn by it, but will more learn better or faster by it?

It's not self-explanatory, all those rhythms will still have to be demonstrated and matched to a phrase.

Many do not mimic natural speaking rhythm. For example, consider that most people saying "hot dog" will say it as two eighths (downbeat upbeat) rather than the two quarters (downbeat, downbeat) in the chart.

Consider also that this chart presents not one analog for two eighths, but... eleven!

Is there something fatally flawed about one and two and...?

ithinknot · by **ithinknot** » 2023-10-31 5:52 p.m.

[quote="robcat2075"]This food thing substitutes learning one rhythmic analog for another, but is it superior?

Some students will learn by it, but will more learn better or faster by it?[/quote]

I raised exactly this point with a music teacher when I was 6.

No opinions were changed, but I did learn just how much a particular type of adult appreciated feedback.

Wilktone · by **Wilktone** » 2023-11-01 9:03 a.m.

[quote="robcat2075"]Some students will learn by it, but will more learn better or faster by it?[/quote]

In my experience it is a great way to teach young students rhythms, particularly if you are following the "sound before sight" approach that is generally considered the best approach at that age.

The "food solfège" I posted is simply a step in the process that might be used in teaching young music students how to read rhythms. You're essentially creating lyrics for rhythmic figures that the students can latch onto in order to understand how those rhythms sound and eventually learn to associate the written notation for the aural result. Once those associations are connected they are no longer needed. And if you're concerned that some people use more syllables than others for some words or start the word naturally on the upbeat or other some such worries, it's not an issue. Young music students are very capable of learning to sing songs with lyrics that have shortened words or melismas, as well as rhythmic pacing that is different from natural speech.

Most importantly, it turns learning how to read and play rhythms more fun. The food associations are something that young students can relate to and easily remember. You don't need to stick with these rhythms, have the students make up their own words. That gives them even more of a personal connection to what they're learning.

If you don't work with young students, your millage may vary. But I sometimes bring out this idea to older students (or even use it myself) when I'm tasked with playing something using quintuplets (I think to myself, "u-ni-ver-si-ty") or septuplets (I think of one of my alma maters, "Ball-State U-ni-ver-si-ty"). Try it sometime.

Dave

Wilktone · by **Wilktone** » 2023-11-01 9:11 a.m.

[quote="VJOFan"]Ta Ta ti ti ta tiri tiri ti ti ta.

How many of us are good with that?[/quote]

[quote="AtomicClock"]

I had to google it.[/quote]

I guess you guys didn't take Elementary Music Methods in college? You've probably at least heard of Kodaly.

<ATTACHMENT filename="Screenshot 2023-11-01 at 9.09.42 AM.png" index="0">~~[attachment=0]~~Screenshot 2023-11-01 at 9.09.42 AM.png</ATTACHMENT>

Ta Ta Ti-ti Ta, Ti-ri-ti-ri Ti-ti Ta (rest)

Not hard once you know what means what.

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2023-11-01 11:42 a.m.

For any who haven't encountered it, here is the "traditional" system:

<ATTACHMENT filename="countingTraditional.png" index="0">~~[attachment=0]~~countingTraditional.png</ATTACHMENT>

How is this not "solfege"? It is syllables used to demonstrate the rhythms.

How is this less teachable? It is a simple pattern.

How is this less instructive? It embodies counting and subdivision of the beat, concepts we want to be learned.

How is it less consistent? Two eighths, for example, will always have the same construction regardless of what precede or follow them, not 11 different possibilities.

ithinknot · by **ithinknot** » 2023-11-01 2:44 p.m.

<ATTACHMENT filename="the universal language.jpg" index="0">~~[attachment=0]~~the universal language.jpg</ATTACHMENT>
Simple or syncopated... sorted.

[quote="Wilktone"]when I'm tasked with playing something using quintuplets (I think to myself, "u-ni-ver-si-ty")[/quote]

... but /ˌjuːnɪˈvəːsɪti/ has an internal stress or protorhythm that disrupts even subdivision.

You don't say /oneːtwoˈthreeːfourːfive/ by default.

I guess I'm just wary of educational processes that involve some degree of replacement or retirement further down the line. You know from the embouchure side of things how difficult substitutions can be, whether of concept or practice... not to mention the extent to which supposedly neutral or generic propositions often prove to influence people in surprisingly distant (and/or counterproductive) ways.

Of course I don't actually think this stuff is harmful (even if as a child I found it a self-evident waste of time), and of course teaching contexts vary enormously, and a larger toolkit is always advantageous... but to make a serious point... I spent several years teaching in the Anglican choral world, which is unusual in being a score-based tradition where the default outcome at premier institutions is that children can sightread at a professionally reliable level before the age of 10 and are routinely performing highly complex and atonal music on relatively minimal rehearsal. In that context, there was always value in breaking things down to component parts, but I honestly can't think of any situation where there was a routine need to overlay a purely external/substitute element. Inevitably, singers would remember certain difficult passages in conjunction with the text setting, but that's reflective of memory formation... it wasn't how they got it right in the first instance.

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2023-11-01 4:10 p.m.

[quote="ithinknot"]I guess I'm just wary of educational processes that involve some degree of replacement or retirement further down the line. ...[/quote]

I'm with David and Rob (almost) all the way on this one. I learned to count the old-fashioned way (one and two and ...), and it's worked well for me. But my daughter started Suzuki violin at the age of four and found substitutions (e.g. Miss-is-sip-pi Hot Dog) helpful - for a year or two. Then she also learned to count.

timothy42b · by **timothy42b** » 2023-11-02 8:22 a.m.

[quote="ithinknot"]<QUOTE author="robcat2075" post_id="223942" time="1698786851" user_id="3697">
This food thing substitutes learning one rhythmic analog for another, but is it superior?

Some students will learn by it, but will more learn better or faster by it?[/quote]

I raised exactly this point with a music teacher when I was 6.

No opinions were changed, but I did learn just how much a particular type of adult appreciated feedback.
</QUOTE>

And from that you learned a better way to respond, when the time came for you to be the adult. Probably a better lesson than any of the others you got from that person.

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2023-11-02 9:13 a.m.

Talking about using words for rhythms, my teacher used to call the dotted eighth - sixteenth - eighth (like in Wagner's "Ride") the "Amsterdam rhythm" since you say Amsterdam in approximately the right cadence. I still remember that, and it's been 60 years.

Wilktone · by **Wilktone** » 2023-11-02 9:41 a.m.

[quote="robcat2075"]How is this not "solfege"? It is syllables used to demonstrate the rhythms.[/quote]

Without looking up a strict definition of "solfège," (maybe it technically is supposed be made up of syllables that are not actual words), I would say it is.

How is it less consistent? Two eighths, for example, will always have the same construction regardless of what precede or follow them, not 11 different possibilities.

It's fine. I learned from the traditional method. I think the advantages that Kodaly, Takademi, or other rhythmic solfège styles have over the traditional rhythmic approach is that downbeats are always the same syllable, rather than having to change them to sound whatever beat the downbeat happens to fall on. I find that sometimes when I count out rhythms with the traditional method that it's hard to keep the downbeat numbers straight. I can still sing the rhythms correctly, but screw up the numbers I call out.

If you get into meters with 7 beats you would need to shorten that number to "s'ven" in order to squeeze it into one syllable, but I doubt that would really become an issue enough to worry about it.

The food thing, on the other hand, is not meant to be the ultimate approach. It's meant to be a way to help students connect with what they are learning in a fun way. What elementary (or even high school) student wouldn't want to think about ice cream and soda? And as a launching point for them to create their own lyrics to fit music they are learning it works well too. I've had students compose their own songs for "bucket band" (drumsticks on buckets) just by asking them questions like what they did over the weekend. "I went to two birthday parties!"

<ATTACHMENT filename="Screenshot 2023-11-02 at 9.24.26 AM.png" index="0">~~[attachment=0]~~Screenshot 2023-11-02 at 9.24.26 AM.png</ATTACHMENT>

Using lyrics over solfège is just meant to help make what they are doing more meaningful and offer some sort of connection beyond nonsense syllables. It helps impart an internal motivation (this is fun) for learning music, which is much more effective than an external one (pleasing the teacher, parent, etc.).

[quote="ithinknot"]<QUOTE author="Wilktone" post_id="223988" time="1698843819" user_id="220">
when I'm tasked with playing something using quintuplets (I think to myself, "u-ni-ver-si-ty")[/quote]

... but /ˌjuːnɪˈvəːsɪti/ has an internal stress or protorhythm that disrupts even subdivision.

You don't say /oneːtwoˈthreeːfourːfive/ by default.</QUOTE>

Well so does "disgraced cosmonaut," but we can still learn to associate the rhythm and lyrics together.

Inevitably, singers would remember certain difficult passages in conjunction with the text setting, but that's reflective of memory formation... it wasn't how they got it right in the first instance.

Exactly, using lyrics to help teach rhythms is designed to help them form a mnemonic for what they happen to be playing. Maybe you start with those, maybe you pull them out with your middle school band when they are having trouble playing a certain rhythm together. It's just a tool to stick in the box, I wouldn't recommend that anyone rely completely on this system as the end goal.

[quote="timothy42b"]<QUOTE author="ithinknot" post_id="223944" time="1698789162" user_id="9763">

I raised exactly this point with a music teacher when I was 6.

No opinions were changed, but I did learn just how much a particular type of adult appreciated feedback.[/quote]

And from that you learned a better way to respond, when the time came for you to be the adult. Probably a better lesson than any of the others you got from that person.
</QUOTE>

One of my job duties with MusicWorks (El Sistema program for primarily elementary school students) is to pull disruptive students out of classes and help them regulate their behavior so they can rejoin their group for the lesson. I often find it amazing how different the student's understanding of why I was asked to talk with them is from the actual reason. Often it's not what the student wanted to do or say, but the way they did it (e.g., interrupting the teacher multiple times when they were supposed to be listening silently).

And I don't trust my own memories from when I was 6. I'm not saying that what you experienced didn't happen, ithinknot, but that your recollection of exactly what went down, how it went down, and why it went down is filtered through your mind at the age of 6. In the process, you came to a determination that may or may not be accurate.

Maybe rhythmic solfege is indeed a waste of time, as you suggest. Having used it "in the trenches" for a while now, I disagree.

Dave

ithinknot · 2023-11-02 11:30 a.m.

[quote="Wilktone"]Maybe rhythmic solfege is indeed a waste of time, as you suggest.[/quote]

The assertion wasn't general - I said *I* found text substitutions a waste of time at that age - all of which was in relation to the fundamental question (emphasis added):

[quote="robcat2075"]Some students will learn by it, but will more learn better or faster by it?[/quote]

I would further distinguish between the word substitutions (cute, and then potentially distracting) and the more obviously structured methods like Takadimi. I agree about tripping over beat numbers in the traditional method, though of course you can easily just substitute "beat" or your favorite monosyllable, or expand/physicalize the exercise with clapped beats/spoken divisions, etc etc.

As concerns my recall of personal legend, it's possible you might have read a little too much into that vignette, which happened to have been non-public and non-confrontational... though doubtless I must have been an intolerably ~~[url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDNgmdGMpuY]~~chippy little autodidact.

[quote="timothy42b"]<QUOTE author="ithinknot" post_id="223944" time="1698789162" user_id="9763">
No opinions were changed, but I did learn just how much a particular type of adult appreciated feedback.[/quote]
And from that you learned a better way to respond, when the time came for you to be the adult. Probably a better lesson than any of the others you got from that person.
</QUOTE>

Yup... prior to school, I hadn't experienced children being spoken to "like children", and the adults I knew didn't interpret curiosity as challenge.

Even at that age, "because that's how I was taught" or "because I said so" seemed obviously... let's say... ill-equipped. There appeared to be plenty of teachers for whom any given Method was more lifebelt than springboard.

Having subsequently been involved in providing music education to that same age group, and met and worked alongside a higher caliber of professional educator, those responses strike me as tragically missed opportunities.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2023-11-02 12:12 p.m.

[quote="BGuttman"]Talking about using words for rhythms, my teacher used to call the dotted eighth - sixteenth - eighth (like in Wagner's "Ride") the "Amsterdam rhythm" since you say Amsterdam in approximately the right cadence. I still remember that, and it's been 60 years.[/quote]

Yup. Teachers still use that.

AtomicClock · by **AtomicClock** » 2023-11-02 12:54 p.m.

I have to think about dotted-eighth - sixteenth in order to figure out how you guys are saying Amsterdam. It's just three equal syllables to me!

I never learned any of these methods directly, although I picked up the conventional method after being in band classes for several years. Are we talking about teaching people to interpret written rhythms (which I learned directly, without any sort of solfege), or are we taking about recognizing large patterns, like the way we read words instead of letters? I could see that still being a valuable skill to learn, even now as an adult.

I like that 'university' idea. I don't think I've ever played a proper quintuplet.

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2023-11-02 2:55 p.m.

A recurring problem with these discussions is not much of this validated in any rigorous way.

We each have a system that we successfully learned by or prefer over another or can construct cogent arguments for but...not much has been done in the way of properly designed studies to ascertain if any is superior to the others.

[quote="Wilktone"]One of my job duties with MusicWorks (El Sistema program for primarily elementary school students) is to pull disruptive students out of classes and help them regulate their behavior so they can rejoin their group for the lesson.[/quote]

Damn!

I wish I had had a guy like that when I was teaching band! I think you could make almost any system work if there was a remedy for disruptive students that wasn't taking up class time.

[quote="AtomicClock"]I have to think about dotted-eighth - sixteenth in order to figure out how you guys are saying Amsterdam. It's just three equal syllables to me![/quote]

Yeah. I think this is problem with using existing words. We don't all time them exactly alike. To me, "Amsterdam" is a 6/8 rhythm...

<ATTACHMENT filename="amsterdam68.jpg" index="0">~~[attachment=0]~~amsterdam68.jpg</ATTACHMENT>

But not always...
<ATTACHMENT filename="amsterdamMorey.jpg" index="1">~~[attachment=1]~~amsterdamMorey.jpg</ATTACHMENT>

Wilktone · by **Wilktone** » 2023-11-03 9:56 a.m.

[quote="ithinknot"]The assertion wasn't general - I said *I* found text substitutions a waste of time at that age - all of which was in relation to the fundamental question (emphasis added):[/quote]

Thanks for the clarification. And also the brief mention of your experience teaching - I was wondering how many of us posting here have actually implemented some of these ideas. But I had been left with the (erroneous) impression that you made up your mind about a pedagogical technique at the age of 6, partly due to a negative interaction with a teacher. I'm still not entirely certain I understand your criticism of using text to teach rhythms, though.

[quote="robcat2075"]A recurring problem with these discussions is not much of this validated in any rigorous way.[/quote]

Yesterday while I was stuck waiting for 20 minutes I started to poke around online for research on teaching rhythms. Most of the stuff I found with a cursory internet search was at least 20 years old, some over 100 years old. It's been looked at, but I haven't done any serious look at the literature. I will post a link to a relevant article below, the literature review seems to do a good job describing prior research.

[quote="robcat2075"]We each have a system that we successfully learned by or prefer over another or can construct cogent arguments for but...not much has been done in the way of properly designed studies to ascertain if any is superior to the others.[/quote]

I don't think that I'm being very clear. These different approaches to teaching reading and playing rhythms (counting number with "and," "uh," etc./rhythmic solfege, putting text to rhythms) are not exclusive to each other. We can (and probably should) use all three. We haven't even mentioned kinesthetic reinforcement (very good with young students who want and need to move around more than older students). Look up Dalcroze and Eurythmics as some codified examples. I don't think we need to rely exclusively on one or a couple of these approaches, they all work together and reinforce each other.

One thing I did notice when I was scanning research was a pilot study that looked at comparing a couple of approaches ~~[url=https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ852405.pdf]~~teaching 1st graders (6 year olds) to read rhythms. The paper makes a very good point that as students (in U.S., at least) don't typically start learning division in math until 3rd grade, teaching rhythms by using the quarter note as the beat and then subdividing is more confusing than teaching how to add rhythms. It's just a pilot study, however, and more research would be needed. It's a compelling argument, though.

Dave

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2023-11-03 1:16 p.m.

[quote="Wilktone"]

I don't think that I'm being very clear. These different approaches to teaching reading and playing rhythms (counting number with "and," "uh," etc./rhythmic solfege, putting text to rhythms) are not exclusive to each other.... I don't think we need to rely exclusively on one or a couple of these approaches, they all work together and reinforce each other.[/quote]

To you and I, these methods have much in common.

I don't get the sense that the evangelists for a system... Kodaly, for example... are like-minded.

One thing I did notice when I was scanning research was a pilot study that looked at comparing a couple of approaches ~~[url=https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ852405.pdf]~~teaching 1st graders (6 year olds) to read rhythms. ... It's just a pilot study, however, and more research would be needed. It's a compelling argument, though.

Interesting... I skimmed through it... their "additive" group did better in some fashion... but it leaves many uncertainties as to what was taught and tested.

This is the subdivision method? It's possible there is better way to teach subdivision than what they chose.

<ATTACHMENT filename="phants.jpg" index="0">~~[attachment=0]~~phants.jpg</ATTACHMENT>

The paper makes a very good point that as students (in U.S., at least) don't typically start learning division in math until 3rd grade, teaching rhythms by using the quarter note as the beat and then subdividing is more confusing than teaching how to add rhythms.

While they may not be learning the math operation of division of any arbitrary number by any other arbitrary number, 1st graders are certainly able to deal with concepts like "half" and "between" and "up" and "down".

The division of quantities on paper is a rather different notion than the division of time... in real time.

But I'm not advocating teaching music notation reading, elephants or otherwise, to first graders anyway. I'm not sure they are a good sample for this test.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2023-11-03 4:49 p.m.

I'm sorry, but I'm laughing at a bunch of this. I'm not a great or special human being, and I and everyone I grew up with learned rhythms the old fashioned way, by just the actual notes used in exercises and etudes. How is that kids these days need food and elephants and all that nonsense? This is crazy1

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2023-11-03 4:50 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]How is that kids these days need food and elephants and all that nonsense? This is crazy1[/quote]

And there it is... "kids these days"

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2023-11-03 6:08 p.m.

When I was a kid in 4th grade (late Pre-Cambrian Era) we all learned to play the Flutophone, a rather obnoxious cousin to the soprano recorder. We learned all the easy tunes kids grow up on: Hot Cross Buns, Twinkle Twinkle Little Star, etc. No complex rhythms there. Sure, we had some kids who couldn't figure out where to put fingers and how to play 4 quarter notes in a row. None of them grew up to be musicians; mostly they found some other skill and learned to capitalize on that.

Kids who had some musical aptitude were put in 5th Grade Band. We played easy stuff like Greensleeves (badly). We learned to read music, but nothing complex. Most of the kids in 5th Grade Band could figure out things like quarter/2 eighth (as 1/2 of a measure). We were never really challenged through elementary school so our reading skills and playing skills were well matched.

Nowadays there seem to be competitions for all grades where the kids are given challenges to sort out the good from the bad. And Band Directors find their jobs are contingent on the kids placing well in these competitions. Kids are now forced to play music written well above their reading ability. Music teachers have to find ways to break these challenging competition rhythms into manageable bits.

Since kids are McDonald's familiar, using McDonald's menu item names to describe rhythms is a good choice to help explain the competition piece. I like that. Helps shortcut the fact that the kids are reading music well above their competency range; sort of like asking an elementary school kid to read Travels with Charley. Sure some are up to that challenge, but many aren't.

bitbckt · by **bitbckt** » 2023-11-03 9:30 p.m.

This whole thread has been an ant fart away from an “old man yells at cloud” meme. “Kids these days” is the cherry on the sundae.

Hilarious. And sad.

Mostly sad.

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2023-11-03 11:49 p.m.

If you read carefully, I'm not putting any blame on the kids. They play as well as (or maybe better than) I did at their age. The change is the expectation of what they can do. Kids are still kids. Some have musical aptitude, but most do not. Expecting all of them to be special is unrealistic.

This whole thread started because a kid asked for somebody to demonstrate how to play a musical challenge. This is like asking the quizmaster to spell a word in a spelling bee. Or asking to explain an exam quiz question by giving the answer.

Kids these days are no better or worse than kids of 65 years ago; just different.

officermayo · by **officermayo** » 2023-11-04 6:38 a.m.

[quote="bitbckt"]This whole thread has been an ant fart away from an “old man yells at cloud” meme. “Kids these days” is the cherry on the sundae.

Hilarious. And sad.

Mostly sad.[/quote]

As the OP I will tell you that's incorrect. The bottom line is that kids are not being taught to read music. The thread's title might apply to you.

atopper333 · by **atopper333** » 2023-11-04 8:31 a.m.

Having been one of those ‘kids these days’ not to long ago…I can attest that in my time in school, I was taught how to count rhythms in beginning band, as I had an awesome band director. I went to a high school band which was mainly focused on marching. The director was a great leader, but didn’t get into teaching those basics. We relied on each other to count out the rhythms. When concert season came around…I struggled with sight reading as I couldn’t lock in a piece until I tried to play through it a dozen times.

It got better with exposure to constantly reading new charts in Jazz, and then going on to getting comfortable reading and playing music for the first time in a church group. My point with this is…it wasn’t taught as the pieces got more complex, and it wasn’t a priority unless you had your own personal initiative, and that was just over twenty years ago, when my high school band of just 150 on the field is now bigger than the four area high school bands combined…

In my opinion, it’s not a failure of the kids, and it’s not a failure of most of the educators, they are just horribly underfunded and unappreciated, and as interest in our bands locally wanes, so do the resources. It’s a vicious cycle and quite honestly, it is heartbreaking.

officermayo · by **officermayo** » 2023-11-04 1:43 p.m.

I would agree with most of what you said, but funding has nothing to do with teaching fundamentals. It costs nothing to teach kids to read music. Now, finding the time to do so when all that matters is marching season - that is a problem.

atopper333 · by **atopper333** » 2023-11-04 1:52 p.m.

[quote="officermayo"]I would agree with most of what you said, but funding has nothing to do with teaching fundamentals. It costs nothing to teach kids to read music. Now, finding the time to do so when all that matters is marching season - that is a problem.[/quote]

I would agree with you on the cost of teaching fundamentals …to me where the funding comes in is a lack of the ability to recruit at the Junior High School level to keep interest up.

I was somewhat interested in playing because my father played in his younger days prior to my birth…what sealed the deal for me was a high school band coming in with an awesome rendition of Bugler’s Holiday. Without funding, that outreach disappears. You got to get them through those doors to teach them…

AtomicClock · by **AtomicClock** » 2023-11-04 3:39 p.m.

[quote="officermayo"]Now, finding the time to do so when all that matters is marching season - that is a problem.[/quote]

Where does the emphasis on marching band come from? Certainly not the students. My friends and I all realized that marching season was an obstacle to endure in order to participate in the springtime concert band. Certainly not from the people who think school is a place for education. The parents are surely more concerned with the price tag of marching as a negative; instrument repairs, uniform purchases, etc.

Who's left? The athletic boosters? The principal's trophy case? Inability of the principal to evaluate the band director's job performance in any other way?

officermayo · by **officermayo** » 2023-11-04 3:44 p.m.

Again, I never blamed the students. Don't know why that has to be restated.

bitbckt · by **bitbckt** » 2023-11-04 4:18 p.m.

[quote="officermayo"]Again, I never blamed the students. Don't know why that has to be restated.[/quote]

Perhaps because you aren’t the only one who has expressed an opinion in this thread. The thread’s title might apply to you.

atopper333 · by **atopper333** » 2023-11-04 5:18 p.m.

[quote="officermayo"]Again, I never blamed the students. Don't know why that has to be restated.[/quote]

Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, as you were the one to make the comment and know your intent with your own words…and seeking clarification from the source is always one of the most useful forms of communication…but I read it as you felt the the problem lies in the priorities of the band program/director, not the students?

I didn’t see it as a blame the kids comment…

officermayo · by **officermayo** » 2023-11-04 5:22 p.m.

Correct.

The blame lies with the directors/programs/schools and NOT the students. They will rise to the level expected of them by those in authority. I know my students do.

officermayo · by **officermayo** » 2023-11-04 5:24 p.m.

[quote="bitbckt"]<QUOTE author="officermayo" post_id="224314" time="1699127056" user_id="12380">
Again, I never blamed the students. Don't know why that has to be restated.[/quote]

Perhaps because you aren’t the only one who has expressed an opinion in this thread. The thread’s title might apply to you.
</QUOTE>

See how I'm replying to you?

That's how you know to whom my comments are directed.

Perhaps you don't understand how internet discussions work.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-11-04 7:19 p.m.

[quote="officermayo"]It costs nothing to teach kids to read music.[/quote]

This is not true, no matter how you slice it. That's like saying it costs nothing to teach kids math or science. I'd argue it costs more to teach music to kids these days than other subjects, if you look at music and art as a "top of the food pyramid" sort of subject.

The way the media presents it, and from what I know about the world, time away from learning to *read*, period, and love learning through reading, is a HUGE cost. The discourse here concerns kids not being able to read music in high school, who might not even be reading text at a 6th grade level. They might have bigger fish to fry.

bitbckt · by **bitbckt** » 2023-11-04 8:24 p.m.

[quote="officermayo"]<QUOTE author="bitbckt" post_id="224316" time="1699129130" user_id="9927">

Perhaps because you aren’t the only one who has expressed an opinion in this thread. The thread’s title might apply to you.[/quote]

See how I'm replying to you?

That's how you know to whom my comments are directed.

Perhaps you don't understand how internet discussions work.
</QUOTE>

The irony of this is unbearable, in light of the lack of threaded response in the post which I quoted. Keep raging against the dying of the light.

atopper333 · by **atopper333** » 2023-11-05 1:34 a.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]<QUOTE author="officermayo" post_id="224304" time="1699119809" user_id="12380">
It costs nothing to teach kids to read music.[/quote]

This is not true, no matter how you slice it. That's like saying it costs nothing to teach kids math or science. I'd argue it costs more to teach music to kids these days than other subjects, if you look at music and art as a "top of the food pyramid" sort of subject.

The way the media presents it, and from what I know about the world, time away from learning to *read*, period, and love learning through reading, is a HUGE cost. The discourse here concerns kids not being able to read music in high school, who might not even be reading text at a 6th grade level. They might have bigger fish to fry.
</QUOTE>

I would agree with a lot of what you have to say…everything costs something, whether it would be money, time, energy, or something else of an intrinsic value. I really don’t think that’s arguable at all…

From my experience though, band at a high school level is an elective. As being an elective, it is voluntary for the student to participate in the program, a student’s motivation for coming to a band program can be many things…and there are many levels as to why this particular system is failing.

In order to avoid another discourse due to me not understanding in totality of what you’re saying…oh, the joys of text based communication….

Is it that you believe that as a top of the pyramid subject, it distracts students from focusing on reading at a level that is comparable to their current grade level in school?

I’d really like to take that part of the discussion on…but I don’t want make an assumption as to what you mean as to avoid another ‘tangent’ to the discussion…

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2023-11-05 8:45 a.m.

[quote="atopper333"]Is it that you believe that as a top of the pyramid subject, it distracts students from focusing on reading at a level that is comparable to their current grade level in school?

I’d really like to take that part of the discussion on…but I don’t want make an assumption as to what you mean as to avoid another ‘tangent’ to the discussion…[/quote]

Well, it might distract from learning to read and write, but my point was more about putting the [c]art before the horse, so to speak. In my mind, the the education pyramid should be something like:

Top - Art/Music

5 - Foreign language

4 - Science/physics

3 - Mathematics and Logic OR a shop class

2 - History/social studies/global studies

1 - Reading and Writing (in the national language)

Base - Social/Communication/Discourse/Home economics

One of the biggest things you learn in school is how to deal with people, and I think our schools should be doing more to teach communication, teamwork, learning to be social, and how to cook/sew/clean, etc. Japan actually has a pretty good system for teaching home economics - kids get assigned cleaning duties in the class and cooking duties in the cafeteria (it's not a class, you just do it).

After that, reading and writing opens up the world to everyone. If you can read and write at a high level, and enjoy it, you can teach yourself almost any subject without a teacher. Yet, most adults in the US can only read at the 7th grade level and about half flat-out CAN'T READ (ie actually understand) an 8th grade level fiction book. High schoolers are now graduating at an even lower level than that. For example, only about 30% of 11th graders in Illinois were considered proficient in reading on the most recent SAT.

I don't think I need to really go through the rest of my pyramid, and I'm sure others would set theirs up differently. But yeah, I think kids have bigger fish to fry these days than learning to read sheet music. I don't think it's the kids faults that they are doing so poorly either -- their parents also can't read.

Wilktone · by **Wilktone** » 2023-11-05 11:13 a.m.

I was thinking a bit more about the OP.

[quote="officermayo"]I see posts in other trombone forums at least once a week where someone posts a photo of a piece of music asking "How does this go?".[/quote]

First question, other trombone forum? I didn't realize there really was another. :P

Other experienced players will respond with links to videos. Are kids not being taught the basics of reading music? I ran into this while working at a community college. Folks with four years of high school band who cannot read.

What's going on in our schools?

But seriously, we discussed for a while whether your observations were a declining trend or not and I don't think we ever came to much of an agreement on that. One thought is that your sample population (students who ask "how does this go?") are self-selecting to post those questions online. The students who can read are busy practicing or asking different questions.

Are there students who aren't learning music literacy because they take short cuts? Sure. Sometimes it's their own choice and sometimes it's a teacher or educational circumstance that hasn't provided them with the resources to learn better. I don't think we can generalize too much here, each case needs to be addressed on its own.

[quote="tbdana"]I'm sorry, but I'm laughing at a bunch of this. I'm not a great or special human being, and I and everyone I grew up with learned rhythms the old fashioned way, by just the actual notes used in exercises and etudes. How is that kids these days need food and elephants and all that nonsense? This is crazy1[/quote]

Picture icons for teaching young students music literacy first were used in 1964. Zoltan Kodaly began developing and teaching his ideas beginning in 1925. I can't find exactly when he developed his rhythmic solfege, but it was probably in the mid-20th century. He borrowed this concept from Emile-Joseph Cheve, who died in 1864. And of course the concept of pitch solfege has been around since about 900.

These ideas are not nonsense and certainly aren't new. Those of us who went to school to study music education are likely more familiar with them, however.

[quote="officermayo"]It costs nothing to teach kids to read music.[/quote]

Other's have already pointed out the error here. It's about as true as saying, "It costs nothing to have musicians play at your event." Teachers need to pay for training and they need to be paid for their work. Not to mention that learning music literacy is more than learning how to read the notes on the page, it's about learning to play it. Musical instruments need to be purchased. Sheet music and other materials need to be purchased. The lights need to be turned on, etc.

As a rule, music classes tend to be higher costing programs than many other subjects. Particularly once you get into the university/college levels.

[quote="AtomicClock"]Where does the emphasis on marching band come from? Certainly not the students.[/quote]

I think you might be surprised at how popular marching band can be at some schools. While I never really enjoyed it (and managed to avoid it, for the most part), I know many musicians and music teachers for whom marching band was their gateway into music studies.

It's also the most visible part of the music program at most high schools. It's the ensemble that more people will see than any other group. It's the ensemble that will usually get the most participation of any ensemble in the program. There are many reasons why high school programs emphasize marching band, and a lot of them are good reasons.

[quote="officermayo"]The blame lies with the directors/programs/schools and NOT the students.[/quote]

I agree that the program and those in charge of setting it up and running it bear most of the responsibility, but sometimes it's the students. Again, I suspect that some of the students posting online "How does this go?" are just looking for short cuts. That's normal. How often do less-experienced musicians post questions about equipment, for example, hoping that a new mouthpiece or horn will help them break through their range cap?

[quote="atopper333"]From my experience though, band at a high school level is an elective.[/quote]

Yes, and many will quit music after fulfilling that elective. Some will continue to participate, but only do it for fun. Rather than focusing on the fundamentals, many of those students will do the bare minimum for achievement and focus on the social elements or whatever aspect they get from it.

[quote="harrisonreed"]One of the biggest things you learn in school is how to deal with people, and I think our schools should be doing more to teach communication, teamwork, learning to be social, and how to cook/sew/clean, etc.[/quote]

Other than the cooking/sewing/etc., music is known to teach and reinforce all of those qualities.

[quote="harrisonreed"]Yet, most adults in the US can only read at the 7th grade level and about half flat-out CAN'T READ (ie actually understand) an 8th grade level fiction book.[/quote]

There's more ~~[url=https://www.crossrivertherapy.com/research/literacy-statistics#:~:text=Nationwide%2C%20on%20average%2C%2079%25,older%20are%20illiterate%20in%202022.]~~nuance than you give credit.

Nationwide, in 2022 79% of adults are considered "literate." Yes, the average American reads at a 7th-8th grade level. Without digging deeper, I note that this statistic says "average American," not "American adult." It includes children, which is not the bulk of the population, but will still skew that average towards the lower end. Adults who don't continue to read won't maintain or improve reading skills, and there are many American adults whose lives just don't involve reading on a level that is higher.

[quote="harrisonreed"]High schoolers are now graduating at an even lower level than that. For example, only about 30% of 11th graders in Illinois were considered proficient in reading on the most recent SAT.[/quote]

If we eliminate 2020 and beyond, when the pandemic closed down schools, the ~~[url=https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=38]~~national trend for literacy has been generally improving since the 1970s. Mathematics have only experienced a downward trend during the pandemic.

Time will tell how those missing years of school will affect those students long term, but it's not fair to look at the last couple of years and draw a broad conclusion that this is a long term trend. It's already been pointed out that the pandemic has hurt musical literacy skills as well. I suspect that many of the students who are asking today, "How does this go?" are dealing with a similar pandemic slump.

I'm not sure the SAT is designed to test reading "proficiency," but is instead designed to test reading comprehension skills that are considered to be predictors of college success (there's a difference between the two). And keep in mind that the SAT is scored on a bell curve. I'm not sure where you got that 30% figure, but I suspect that's just the lower end of the bell curve. That doesn't necessarily mean that those students are not proficient readers (certainly some aren't), but that they scored below average on that particular test at that particular time. Another way to look at this is that 49% of students who took the SAT scored below average, QED.

But yes, the U.S. educational system can use some improvements. I would like to see us do better too.

Dave

afugate · by **afugate** » 2023-11-06 8:22 a.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]After that, reading and writing opens up the world to everyone. If you can read and write at a high level, and enjoy it, you can teach yourself almost any subject without a teacher. Yet, most adults in the US can only read at the 7th grade level and about half flat-out CAN'T READ (ie actually understand) an 8th grade level fiction book. High schoolers are now graduating at an even lower level than that. For example, only about 30% of 11th graders in Illinois were considered proficient in reading on the most recent SAT.[/quote]

Side Bar

To my knowledge, the SAT is not used as a proficiency testing instrument. It's likely that this actually references the NAEP/NCES reading proficiency scores. NAEP scores are generally what is discussed when one hears someone talking about reading proficiency.

To that point: A reading score of "Proficient" in the NAEP/NCES does not mean what most people assume it means. It does not mean a kid can read at grade level. Reading at grade level equates to an NAEP/NCES rating of "basic." Proficient means they read above grade level.

NAEP levels and their rough letter grade approximations are:

● Advanced: A

● Proficient: B

● Basic: C

● Below Basic: D/F

(Removes Pedant's hat)

--Andy in OKC

atopper333 · by **atopper333** » 2023-11-06 8:29 a.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]

One of the biggest things you learn in school is how to deal with people, and I think our schools should be doing more to teach communication, teamwork, learning to be social, and how to cook/sew/clean, etc. Japan actually has a pretty good system for teaching home economics - kids get assigned cleaning duties in the class and cooking duties in the cafeteria (it's not a class, you just do it).
[/quote]

I do appreciate the elaboration. On that note, I know very little about the Japanese education system. Is band integrated into learning at a certain level or is it treated as an elective? If treated as an elective, does it only become an option at a certain level or after the student shows proficiency in other subjects?

I only ask as this seems to be a way of making sure students have a certain skill set prior to them taking on tasks such as learning music, and that would make sense as the student would have demonstrated the fundamentals necessary for the task.

I guess to me, learning to read sheet music is a task which requires discipline and self initiative more than it does time in class as that was the system I was raised in, and now, with the resources available online to assist with learning, it seems to me to come down to how important is the music and the ability to understand it to the student (at any level). If it’s important…they will push themselves…if not…then not…

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2023-11-10 3:27 p.m.

[quote="Wilktone"]<QUOTE author="officermayo" post_id="219598" time="1694305616" user_id="12380">
I see posts in other trombone forums at least once a week where someone posts a photo of a piece of music asking "How does this go?".[/quote]

First question, other trombone forum? I didn't realize there really was another. :P
</QUOTE>

There are numerous trombone Facebook groups and probably on other social media also.

There is a Bass Trombone group that has 10,000+ members. Are there even 10,000 bass trombones in the world? :idk:

Quick Links

Instruments

Marketplace

Reading Is Fundamental