Does the ability of reading and writing music on staff help with learning music fundamentals?
As I see it, notation on sheet music is a tool for translating musical ideas into something that can be read/interpreted by others and played back, given they understand the same set of rules.
I assume also that the way one approaches to music or the instrument played makes thinking about music itself very different. So when it's time to write or create some music, maybe someone trained to see through the lenses of musical notation would come up with some sort of "patterns" or ideas that another person more used to digital creation would have different. It's like if the tool was shaping the craft somehow.
Some time ago I've came across a bass workshop by Victor Wooten that made me think about music in a different way. He explains music as made of 10 elements (notes, rhythm, space, dynamics, articulation...). He believes that all of these are equally important to make music, not even good or bad music, simply music, because you can find them in every melody or song.
Introduction made, now the question. On my personal journey to learn music I've tried guitar playing with no attention to music theory and after that some time in an music school. I'm not reluctant to theory, in fact I like it, but what I fail to see it's the point of making the staff the center of my learning when I don't want to be a classical nor professional interpreter.
I want to understand music, its elements and details to be able to express myself with no more limitations than my abilities. Beyond some basic knowledge of notation that certainly is good to have, is there any fundamental element that is better learned using music written on a staff? I'm thinking in rhythm but not sure.
theory notation self-learning
New contributor
add a comment |
As I see it, notation on sheet music is a tool for translating musical ideas into something that can be read/interpreted by others and played back, given they understand the same set of rules.
I assume also that the way one approaches to music or the instrument played makes thinking about music itself very different. So when it's time to write or create some music, maybe someone trained to see through the lenses of musical notation would come up with some sort of "patterns" or ideas that another person more used to digital creation would have different. It's like if the tool was shaping the craft somehow.
Some time ago I've came across a bass workshop by Victor Wooten that made me think about music in a different way. He explains music as made of 10 elements (notes, rhythm, space, dynamics, articulation...). He believes that all of these are equally important to make music, not even good or bad music, simply music, because you can find them in every melody or song.
Introduction made, now the question. On my personal journey to learn music I've tried guitar playing with no attention to music theory and after that some time in an music school. I'm not reluctant to theory, in fact I like it, but what I fail to see it's the point of making the staff the center of my learning when I don't want to be a classical nor professional interpreter.
I want to understand music, its elements and details to be able to express myself with no more limitations than my abilities. Beyond some basic knowledge of notation that certainly is good to have, is there any fundamental element that is better learned using music written on a staff? I'm thinking in rhythm but not sure.
theory notation self-learning
New contributor
1
There is a difference between sight reading and the ability to read and write music on the staff. Sight reading is the ability to play a piece as-written on the first viewing. The ability to read and write, without the skill of sight-reading, is valuable in itself. Which skill do you mean?
– David Bowling
3 hours ago
Yes, I think you should replace sight reading by reading sheet music to get the answers you are looking for.
– Albrecht Hügli
3 hours ago
Thanks, good suggestion. You both understood my point. I've edited question and description to be more precise.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
add a comment |
As I see it, notation on sheet music is a tool for translating musical ideas into something that can be read/interpreted by others and played back, given they understand the same set of rules.
I assume also that the way one approaches to music or the instrument played makes thinking about music itself very different. So when it's time to write or create some music, maybe someone trained to see through the lenses of musical notation would come up with some sort of "patterns" or ideas that another person more used to digital creation would have different. It's like if the tool was shaping the craft somehow.
Some time ago I've came across a bass workshop by Victor Wooten that made me think about music in a different way. He explains music as made of 10 elements (notes, rhythm, space, dynamics, articulation...). He believes that all of these are equally important to make music, not even good or bad music, simply music, because you can find them in every melody or song.
Introduction made, now the question. On my personal journey to learn music I've tried guitar playing with no attention to music theory and after that some time in an music school. I'm not reluctant to theory, in fact I like it, but what I fail to see it's the point of making the staff the center of my learning when I don't want to be a classical nor professional interpreter.
I want to understand music, its elements and details to be able to express myself with no more limitations than my abilities. Beyond some basic knowledge of notation that certainly is good to have, is there any fundamental element that is better learned using music written on a staff? I'm thinking in rhythm but not sure.
theory notation self-learning
New contributor
As I see it, notation on sheet music is a tool for translating musical ideas into something that can be read/interpreted by others and played back, given they understand the same set of rules.
I assume also that the way one approaches to music or the instrument played makes thinking about music itself very different. So when it's time to write or create some music, maybe someone trained to see through the lenses of musical notation would come up with some sort of "patterns" or ideas that another person more used to digital creation would have different. It's like if the tool was shaping the craft somehow.
Some time ago I've came across a bass workshop by Victor Wooten that made me think about music in a different way. He explains music as made of 10 elements (notes, rhythm, space, dynamics, articulation...). He believes that all of these are equally important to make music, not even good or bad music, simply music, because you can find them in every melody or song.
Introduction made, now the question. On my personal journey to learn music I've tried guitar playing with no attention to music theory and after that some time in an music school. I'm not reluctant to theory, in fact I like it, but what I fail to see it's the point of making the staff the center of my learning when I don't want to be a classical nor professional interpreter.
I want to understand music, its elements and details to be able to express myself with no more limitations than my abilities. Beyond some basic knowledge of notation that certainly is good to have, is there any fundamental element that is better learned using music written on a staff? I'm thinking in rhythm but not sure.
theory notation self-learning
theory notation self-learning
New contributor
New contributor
edited 2 hours ago
miquecg
New contributor
asked 3 hours ago
miquecgmiquecg
112
112
New contributor
New contributor
1
There is a difference between sight reading and the ability to read and write music on the staff. Sight reading is the ability to play a piece as-written on the first viewing. The ability to read and write, without the skill of sight-reading, is valuable in itself. Which skill do you mean?
– David Bowling
3 hours ago
Yes, I think you should replace sight reading by reading sheet music to get the answers you are looking for.
– Albrecht Hügli
3 hours ago
Thanks, good suggestion. You both understood my point. I've edited question and description to be more precise.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
add a comment |
1
There is a difference between sight reading and the ability to read and write music on the staff. Sight reading is the ability to play a piece as-written on the first viewing. The ability to read and write, without the skill of sight-reading, is valuable in itself. Which skill do you mean?
– David Bowling
3 hours ago
Yes, I think you should replace sight reading by reading sheet music to get the answers you are looking for.
– Albrecht Hügli
3 hours ago
Thanks, good suggestion. You both understood my point. I've edited question and description to be more precise.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
1
1
There is a difference between sight reading and the ability to read and write music on the staff. Sight reading is the ability to play a piece as-written on the first viewing. The ability to read and write, without the skill of sight-reading, is valuable in itself. Which skill do you mean?
– David Bowling
3 hours ago
There is a difference between sight reading and the ability to read and write music on the staff. Sight reading is the ability to play a piece as-written on the first viewing. The ability to read and write, without the skill of sight-reading, is valuable in itself. Which skill do you mean?
– David Bowling
3 hours ago
Yes, I think you should replace sight reading by reading sheet music to get the answers you are looking for.
– Albrecht Hügli
3 hours ago
Yes, I think you should replace sight reading by reading sheet music to get the answers you are looking for.
– Albrecht Hügli
3 hours ago
Thanks, good suggestion. You both understood my point. I've edited question and description to be more precise.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
Thanks, good suggestion. You both understood my point. I've edited question and description to be more precise.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
add a comment |
8 Answers
8
active
oldest
votes
I don't see how sight reading would help with learning the fundamentals of music theory, but there is a very strong case of the converse: a better understanding of music theory makes you a better sight reader.
So much of the "Classical" repertoire is built around fundamental patterns of scales and triads. When a pianist simply knows their scales, sight reading a Mozart piano sonata becomes much easier. Instead of tallying a string of 50 straight sixteenth notes, a student adequately trained in music theory will recognize those sixteenths notes as patterns of the A-major scale; the music then almost plays itself.
In the world of jazz, a string of nine chord changes might look completely foreign to someone untrained in music theory. But the adequately trained student recognizes it as a string of ii–V–I progressions; now suddenly the student hearkens back to their training and the improvisation flows naturally.
Keep in mind too that "music theory" isn't just written theory; it also involves ear training. Musicians that "don't want to be a classical nor professional interpreter" often prefer to play by ear. In such cases, the knowledge of common chord patterns makes playing by ear (not to mention composing) much easier and much more successful.
That's a bit my point or idea. Investing more time on ear training to recognize pitch, chords, intervals, etc. than in reading music on a staff.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I can read English. I could read a thesis about nuclear science, or whatever, but it wouldn't make a lot of sense to m, although anyone listening may be able to understand what was being read.
Sight-reading is a great skill to have, but I don't think that that, in itself, will particularly give you a great insight into music, or music theory. Learning how to sight-read may well help, as there are certain premises and facts that are important to know and understand whilst learning how to sight-read.
So, studying theory - with the all important practical playing in tandem to make it make sense - is your better route, learning how to sight-read on the way will help, but purely sight-reading things won't necessarily give you much insight into music. Apart from being able to pick up anything, and play it, so bringing that sheet music to life, and perhaps meeting other genres that, if you can't sight-read, may be denied.
Thanks for the reply. I've rephrased a bit my question because the point was not really clear. The things is if "reading music on staff" is any useful to help acquiring basics of music theory or even composing.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I want to understand music, its elements and details to be able to express myself with no more limitations than my abilities. Beyond some basic knowledge of notation, is there any fundamental element of music that sight reading would help me to understand better? I'm thinking in rhythm but not sure.
After reading your waste introduction I assume that you actually mean understanding sheet music as you mention just some basic knowledge of notation and the 10 elements of music ...
Reading and understanding of sheet music will be of an interactive benefit for the process of understanding music theory, listening, analyzing and also for the skill of sight reading. Each moment you are investigating to improve your skills for reading scales, intervals, triads and all sorts of chords, rhythm, solfège, clefs and scores will have agreat benefit for all other occupations with music, also for someone who comes from computer music or any instrument.
Don’t forget that all the genius performers who were musical analphabethists were not those genies because they were lacking of reading knowledge, they didn’t know to read sheet music because they were poor and didn’t have the opportunity to learn it.
add a comment |
Standard notation inherently relates to a certain model of what music is - for example
- The idea that music is made of 'notes' and 'rests'
- The idea of rhythms as being constructed of units of time that are hierarchical subdivisions of a bar
- the idea that a piece of music is assumed to be diatonic and can be said to be in a certain key
(There's no reason you have to think of music as being made of 'notes', or having a 'key' - that's just a particular model, albeit a very common one).
The more used to standard notation you are, the better you will be at thinking of music from the perspective of the model that is implied by standard notation. But if thinking of music in that way is already straightforward for you, then it might be that there isn't any major new musical concept that sight-reading or reading music is going to teach you.
That isn't to say that reading music might not be an incredibly valuable skill, of course. But then learning Chinese, or real estate law, or welding could also be incredibly valuable too. You have to focus your efforts where it seems the return will be greatest.
add a comment |
I want to understand music, its elements and details to be able to
express myself with no more limitations than my abilities.
The trouble is, we DO limit ourselves to our abilities. If our musical journey is limited to 'monkey see, monkey do' we're only going to understand music that we can play, on our chosen instrument, at our level of technique.
It's useful to see music as notation. It can also be quite an eye-opener to see it as graphic display on a sequencer screen (but that's 'notation' too!) particularly when it's a performance not a quantized construction.
And yes, even a skilled, reading pianist has to consciously break away from writing stuff that lies under 10 fingers on a keyboard! (But he can, quite easily. His technique isn't a disability.)
add a comment |
Reading is pretty basic to understanding theory, because we name things differently based on the notation (e.g. an augmented fourth sounds the same as a diminished fifth). Reading also gives a notation to rhythm, and articulation through slurs, legato lines, staccato dots, etc.
In any field it's useful to have some kind of nomenclature. It gives you something to wrap your head around and communicate with others. You could get along by demonstrating what you mean if you don't have a language to describe it, but notation gives you a faster and clearer method.
That said, "sight" reading means being able to interepret a piece that you haven't seen before. I think it's a useful skill for the work I do as a guitarist, but it's certainly not essential for all guitarists, and the speed at which you can recognize things like intervals and chords isn't much of a barrier to understanding music theory - if you can follow and understand the written examples in theory texts, you're reading skills are sufficient, and reading faster won't help al that much.
New contributor
add a comment |
You have to see that musical sheets gives to you only 2 things:
- WHAT to play/execute;
- HOW to play/execute.
For the first one the sheets will brings to you all the notes or elements which are contained in the song. Is valid reforce that music is not made only of sound and notes but it is made by silence as well. Then this part brings this elements for you.
Once you know what you need to play (or even sing) the song now you have to know how to perform these elements and this will took by the second topic. If you know all notes and silences you have to do, the sheet music will teach you the durations, expressions, dynamics or even feeling.
Knowing this you see that sheets can not teach you any music rules or theory, but you don't have to quit from its learning.
Why?
Answering: you need to know that sheets are the VISUAL form of a sound. We only can LISTEN to a sound, but we can't see it. The sheet is the way that humans can to SEE the song.
Then, if you really want be a person that understand music you really have to do it completelly, and learn sheet reading is a part of this knownledge.
New contributor
add a comment |
but what I fail to see it's the point of making the staff the center
of my learning when I don't want to be a classical nor professional
interpreter.
Same here. Same with the many great musicians such as the Beatles who didn't read music at all. In Jimi Hendrix's biography he writes that his inability to read or write music made him focus better on the music he heard. Same with musicians like Stevie Wonder.
Sheet music in the past was mainly used as a way to record music. But it's not that great of a tool for learning theory. It doesn't show harmonic analysis such as chords and it shows notes in absolute terms which makes the piece alot harder to transpose.
1
You last paragraph is just wrong. Sheet music is used as a way to perform music, recording is only one of the performing domains. Notation is a very good visual music theory learning tool and sheet music very easily shows structures like chords, scales, and motifs not to mention form and may other ideas. Trying to do harmonic analysis without any kind of notation requires a much more advanced ear than a beginner would have and the you still need to notate it some way. Transposing via notation is not a difficult thing, you just need practice like anything else.
– Dom♦
1 hour ago
@Dom I don't need solutions from the middle ages thanks. I'm a front end software engineer I can develop my own notation. Even something like this would be preferable to sheet music: hooktheory.com/images/controllers/hookpad/…
– foreyez
30 mins ago
You must continue to develop your own way to write music. It may take hundreds of years to find a way different from what has already developed, and who knows, may be a million times better. But, for now, the current system works for most of us (obviously not yourself) and does the job admirably. I bet you enjoy re-inventing wheels too.
– Tim
11 mins ago
@Dom something with colors. something that indicates chords and scale degrees. and everything should be in relative terms because music is all relative. it's not canon in D. it's canon in whatever key you want to make it. sheesh.
– foreyez
11 mins ago
1
@foreyez that's not usable for performances nor can it do a lot of what sheet music can and if you talk about making your own I have to reference this xkcd xkcd.com/927. Again if you don't want to deal with sheet music that's fine, but please don't just about spreading misinformation about sheet music notation and be respectful of the notation and those who use it. " I don't need solutions from the middle ages thanks." is not constructive and is not respectful.
– Dom♦
11 mins ago
|
show 1 more comment
protected by Dom♦ 1 hour ago
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?
8 Answers
8
active
oldest
votes
8 Answers
8
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I don't see how sight reading would help with learning the fundamentals of music theory, but there is a very strong case of the converse: a better understanding of music theory makes you a better sight reader.
So much of the "Classical" repertoire is built around fundamental patterns of scales and triads. When a pianist simply knows their scales, sight reading a Mozart piano sonata becomes much easier. Instead of tallying a string of 50 straight sixteenth notes, a student adequately trained in music theory will recognize those sixteenths notes as patterns of the A-major scale; the music then almost plays itself.
In the world of jazz, a string of nine chord changes might look completely foreign to someone untrained in music theory. But the adequately trained student recognizes it as a string of ii–V–I progressions; now suddenly the student hearkens back to their training and the improvisation flows naturally.
Keep in mind too that "music theory" isn't just written theory; it also involves ear training. Musicians that "don't want to be a classical nor professional interpreter" often prefer to play by ear. In such cases, the knowledge of common chord patterns makes playing by ear (not to mention composing) much easier and much more successful.
That's a bit my point or idea. Investing more time on ear training to recognize pitch, chords, intervals, etc. than in reading music on a staff.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I don't see how sight reading would help with learning the fundamentals of music theory, but there is a very strong case of the converse: a better understanding of music theory makes you a better sight reader.
So much of the "Classical" repertoire is built around fundamental patterns of scales and triads. When a pianist simply knows their scales, sight reading a Mozart piano sonata becomes much easier. Instead of tallying a string of 50 straight sixteenth notes, a student adequately trained in music theory will recognize those sixteenths notes as patterns of the A-major scale; the music then almost plays itself.
In the world of jazz, a string of nine chord changes might look completely foreign to someone untrained in music theory. But the adequately trained student recognizes it as a string of ii–V–I progressions; now suddenly the student hearkens back to their training and the improvisation flows naturally.
Keep in mind too that "music theory" isn't just written theory; it also involves ear training. Musicians that "don't want to be a classical nor professional interpreter" often prefer to play by ear. In such cases, the knowledge of common chord patterns makes playing by ear (not to mention composing) much easier and much more successful.
That's a bit my point or idea. Investing more time on ear training to recognize pitch, chords, intervals, etc. than in reading music on a staff.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I don't see how sight reading would help with learning the fundamentals of music theory, but there is a very strong case of the converse: a better understanding of music theory makes you a better sight reader.
So much of the "Classical" repertoire is built around fundamental patterns of scales and triads. When a pianist simply knows their scales, sight reading a Mozart piano sonata becomes much easier. Instead of tallying a string of 50 straight sixteenth notes, a student adequately trained in music theory will recognize those sixteenths notes as patterns of the A-major scale; the music then almost plays itself.
In the world of jazz, a string of nine chord changes might look completely foreign to someone untrained in music theory. But the adequately trained student recognizes it as a string of ii–V–I progressions; now suddenly the student hearkens back to their training and the improvisation flows naturally.
Keep in mind too that "music theory" isn't just written theory; it also involves ear training. Musicians that "don't want to be a classical nor professional interpreter" often prefer to play by ear. In such cases, the knowledge of common chord patterns makes playing by ear (not to mention composing) much easier and much more successful.
I don't see how sight reading would help with learning the fundamentals of music theory, but there is a very strong case of the converse: a better understanding of music theory makes you a better sight reader.
So much of the "Classical" repertoire is built around fundamental patterns of scales and triads. When a pianist simply knows their scales, sight reading a Mozart piano sonata becomes much easier. Instead of tallying a string of 50 straight sixteenth notes, a student adequately trained in music theory will recognize those sixteenths notes as patterns of the A-major scale; the music then almost plays itself.
In the world of jazz, a string of nine chord changes might look completely foreign to someone untrained in music theory. But the adequately trained student recognizes it as a string of ii–V–I progressions; now suddenly the student hearkens back to their training and the improvisation flows naturally.
Keep in mind too that "music theory" isn't just written theory; it also involves ear training. Musicians that "don't want to be a classical nor professional interpreter" often prefer to play by ear. In such cases, the knowledge of common chord patterns makes playing by ear (not to mention composing) much easier and much more successful.
answered 3 hours ago
RichardRichard
40.9k689174
40.9k689174
That's a bit my point or idea. Investing more time on ear training to recognize pitch, chords, intervals, etc. than in reading music on a staff.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
add a comment |
That's a bit my point or idea. Investing more time on ear training to recognize pitch, chords, intervals, etc. than in reading music on a staff.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
That's a bit my point or idea. Investing more time on ear training to recognize pitch, chords, intervals, etc. than in reading music on a staff.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
That's a bit my point or idea. Investing more time on ear training to recognize pitch, chords, intervals, etc. than in reading music on a staff.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I can read English. I could read a thesis about nuclear science, or whatever, but it wouldn't make a lot of sense to m, although anyone listening may be able to understand what was being read.
Sight-reading is a great skill to have, but I don't think that that, in itself, will particularly give you a great insight into music, or music theory. Learning how to sight-read may well help, as there are certain premises and facts that are important to know and understand whilst learning how to sight-read.
So, studying theory - with the all important practical playing in tandem to make it make sense - is your better route, learning how to sight-read on the way will help, but purely sight-reading things won't necessarily give you much insight into music. Apart from being able to pick up anything, and play it, so bringing that sheet music to life, and perhaps meeting other genres that, if you can't sight-read, may be denied.
Thanks for the reply. I've rephrased a bit my question because the point was not really clear. The things is if "reading music on staff" is any useful to help acquiring basics of music theory or even composing.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I can read English. I could read a thesis about nuclear science, or whatever, but it wouldn't make a lot of sense to m, although anyone listening may be able to understand what was being read.
Sight-reading is a great skill to have, but I don't think that that, in itself, will particularly give you a great insight into music, or music theory. Learning how to sight-read may well help, as there are certain premises and facts that are important to know and understand whilst learning how to sight-read.
So, studying theory - with the all important practical playing in tandem to make it make sense - is your better route, learning how to sight-read on the way will help, but purely sight-reading things won't necessarily give you much insight into music. Apart from being able to pick up anything, and play it, so bringing that sheet music to life, and perhaps meeting other genres that, if you can't sight-read, may be denied.
Thanks for the reply. I've rephrased a bit my question because the point was not really clear. The things is if "reading music on staff" is any useful to help acquiring basics of music theory or even composing.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I can read English. I could read a thesis about nuclear science, or whatever, but it wouldn't make a lot of sense to m, although anyone listening may be able to understand what was being read.
Sight-reading is a great skill to have, but I don't think that that, in itself, will particularly give you a great insight into music, or music theory. Learning how to sight-read may well help, as there are certain premises and facts that are important to know and understand whilst learning how to sight-read.
So, studying theory - with the all important practical playing in tandem to make it make sense - is your better route, learning how to sight-read on the way will help, but purely sight-reading things won't necessarily give you much insight into music. Apart from being able to pick up anything, and play it, so bringing that sheet music to life, and perhaps meeting other genres that, if you can't sight-read, may be denied.
I can read English. I could read a thesis about nuclear science, or whatever, but it wouldn't make a lot of sense to m, although anyone listening may be able to understand what was being read.
Sight-reading is a great skill to have, but I don't think that that, in itself, will particularly give you a great insight into music, or music theory. Learning how to sight-read may well help, as there are certain premises and facts that are important to know and understand whilst learning how to sight-read.
So, studying theory - with the all important practical playing in tandem to make it make sense - is your better route, learning how to sight-read on the way will help, but purely sight-reading things won't necessarily give you much insight into music. Apart from being able to pick up anything, and play it, so bringing that sheet music to life, and perhaps meeting other genres that, if you can't sight-read, may be denied.
answered 3 hours ago
TimTim
101k10104256
101k10104256
Thanks for the reply. I've rephrased a bit my question because the point was not really clear. The things is if "reading music on staff" is any useful to help acquiring basics of music theory or even composing.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for the reply. I've rephrased a bit my question because the point was not really clear. The things is if "reading music on staff" is any useful to help acquiring basics of music theory or even composing.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
Thanks for the reply. I've rephrased a bit my question because the point was not really clear. The things is if "reading music on staff" is any useful to help acquiring basics of music theory or even composing.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
Thanks for the reply. I've rephrased a bit my question because the point was not really clear. The things is if "reading music on staff" is any useful to help acquiring basics of music theory or even composing.
– miquecg
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I want to understand music, its elements and details to be able to express myself with no more limitations than my abilities. Beyond some basic knowledge of notation, is there any fundamental element of music that sight reading would help me to understand better? I'm thinking in rhythm but not sure.
After reading your waste introduction I assume that you actually mean understanding sheet music as you mention just some basic knowledge of notation and the 10 elements of music ...
Reading and understanding of sheet music will be of an interactive benefit for the process of understanding music theory, listening, analyzing and also for the skill of sight reading. Each moment you are investigating to improve your skills for reading scales, intervals, triads and all sorts of chords, rhythm, solfège, clefs and scores will have agreat benefit for all other occupations with music, also for someone who comes from computer music or any instrument.
Don’t forget that all the genius performers who were musical analphabethists were not those genies because they were lacking of reading knowledge, they didn’t know to read sheet music because they were poor and didn’t have the opportunity to learn it.
add a comment |
I want to understand music, its elements and details to be able to express myself with no more limitations than my abilities. Beyond some basic knowledge of notation, is there any fundamental element of music that sight reading would help me to understand better? I'm thinking in rhythm but not sure.
After reading your waste introduction I assume that you actually mean understanding sheet music as you mention just some basic knowledge of notation and the 10 elements of music ...
Reading and understanding of sheet music will be of an interactive benefit for the process of understanding music theory, listening, analyzing and also for the skill of sight reading. Each moment you are investigating to improve your skills for reading scales, intervals, triads and all sorts of chords, rhythm, solfège, clefs and scores will have agreat benefit for all other occupations with music, also for someone who comes from computer music or any instrument.
Don’t forget that all the genius performers who were musical analphabethists were not those genies because they were lacking of reading knowledge, they didn’t know to read sheet music because they were poor and didn’t have the opportunity to learn it.
add a comment |
I want to understand music, its elements and details to be able to express myself with no more limitations than my abilities. Beyond some basic knowledge of notation, is there any fundamental element of music that sight reading would help me to understand better? I'm thinking in rhythm but not sure.
After reading your waste introduction I assume that you actually mean understanding sheet music as you mention just some basic knowledge of notation and the 10 elements of music ...
Reading and understanding of sheet music will be of an interactive benefit for the process of understanding music theory, listening, analyzing and also for the skill of sight reading. Each moment you are investigating to improve your skills for reading scales, intervals, triads and all sorts of chords, rhythm, solfège, clefs and scores will have agreat benefit for all other occupations with music, also for someone who comes from computer music or any instrument.
Don’t forget that all the genius performers who were musical analphabethists were not those genies because they were lacking of reading knowledge, they didn’t know to read sheet music because they were poor and didn’t have the opportunity to learn it.
I want to understand music, its elements and details to be able to express myself with no more limitations than my abilities. Beyond some basic knowledge of notation, is there any fundamental element of music that sight reading would help me to understand better? I'm thinking in rhythm but not sure.
After reading your waste introduction I assume that you actually mean understanding sheet music as you mention just some basic knowledge of notation and the 10 elements of music ...
Reading and understanding of sheet music will be of an interactive benefit for the process of understanding music theory, listening, analyzing and also for the skill of sight reading. Each moment you are investigating to improve your skills for reading scales, intervals, triads and all sorts of chords, rhythm, solfège, clefs and scores will have agreat benefit for all other occupations with music, also for someone who comes from computer music or any instrument.
Don’t forget that all the genius performers who were musical analphabethists were not those genies because they were lacking of reading knowledge, they didn’t know to read sheet music because they were poor and didn’t have the opportunity to learn it.
answered 3 hours ago
Albrecht HügliAlbrecht Hügli
2,063219
2,063219
add a comment |
add a comment |
Standard notation inherently relates to a certain model of what music is - for example
- The idea that music is made of 'notes' and 'rests'
- The idea of rhythms as being constructed of units of time that are hierarchical subdivisions of a bar
- the idea that a piece of music is assumed to be diatonic and can be said to be in a certain key
(There's no reason you have to think of music as being made of 'notes', or having a 'key' - that's just a particular model, albeit a very common one).
The more used to standard notation you are, the better you will be at thinking of music from the perspective of the model that is implied by standard notation. But if thinking of music in that way is already straightforward for you, then it might be that there isn't any major new musical concept that sight-reading or reading music is going to teach you.
That isn't to say that reading music might not be an incredibly valuable skill, of course. But then learning Chinese, or real estate law, or welding could also be incredibly valuable too. You have to focus your efforts where it seems the return will be greatest.
add a comment |
Standard notation inherently relates to a certain model of what music is - for example
- The idea that music is made of 'notes' and 'rests'
- The idea of rhythms as being constructed of units of time that are hierarchical subdivisions of a bar
- the idea that a piece of music is assumed to be diatonic and can be said to be in a certain key
(There's no reason you have to think of music as being made of 'notes', or having a 'key' - that's just a particular model, albeit a very common one).
The more used to standard notation you are, the better you will be at thinking of music from the perspective of the model that is implied by standard notation. But if thinking of music in that way is already straightforward for you, then it might be that there isn't any major new musical concept that sight-reading or reading music is going to teach you.
That isn't to say that reading music might not be an incredibly valuable skill, of course. But then learning Chinese, or real estate law, or welding could also be incredibly valuable too. You have to focus your efforts where it seems the return will be greatest.
add a comment |
Standard notation inherently relates to a certain model of what music is - for example
- The idea that music is made of 'notes' and 'rests'
- The idea of rhythms as being constructed of units of time that are hierarchical subdivisions of a bar
- the idea that a piece of music is assumed to be diatonic and can be said to be in a certain key
(There's no reason you have to think of music as being made of 'notes', or having a 'key' - that's just a particular model, albeit a very common one).
The more used to standard notation you are, the better you will be at thinking of music from the perspective of the model that is implied by standard notation. But if thinking of music in that way is already straightforward for you, then it might be that there isn't any major new musical concept that sight-reading or reading music is going to teach you.
That isn't to say that reading music might not be an incredibly valuable skill, of course. But then learning Chinese, or real estate law, or welding could also be incredibly valuable too. You have to focus your efforts where it seems the return will be greatest.
Standard notation inherently relates to a certain model of what music is - for example
- The idea that music is made of 'notes' and 'rests'
- The idea of rhythms as being constructed of units of time that are hierarchical subdivisions of a bar
- the idea that a piece of music is assumed to be diatonic and can be said to be in a certain key
(There's no reason you have to think of music as being made of 'notes', or having a 'key' - that's just a particular model, albeit a very common one).
The more used to standard notation you are, the better you will be at thinking of music from the perspective of the model that is implied by standard notation. But if thinking of music in that way is already straightforward for you, then it might be that there isn't any major new musical concept that sight-reading or reading music is going to teach you.
That isn't to say that reading music might not be an incredibly valuable skill, of course. But then learning Chinese, or real estate law, or welding could also be incredibly valuable too. You have to focus your efforts where it seems the return will be greatest.
answered 2 hours ago
topo mortotopo morto
25k243101
25k243101
add a comment |
add a comment |
I want to understand music, its elements and details to be able to
express myself with no more limitations than my abilities.
The trouble is, we DO limit ourselves to our abilities. If our musical journey is limited to 'monkey see, monkey do' we're only going to understand music that we can play, on our chosen instrument, at our level of technique.
It's useful to see music as notation. It can also be quite an eye-opener to see it as graphic display on a sequencer screen (but that's 'notation' too!) particularly when it's a performance not a quantized construction.
And yes, even a skilled, reading pianist has to consciously break away from writing stuff that lies under 10 fingers on a keyboard! (But he can, quite easily. His technique isn't a disability.)
add a comment |
I want to understand music, its elements and details to be able to
express myself with no more limitations than my abilities.
The trouble is, we DO limit ourselves to our abilities. If our musical journey is limited to 'monkey see, monkey do' we're only going to understand music that we can play, on our chosen instrument, at our level of technique.
It's useful to see music as notation. It can also be quite an eye-opener to see it as graphic display on a sequencer screen (but that's 'notation' too!) particularly when it's a performance not a quantized construction.
And yes, even a skilled, reading pianist has to consciously break away from writing stuff that lies under 10 fingers on a keyboard! (But he can, quite easily. His technique isn't a disability.)
add a comment |
I want to understand music, its elements and details to be able to
express myself with no more limitations than my abilities.
The trouble is, we DO limit ourselves to our abilities. If our musical journey is limited to 'monkey see, monkey do' we're only going to understand music that we can play, on our chosen instrument, at our level of technique.
It's useful to see music as notation. It can also be quite an eye-opener to see it as graphic display on a sequencer screen (but that's 'notation' too!) particularly when it's a performance not a quantized construction.
And yes, even a skilled, reading pianist has to consciously break away from writing stuff that lies under 10 fingers on a keyboard! (But he can, quite easily. His technique isn't a disability.)
I want to understand music, its elements and details to be able to
express myself with no more limitations than my abilities.
The trouble is, we DO limit ourselves to our abilities. If our musical journey is limited to 'monkey see, monkey do' we're only going to understand music that we can play, on our chosen instrument, at our level of technique.
It's useful to see music as notation. It can also be quite an eye-opener to see it as graphic display on a sequencer screen (but that's 'notation' too!) particularly when it's a performance not a quantized construction.
And yes, even a skilled, reading pianist has to consciously break away from writing stuff that lies under 10 fingers on a keyboard! (But he can, quite easily. His technique isn't a disability.)
answered 2 hours ago
Laurence PayneLaurence Payne
34.4k1563
34.4k1563
add a comment |
add a comment |
Reading is pretty basic to understanding theory, because we name things differently based on the notation (e.g. an augmented fourth sounds the same as a diminished fifth). Reading also gives a notation to rhythm, and articulation through slurs, legato lines, staccato dots, etc.
In any field it's useful to have some kind of nomenclature. It gives you something to wrap your head around and communicate with others. You could get along by demonstrating what you mean if you don't have a language to describe it, but notation gives you a faster and clearer method.
That said, "sight" reading means being able to interepret a piece that you haven't seen before. I think it's a useful skill for the work I do as a guitarist, but it's certainly not essential for all guitarists, and the speed at which you can recognize things like intervals and chords isn't much of a barrier to understanding music theory - if you can follow and understand the written examples in theory texts, you're reading skills are sufficient, and reading faster won't help al that much.
New contributor
add a comment |
Reading is pretty basic to understanding theory, because we name things differently based on the notation (e.g. an augmented fourth sounds the same as a diminished fifth). Reading also gives a notation to rhythm, and articulation through slurs, legato lines, staccato dots, etc.
In any field it's useful to have some kind of nomenclature. It gives you something to wrap your head around and communicate with others. You could get along by demonstrating what you mean if you don't have a language to describe it, but notation gives you a faster and clearer method.
That said, "sight" reading means being able to interepret a piece that you haven't seen before. I think it's a useful skill for the work I do as a guitarist, but it's certainly not essential for all guitarists, and the speed at which you can recognize things like intervals and chords isn't much of a barrier to understanding music theory - if you can follow and understand the written examples in theory texts, you're reading skills are sufficient, and reading faster won't help al that much.
New contributor
add a comment |
Reading is pretty basic to understanding theory, because we name things differently based on the notation (e.g. an augmented fourth sounds the same as a diminished fifth). Reading also gives a notation to rhythm, and articulation through slurs, legato lines, staccato dots, etc.
In any field it's useful to have some kind of nomenclature. It gives you something to wrap your head around and communicate with others. You could get along by demonstrating what you mean if you don't have a language to describe it, but notation gives you a faster and clearer method.
That said, "sight" reading means being able to interepret a piece that you haven't seen before. I think it's a useful skill for the work I do as a guitarist, but it's certainly not essential for all guitarists, and the speed at which you can recognize things like intervals and chords isn't much of a barrier to understanding music theory - if you can follow and understand the written examples in theory texts, you're reading skills are sufficient, and reading faster won't help al that much.
New contributor
Reading is pretty basic to understanding theory, because we name things differently based on the notation (e.g. an augmented fourth sounds the same as a diminished fifth). Reading also gives a notation to rhythm, and articulation through slurs, legato lines, staccato dots, etc.
In any field it's useful to have some kind of nomenclature. It gives you something to wrap your head around and communicate with others. You could get along by demonstrating what you mean if you don't have a language to describe it, but notation gives you a faster and clearer method.
That said, "sight" reading means being able to interepret a piece that you haven't seen before. I think it's a useful skill for the work I do as a guitarist, but it's certainly not essential for all guitarists, and the speed at which you can recognize things like intervals and chords isn't much of a barrier to understanding music theory - if you can follow and understand the written examples in theory texts, you're reading skills are sufficient, and reading faster won't help al that much.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 3 hours ago
Tom SerbTom Serb
424
424
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
You have to see that musical sheets gives to you only 2 things:
- WHAT to play/execute;
- HOW to play/execute.
For the first one the sheets will brings to you all the notes or elements which are contained in the song. Is valid reforce that music is not made only of sound and notes but it is made by silence as well. Then this part brings this elements for you.
Once you know what you need to play (or even sing) the song now you have to know how to perform these elements and this will took by the second topic. If you know all notes and silences you have to do, the sheet music will teach you the durations, expressions, dynamics or even feeling.
Knowing this you see that sheets can not teach you any music rules or theory, but you don't have to quit from its learning.
Why?
Answering: you need to know that sheets are the VISUAL form of a sound. We only can LISTEN to a sound, but we can't see it. The sheet is the way that humans can to SEE the song.
Then, if you really want be a person that understand music you really have to do it completelly, and learn sheet reading is a part of this knownledge.
New contributor
add a comment |
You have to see that musical sheets gives to you only 2 things:
- WHAT to play/execute;
- HOW to play/execute.
For the first one the sheets will brings to you all the notes or elements which are contained in the song. Is valid reforce that music is not made only of sound and notes but it is made by silence as well. Then this part brings this elements for you.
Once you know what you need to play (or even sing) the song now you have to know how to perform these elements and this will took by the second topic. If you know all notes and silences you have to do, the sheet music will teach you the durations, expressions, dynamics or even feeling.
Knowing this you see that sheets can not teach you any music rules or theory, but you don't have to quit from its learning.
Why?
Answering: you need to know that sheets are the VISUAL form of a sound. We only can LISTEN to a sound, but we can't see it. The sheet is the way that humans can to SEE the song.
Then, if you really want be a person that understand music you really have to do it completelly, and learn sheet reading is a part of this knownledge.
New contributor
add a comment |
You have to see that musical sheets gives to you only 2 things:
- WHAT to play/execute;
- HOW to play/execute.
For the first one the sheets will brings to you all the notes or elements which are contained in the song. Is valid reforce that music is not made only of sound and notes but it is made by silence as well. Then this part brings this elements for you.
Once you know what you need to play (or even sing) the song now you have to know how to perform these elements and this will took by the second topic. If you know all notes and silences you have to do, the sheet music will teach you the durations, expressions, dynamics or even feeling.
Knowing this you see that sheets can not teach you any music rules or theory, but you don't have to quit from its learning.
Why?
Answering: you need to know that sheets are the VISUAL form of a sound. We only can LISTEN to a sound, but we can't see it. The sheet is the way that humans can to SEE the song.
Then, if you really want be a person that understand music you really have to do it completelly, and learn sheet reading is a part of this knownledge.
New contributor
You have to see that musical sheets gives to you only 2 things:
- WHAT to play/execute;
- HOW to play/execute.
For the first one the sheets will brings to you all the notes or elements which are contained in the song. Is valid reforce that music is not made only of sound and notes but it is made by silence as well. Then this part brings this elements for you.
Once you know what you need to play (or even sing) the song now you have to know how to perform these elements and this will took by the second topic. If you know all notes and silences you have to do, the sheet music will teach you the durations, expressions, dynamics or even feeling.
Knowing this you see that sheets can not teach you any music rules or theory, but you don't have to quit from its learning.
Why?
Answering: you need to know that sheets are the VISUAL form of a sound. We only can LISTEN to a sound, but we can't see it. The sheet is the way that humans can to SEE the song.
Then, if you really want be a person that understand music you really have to do it completelly, and learn sheet reading is a part of this knownledge.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 1 hour ago
Lucas SousaLucas Sousa
11
11
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
but what I fail to see it's the point of making the staff the center
of my learning when I don't want to be a classical nor professional
interpreter.
Same here. Same with the many great musicians such as the Beatles who didn't read music at all. In Jimi Hendrix's biography he writes that his inability to read or write music made him focus better on the music he heard. Same with musicians like Stevie Wonder.
Sheet music in the past was mainly used as a way to record music. But it's not that great of a tool for learning theory. It doesn't show harmonic analysis such as chords and it shows notes in absolute terms which makes the piece alot harder to transpose.
1
You last paragraph is just wrong. Sheet music is used as a way to perform music, recording is only one of the performing domains. Notation is a very good visual music theory learning tool and sheet music very easily shows structures like chords, scales, and motifs not to mention form and may other ideas. Trying to do harmonic analysis without any kind of notation requires a much more advanced ear than a beginner would have and the you still need to notate it some way. Transposing via notation is not a difficult thing, you just need practice like anything else.
– Dom♦
1 hour ago
@Dom I don't need solutions from the middle ages thanks. I'm a front end software engineer I can develop my own notation. Even something like this would be preferable to sheet music: hooktheory.com/images/controllers/hookpad/…
– foreyez
30 mins ago
You must continue to develop your own way to write music. It may take hundreds of years to find a way different from what has already developed, and who knows, may be a million times better. But, for now, the current system works for most of us (obviously not yourself) and does the job admirably. I bet you enjoy re-inventing wheels too.
– Tim
11 mins ago
@Dom something with colors. something that indicates chords and scale degrees. and everything should be in relative terms because music is all relative. it's not canon in D. it's canon in whatever key you want to make it. sheesh.
– foreyez
11 mins ago
1
@foreyez that's not usable for performances nor can it do a lot of what sheet music can and if you talk about making your own I have to reference this xkcd xkcd.com/927. Again if you don't want to deal with sheet music that's fine, but please don't just about spreading misinformation about sheet music notation and be respectful of the notation and those who use it. " I don't need solutions from the middle ages thanks." is not constructive and is not respectful.
– Dom♦
11 mins ago
|
show 1 more comment
but what I fail to see it's the point of making the staff the center
of my learning when I don't want to be a classical nor professional
interpreter.
Same here. Same with the many great musicians such as the Beatles who didn't read music at all. In Jimi Hendrix's biography he writes that his inability to read or write music made him focus better on the music he heard. Same with musicians like Stevie Wonder.
Sheet music in the past was mainly used as a way to record music. But it's not that great of a tool for learning theory. It doesn't show harmonic analysis such as chords and it shows notes in absolute terms which makes the piece alot harder to transpose.
1
You last paragraph is just wrong. Sheet music is used as a way to perform music, recording is only one of the performing domains. Notation is a very good visual music theory learning tool and sheet music very easily shows structures like chords, scales, and motifs not to mention form and may other ideas. Trying to do harmonic analysis without any kind of notation requires a much more advanced ear than a beginner would have and the you still need to notate it some way. Transposing via notation is not a difficult thing, you just need practice like anything else.
– Dom♦
1 hour ago
@Dom I don't need solutions from the middle ages thanks. I'm a front end software engineer I can develop my own notation. Even something like this would be preferable to sheet music: hooktheory.com/images/controllers/hookpad/…
– foreyez
30 mins ago
You must continue to develop your own way to write music. It may take hundreds of years to find a way different from what has already developed, and who knows, may be a million times better. But, for now, the current system works for most of us (obviously not yourself) and does the job admirably. I bet you enjoy re-inventing wheels too.
– Tim
11 mins ago
@Dom something with colors. something that indicates chords and scale degrees. and everything should be in relative terms because music is all relative. it's not canon in D. it's canon in whatever key you want to make it. sheesh.
– foreyez
11 mins ago
1
@foreyez that's not usable for performances nor can it do a lot of what sheet music can and if you talk about making your own I have to reference this xkcd xkcd.com/927. Again if you don't want to deal with sheet music that's fine, but please don't just about spreading misinformation about sheet music notation and be respectful of the notation and those who use it. " I don't need solutions from the middle ages thanks." is not constructive and is not respectful.
– Dom♦
11 mins ago
|
show 1 more comment
but what I fail to see it's the point of making the staff the center
of my learning when I don't want to be a classical nor professional
interpreter.
Same here. Same with the many great musicians such as the Beatles who didn't read music at all. In Jimi Hendrix's biography he writes that his inability to read or write music made him focus better on the music he heard. Same with musicians like Stevie Wonder.
Sheet music in the past was mainly used as a way to record music. But it's not that great of a tool for learning theory. It doesn't show harmonic analysis such as chords and it shows notes in absolute terms which makes the piece alot harder to transpose.
but what I fail to see it's the point of making the staff the center
of my learning when I don't want to be a classical nor professional
interpreter.
Same here. Same with the many great musicians such as the Beatles who didn't read music at all. In Jimi Hendrix's biography he writes that his inability to read or write music made him focus better on the music he heard. Same with musicians like Stevie Wonder.
Sheet music in the past was mainly used as a way to record music. But it's not that great of a tool for learning theory. It doesn't show harmonic analysis such as chords and it shows notes in absolute terms which makes the piece alot harder to transpose.
answered 2 hours ago
foreyezforeyez
4,79732478
4,79732478
1
You last paragraph is just wrong. Sheet music is used as a way to perform music, recording is only one of the performing domains. Notation is a very good visual music theory learning tool and sheet music very easily shows structures like chords, scales, and motifs not to mention form and may other ideas. Trying to do harmonic analysis without any kind of notation requires a much more advanced ear than a beginner would have and the you still need to notate it some way. Transposing via notation is not a difficult thing, you just need practice like anything else.
– Dom♦
1 hour ago
@Dom I don't need solutions from the middle ages thanks. I'm a front end software engineer I can develop my own notation. Even something like this would be preferable to sheet music: hooktheory.com/images/controllers/hookpad/…
– foreyez
30 mins ago
You must continue to develop your own way to write music. It may take hundreds of years to find a way different from what has already developed, and who knows, may be a million times better. But, for now, the current system works for most of us (obviously not yourself) and does the job admirably. I bet you enjoy re-inventing wheels too.
– Tim
11 mins ago
@Dom something with colors. something that indicates chords and scale degrees. and everything should be in relative terms because music is all relative. it's not canon in D. it's canon in whatever key you want to make it. sheesh.
– foreyez
11 mins ago
1
@foreyez that's not usable for performances nor can it do a lot of what sheet music can and if you talk about making your own I have to reference this xkcd xkcd.com/927. Again if you don't want to deal with sheet music that's fine, but please don't just about spreading misinformation about sheet music notation and be respectful of the notation and those who use it. " I don't need solutions from the middle ages thanks." is not constructive and is not respectful.
– Dom♦
11 mins ago
|
show 1 more comment
1
You last paragraph is just wrong. Sheet music is used as a way to perform music, recording is only one of the performing domains. Notation is a very good visual music theory learning tool and sheet music very easily shows structures like chords, scales, and motifs not to mention form and may other ideas. Trying to do harmonic analysis without any kind of notation requires a much more advanced ear than a beginner would have and the you still need to notate it some way. Transposing via notation is not a difficult thing, you just need practice like anything else.
– Dom♦
1 hour ago
@Dom I don't need solutions from the middle ages thanks. I'm a front end software engineer I can develop my own notation. Even something like this would be preferable to sheet music: hooktheory.com/images/controllers/hookpad/…
– foreyez
30 mins ago
You must continue to develop your own way to write music. It may take hundreds of years to find a way different from what has already developed, and who knows, may be a million times better. But, for now, the current system works for most of us (obviously not yourself) and does the job admirably. I bet you enjoy re-inventing wheels too.
– Tim
11 mins ago
@Dom something with colors. something that indicates chords and scale degrees. and everything should be in relative terms because music is all relative. it's not canon in D. it's canon in whatever key you want to make it. sheesh.
– foreyez
11 mins ago
1
@foreyez that's not usable for performances nor can it do a lot of what sheet music can and if you talk about making your own I have to reference this xkcd xkcd.com/927. Again if you don't want to deal with sheet music that's fine, but please don't just about spreading misinformation about sheet music notation and be respectful of the notation and those who use it. " I don't need solutions from the middle ages thanks." is not constructive and is not respectful.
– Dom♦
11 mins ago
1
1
You last paragraph is just wrong. Sheet music is used as a way to perform music, recording is only one of the performing domains. Notation is a very good visual music theory learning tool and sheet music very easily shows structures like chords, scales, and motifs not to mention form and may other ideas. Trying to do harmonic analysis without any kind of notation requires a much more advanced ear than a beginner would have and the you still need to notate it some way. Transposing via notation is not a difficult thing, you just need practice like anything else.
– Dom♦
1 hour ago
You last paragraph is just wrong. Sheet music is used as a way to perform music, recording is only one of the performing domains. Notation is a very good visual music theory learning tool and sheet music very easily shows structures like chords, scales, and motifs not to mention form and may other ideas. Trying to do harmonic analysis without any kind of notation requires a much more advanced ear than a beginner would have and the you still need to notate it some way. Transposing via notation is not a difficult thing, you just need practice like anything else.
– Dom♦
1 hour ago
@Dom I don't need solutions from the middle ages thanks. I'm a front end software engineer I can develop my own notation. Even something like this would be preferable to sheet music: hooktheory.com/images/controllers/hookpad/…
– foreyez
30 mins ago
@Dom I don't need solutions from the middle ages thanks. I'm a front end software engineer I can develop my own notation. Even something like this would be preferable to sheet music: hooktheory.com/images/controllers/hookpad/…
– foreyez
30 mins ago
You must continue to develop your own way to write music. It may take hundreds of years to find a way different from what has already developed, and who knows, may be a million times better. But, for now, the current system works for most of us (obviously not yourself) and does the job admirably. I bet you enjoy re-inventing wheels too.
– Tim
11 mins ago
You must continue to develop your own way to write music. It may take hundreds of years to find a way different from what has already developed, and who knows, may be a million times better. But, for now, the current system works for most of us (obviously not yourself) and does the job admirably. I bet you enjoy re-inventing wheels too.
– Tim
11 mins ago
@Dom something with colors. something that indicates chords and scale degrees. and everything should be in relative terms because music is all relative. it's not canon in D. it's canon in whatever key you want to make it. sheesh.
– foreyez
11 mins ago
@Dom something with colors. something that indicates chords and scale degrees. and everything should be in relative terms because music is all relative. it's not canon in D. it's canon in whatever key you want to make it. sheesh.
– foreyez
11 mins ago
1
1
@foreyez that's not usable for performances nor can it do a lot of what sheet music can and if you talk about making your own I have to reference this xkcd xkcd.com/927. Again if you don't want to deal with sheet music that's fine, but please don't just about spreading misinformation about sheet music notation and be respectful of the notation and those who use it. " I don't need solutions from the middle ages thanks." is not constructive and is not respectful.
– Dom♦
11 mins ago
@foreyez that's not usable for performances nor can it do a lot of what sheet music can and if you talk about making your own I have to reference this xkcd xkcd.com/927. Again if you don't want to deal with sheet music that's fine, but please don't just about spreading misinformation about sheet music notation and be respectful of the notation and those who use it. " I don't need solutions from the middle ages thanks." is not constructive and is not respectful.
– Dom♦
11 mins ago
|
show 1 more comment
protected by Dom♦ 1 hour ago
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?
1
There is a difference between sight reading and the ability to read and write music on the staff. Sight reading is the ability to play a piece as-written on the first viewing. The ability to read and write, without the skill of sight-reading, is valuable in itself. Which skill do you mean?
– David Bowling
3 hours ago
Yes, I think you should replace sight reading by reading sheet music to get the answers you are looking for.
– Albrecht Hügli
3 hours ago
Thanks, good suggestion. You both understood my point. I've edited question and description to be more precise.
– miquecg
2 hours ago