Vision Music Forum Index Vision Music
Community Forum
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

How Important Is Reading Skill?
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Vision Music Forum Index -> Guitar: Blues, Jazz & Beyond
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
nylenny



Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 291

PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 6:17 pm    Post subject: How Important Is Reading Skill? Reply with quote

I think that developing one's ear through transcription is far more important than reading skill. They're not even in the same league musically.

But whether guitarists need to read has for some time been a point of contention. I started out on an orchestral instrument, changed to classical guitar, and then, many years later switched to electric. So I can read -- at least I don't embarrass myself.

I think the most important / applicable part of reading for jazz and other non-classical styles is rhythmic reading, something which I continue to focus.

From time to time, I get frustrated that so much guitar music contains tab. I think this could hold back some serious players. If we didn't have tab, more guitarists would be able to read, and reading would be more meaningful to everyone.

Here's something to consider. The first fax machine had zero value. Zip.
Nada. Zero. Who would you send faxes to? Each fax machine that was
old and put into productive use increased the value of other extant
fax machines.

Reading is similar. If everyone read, it would make the skill more
valuable to those that already read. However, I do get to use the
note reading when I play with non-guitarists. And it's great fun to
pick up sheet music and read it.

Now, before I get blasted for bringing up reading, I'd like to say a few things in my defense Wink . I do not consider note reading to be one of the most important skills -- ear training, rhythmic facility, creativity, knowlege of language, and repetoire blow it away... plain leave it in the dust. But it is a nice skill to have, and one that can be developed while you are otherwise engaged in learning to play guitar (for example, if you read music instead of reading tab, you would eventually become a decent reader, and you would have picked up the skill efficiently while learning the fingerboard).

OK. Get out your tomatoes and throw!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
VM Coach


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 479
Location: Portland, OR

PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 6:59 pm    Post subject: Re: How Important Is Reading Skill? Reply with quote

nylenny wrote:
OK. Get out your tomatoes and throw!


Len,

<LOL> Great thoughts on a fascinating subject, and let me first of all say that you are one of the most skilled transcribers I've ever coached. It's not just your harmonic accuracy, but your ability to dissect and notate complex rhythmic figures that eludes the vast majority of guitarists (even those who can sight-read well).

My attitude towards tab and it being a negative for guitarists differs somewhat. Consider that even before tab was in vogue, many great guitarists spanning several genres (including jazz) learned totally by ear. Part of this deals with the complexity of reading music on guitar, and the necessity of visual clues as to where to play a given note (e.g. high E open? 5th fret? 9th fret? 14th fret?). Reading music is SO much easier on the piano, because each pitch is in one place.

Of course, you and I, due to our classical backgrounds, can both relate to encircled string indicators, Roman numeral position indicators (many don't understand those symbols), and LH fingerings to provide some visual clues.

All of the great blues guitarists never read music, nor did Christian, Wes, or Pass. Benson doesn't read music. Traditional rock guitar players don't read music. For the most part they were all ear players and in one sense that element was a huge factor in their acquired ability. So when tab (which dates back to lute music in times past) became the standard, it wasn't a replacement for what reading provides in the way of rhythmic understanding, but simply a visual aid that still coordinates with the ear in putting the picture together. Many view it as a "crutch" of sorts, but realistically no more for an ear player than those aforementioned indicators are for a classical player. With that in mind I consider it a positive, because anything that helps to draw the picture and communicate to a student is helpful. Assuming that if it wasn't there players would automatically read is a bit of a stretch. They may feel more inclined to do so, but guitar history really doesn't support that conclusion.

And finally, while we can point to many shortcomings, when it comes to contemporary music if I had to make a choice between ear ability and reading ability, I'd choose the former in a heartbeat. You and I both know that there are great sight-readers who are just terrible when it comes to using their ear or improvising. Fortunately, we don't have to make that choice and therefore benefit by being as armed and dangerous as possible. My longstanding motto? "You should be able to write what you hear." This promotes sight-reading and is an easier "sell" educationally to ear-oriented guitarists. All for now...

- Mark
_________________
"Anyone can make the simple complicated. Creativity is making the complicated simple" - Mingus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
nylenny



Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 291

PostPosted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 2:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the kind words Mark.

The trick to writing rhythms is doing it. I've made my biggest jumps through the following:

Difficult ryhthms: transcribe slow blues
Sixteenth subdivisions: transcribe bass lines
Shuffle rhythms: transcribe any jazz or Robben Ford. I like to transcribe Robben because he plays in the center of the beat (think rotary perception), and he is sensitive to rhythmic subdivisions and timing of rests

Just making a list like this is a good exercise, because you have to think about what you've learned from each mentor, which is not easy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
VM Coach


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 479
Location: Portland, OR

PostPosted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 7:12 pm    Post subject: Re: Transcribing Rhythms Reply with quote

nylenny wrote:
Thanks for the kind words Mark.

Just making a list like this is a good exercise, because you have to think about what you've learned from each mentor, which is not easy.


Len,

You're welcome. VERY interesting reading your list and breakdown of what has been responsible for your growth in each area. Being a player who has learned the vast majority of what he knows via transcribing, I frequently ponder each of my mentors and what I have specifically gained from them.

Transcribing slow blues is brutal, and it has less to do with any particular player but the fact that there's no rhythmic common denominator that you can rely upon. Sure, you can point to triplets or groups of six, but a lot of that goes right out the window when you realize that 9 or 10 notes just flew by in a beat, and that there is rhythmic variance within the group. And I'm not talking about some phenomenal guitar technician, but my past efforts with the likes of Jimi Hendrix (several versions of "Red House"), SRV, and so on. In other words, it almost doesn't make a difference who the player happens to be, because it's the tempo itself that creates the challenge.

On the one hand the effort is well worth it, because it forces you to play a phrase over and over again while trying to decipher the rhythm, and that kind of listening intensity translates to a highly superior ear. However, from the practical side the reality is that a slow blues transcription is typically the most difficult to sight-read correctly if you're not combining the process with listening to the source itself.

When it comes to funky vamp playing and a much deeper understanding of sixteenth-note phrasing, Benson has been the biggest contributor to my playing. His rhythmic imagination is off the map compared with any guitarist I've ever heard, and it was his vast repertoire of blues and jazz language combined with his creative phrasing that led to transcribing 30 of his solos spanning a 15-year time period ('64 through '79).

- Mark
_________________
"Anyone can make the simple complicated. Creativity is making the complicated simple" - Mingus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Larry_DC



Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 207

PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 1:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Reading is important to me only because I enjoy picking up a magazine such as JJG and learning songs without ever having heard that specific arrangement. It's another tool in the box. I also like to play Mark's lessons before listening to the CD just to see how accurate my reading is.

Now that I'm studying bass it's a relatively easy switch to bass clef so I can learn at a faster pace. For me TAB is there ONLY to provide a suggestion when I can't figure out a comfortable finger pattern.

As for transcribing blues, I dreaded those 5 and 6 note clusters until a few lessons forced me to sit down and painfully tap out the phrases at a snail's pace. It turned out to be a worthwhile exercise. After 30 years of playing Red House "wrong" I finally transcribed it. Not that I can play it "right'," I just have a better handle on how Jimi did it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nylenny



Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 291

PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 1:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've transcribed that solo too!!!!!!!!!! Lots of nuance in that one. The trick with playing Jimi is getting the sublety.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Larry_DC



Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 207

PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 2:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

nylenny wrote:
I've transcribed that solo too!!!!!!!!!! Lots of nuance in that one. The trick with playing Jimi is getting the sublety.


Too funny. Which version did you transcribe? There's the mellow one and the more in-your-face psychedelic version. The latter is my favorite. I notated the intro as best I could but never wrote out the solo, only memorized it by slowing it down. Which leads back to reading. It helps me when I've forgotten long ago solos, long ago being yesterday Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nylenny



Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 291

PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 2:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's been a while, but I think it was the mellow one. I also have transcribed parts of other solos. Never could get them down quite how I wanted them, however.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nylenny



Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 291

PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 2:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Larry said

Quote:
but never wrote out the solo, only memorized it by slowing it down.


Me too! I still have a recording playing it at about 70% speed (not my proudest moment). Gotta love those speed adjustments!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
VM Coach


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 479
Location: Portland, OR

PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 6:10 am    Post subject: Re: Red House Reply with quote

Larry_DC wrote:
Too funny. Which version did you transcribe? There's the mellow one and the more in-your-face psychedelic version. The latter is my favorite. I notated the intro as best I could but never wrote out the solo, only memorized it by slowing it down. Which leads back to reading. It helps me when I've forgotten long ago solos, long ago being yesterday Laughing


Larry,

Hmm... I think there were more versions of Red House than two, plus the same tune with a different title ("My Bleeding Heart") if I'm not mistaken.

One of the versions I transcribed was from his "In The West" live recording at the Berkeley Community Theater in the East Bay. It was particularly memorable because I was actually at the concert that night, when I was just flirting with the notion of playing guitar. I remember that it was loud, and after the first number Jimi turned around and turned his Marshalls up all the way. Well... let's just say that I had a hard time hearing for several days after that show. Laughing

Hendrix was such a great guitarist not only because he loved the blues, but because he really used the full scope of the guitar to include chord punches and double-stops in both his solos and originals. Back in those days bands would have one lead guitarist and one rhythm guitarist, but Jimi did both at the same time. That element alone had a major impact on me that's lasted to this day.

- Mark
_________________
"Anyone can make the simple complicated. Creativity is making the complicated simple" - Mingus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Larry_DC



Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 207

PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've only heard two of Jimi's versions. One is from a DVD and it was a typical blues. The other was from Smash Hits. That was the one that floors me to this day. That must have been something to see him live. And that was probably the only time he played with his amps set below 10. Must have been an oversight.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tony



Joined: 27 Nov 2008
Posts: 16
Location: Milwaukie Oregon

PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 9:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hmmm ! I have met many a fine Jazz guitarists and one of my pet questions is this very subject..

Dan Balmer: How important is reading music ?

Answer: For every 1/2 hour you spend learning to read you will become
1/2 hour better as a musician. I don't know what else in music
you could study where that would be true.

Mike Davis: Playing the guitar without learning to read music Is totally
lame.

Jerry Hahn: Reading music is an essential skill to learning Jazz

All the above are College level teachers and fine Jazz musicians.

As for me: I can read a little but the more I take the time to read the more I think I understand music. Music Notation is the language of music is it not ? I kick myself that I didn't spend more effort learning to read.

How else can you learn to play the head ? I don't waste time transposing
the head, while I think that transposing the improv is less critical playing the head needs to be 100 % accurate and a mistake would be less forgiveable then making a mistake during an improve.


"If I had to choose transcribing over learning to read I'd choose transcribing."

The beauty of it is " We don't have to choose, we can and should do both"

But talk is cheap and regrettably I haven't put my money where my mouth is..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
VM Coach


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 479
Location: Portland, OR

PostPosted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 7:30 am    Post subject: Re: Reading vs Transcribing Reply with quote

Tony wrote:
"If I had to choose transcribing over learning to read I'd choose transcribing."

The beauty of it is " We don't have to choose, we can and should do both"

But talk is cheap and regrettably I haven't put my money where my mouth is..


Tony,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and the comments/opinions of those instructors, two of whom (Dan Balmer and Jerry Hahn) I'm very familiar with from working with their students privately. My issue isn't whether you should read or not, but what is the most optimum way to improve that ability? One thing I know for sure is that if you don't read as part of the learning process early on, it's VERY difficult to make major strides later.

However, the good news lies in what you said about not having to choose between reading and transcribing, because the secret to superior reading ability IS transcribing. When you write what you hear there are far more senses involved simultaneously, and that's always a superior way to learn an art that in reality deals with multiple senses when you perform. It's when you isolate a specific sense, like ear, mind, sight, or physical technique without involving the others that you have an inferior learning process, and one that I know from personal experience is ineffective.

I also agree with you that if indeed someone was holding a gun to your head or you had a terminal illness and simply had to choose one over the other, it would be learning by ear (aka transcribing) over reading. After all, great jazz guitarists like Wes, Pass, and Benson didn't read or write at all. What you hear trumps everything in jazz, but writing what you hear is the #1 way to become a great reader, and fast. Don't just take my word for it. Set aside 10-15 minutes a day to write what you're hearing and you'll see major results in just a few weeks! All for now...

- Mark
_________________
"Anyone can make the simple complicated. Creativity is making the complicated simple" - Mingus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
thaydon



Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 80
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

PostPosted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 1:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

From the age of 6-13, I played classical piano and then switched to classical guitar at 17 and in the past 7 years jazz guitar. So reading treble and bass clef is ingrained however, transcribing was very new to me. What I learned so far is:
1) I transcribe something that I really would love to play, rather than "this is a famous solo I should know", otherwise as much as I write it down and play it I don't incorporate it into my playing and then I feel I haven't used my time wisely (quantity vs quality practice). For example, I transcribed an Eddie Lang solo and the way he goes back and forth between the 3rd and flatted 3rd is subtle and sounds great.
2) With the above in mind, I don't write down my transcriptions I either get it or I don't- again going back to the quality vs quantity practice.
So in 30 -45 minutes I have a least a couple of phrases I can utilize in a jam track.
_________________
sincerely yours,

Todd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
VM Coach


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 479
Location: Portland, OR

PostPosted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 5:43 pm    Post subject: More... Reply with quote

thaydon wrote:
From the age of 6-13, I played classical piano and then switched to classical guitar at 17 and in the past 7 years jazz guitar. So reading treble and bass clef is ingrained however, transcribing was very new to me.


Todd,

Thanks for chiming in and sharing your background. As I mentioned before, when you begin reading early on as you did (btw, common for piano, sax, trumpet, clarinet, violin), that skill does indeed become ingrained as part of the music process. It's not unlike learning to read English or any other language beyond just hearing and speaking it. Consider that some can communicate speech and comprehend what someone is saying, yet are terrible at reading and writing.

The point you make about what you choose to transcribe resonates heavily with me, and I totally agree that the decision shouldn't be based on anything but what truly motivates and inspires you. That can range from the melody of a tune, a chord progression, a bass line, a solo, a lick or two, a given artistic influence (e.g. Wes, Bird, Trane, GB, etc), or a known "need" as a student. For instance, literally decades ago I realized that in order to become a more proficient jazz improviser, I needed to expand my language vocabulary. So one summer I decided to transcribe every II-V lick I could find in both mine and my father's record collection. So I went through solos by Oscar Peterson, Parker, Benson, Pat Martino, Joe Pass, Hank Garland and numerous others, searching specifically for that piece of the jazz puzzle. And I did write down my findings so I could recall them for study and application. As a result of that focused effort, I was able to successfully fill that gap significantly in just a few months.

And last, another reason that ear and transcribing are most important is that sight-reading is an "interpretive" skill at best. You really do still have to hear the source to get the feel and phrasing right, especially with regards to jazz and blues but even in classical music. That's why classical musicians who mainly read are often clueless when tackling a jazz solo, because they don't comprehend the interpretation of the style.

- Mark
_________________
"Anyone can make the simple complicated. Creativity is making the complicated simple" - Mingus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Vision Music Forum Index -> Guitar: Blues, Jazz & Beyond All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group