Ok, no more excuses.

[pawlowski6132]

C D E F G A B Db F# Gbb Dx etc

Isn't that how everybody does it? I think you lost me on this one.

[Christian Miller]

Isn't that how everybody does it? I think you lost me on this one.

I don't know. I think most instrumentalists do it this way, if not all.

As a sight singer, I don't have perfect pitch, so I'm reading E in the key of A major, say, and pitching 'Sol' or '5' in the prevailing key, rather than just singing A the way someone with perfect pitch would. It works fine in this context for some reason.

[pawlowski6132]

I don't know. I think most instrumentalists do it this way, if not all.

As a sight singer, I don't have perfect pitch, so I'm reading E in the key of A major, say, and pitching 'Sol' or '5' in the prevailing key, rather than just singing A the way someone with perfect pitch would. It works fine in this context for some reason.

Interesting. Thanks for all the great info

[rpjazzguitar]

It sounds like, according to this approach, you're going to look at the notes, convert them to solfege, or similar, and then put them on the guitar based on solfege which, I guess, means converting them back to notes or grips or spacing, or something.

As opposed to knowing the note on the paper and where it is on the guitar.

And the benefit of that is that once you've converted to solfege the syllables in your brain are independent of key. And, somehow, you won't be confused reading something in a key you're not playing it in.

And, all the stuff that's confusing about using solfege for jazz tunes with changing key centers, well, somehow you'll deal with that. Must be a way, but I don't use solfege so I don't know about how that's done. Something about movable do, isn't it?

The way my mind works, this might work up to a tempo of maybe 4 bpm. Maybe 16 with practice. Might be why I've never heard of anybody doing it that way, although tbh it never occurred to me to ask.

I often have the impression that some players don't know the names of the notes all over the fretboard without having to think about it. Learning to read will help with that. I don't think it is possible to read well if you don't know the fretboard.

IMO, reading is knowing what note it says on the paper and knowing where that note falls on the guitar, which is usually more than one place. You learn 72 notes and get the 12th fret and up almost for free.

Also I'd strongly recommend you read everything in every possible octave, which is usually two octaves on the guitar. If you're involved with reading bands, that will come in handy over and over again.

[bako]

Some of the best sight readers I have met simply look at the staff and know where to put their fingers.
They would have to think to say what notes they are playing at any given moment.
It is purely a tactile based approach.

[rpjazzguitar]

When I'm playing a melody that I'm thinking of, it can seem like my fingers go to the right note without conscious thought. Not always, but it happens.

But when reading, I always know the note by name and I know exactly where I am on the neck and what finger I'm using. I have probably scanned ahead, if the music isn't too dense to permit it, to determine if I'm going to have a problem in my current fret position. I can't imagine getting to the point where my fingers are reading on their own, so to speak. But, I have met players who do things I find unimaginable.

[Christian Miller]

It sounds like, according to this approach, you're going to look at the notes, convert them to solfege, or similar, and then put them on the guitar based on solfege which, I guess, means converting them back to notes or grips or spacing, or something.

As opposed to knowing the note on the paper and where it is on the guitar.

And the benefit of that is that once you've converted to solfege the syllables in your brain are independent of key. And, somehow, you won't be confused reading something in a key you're not playing it in.

And, all the stuff that's confusing about using solfege for jazz tunes with changing key centers, well, somehow you'll deal with that. Must be a way, but I don't use solfege so I don't know about how that's done. Something about movable do, isn't it?
.

Yeah if I was doing it I wouldn’t use syllables I’d just think in terms of numbered degrees of the scale.

It is graphical - a diatonic fifth or third or octave looks a certain way on the staff and I definitely use that when reading chords and arpeggios and things.

So maybe I do it a bit. So much of reading is based on sheer experience and exposure to music that it can be hard to track the exact way one does it - in order to sight read you need to be able to do it intuitively.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Christian Miller]

And, all the stuff that's confusing about using solfege for jazz tunes with changing key centers, well, somehow you'll deal with that. Must be a way, but I don't use solfege so I don't know about how that's done. Something about movable do, isn't it? .

This overlaps a bit with ear training/sight singing, which is no bad thing IMO. This is much more relevant to how I personally hear and analyse music rather than to how I read it off a page sight unseen.

So yes moveable pitch centre. You go to the bridge in The Song is You for example, and you reset the key centre (1) from C to E.

Some sources will write out the key change as a fresh key signature, as a classical piece would (I have an old Mehegan book that does this), but these days most don't. So that makes it a little trickier to do the relative pitch thing in a sense (although it may make absolute pitch reading a little easier perhaps?)

In some cases (Aebersold Real Book for example) the author has chosen to use a Null Key Signature which makes this sort of approach a little more difficult. This is certainly a common approach in modern jazz charts.

What constitutes a modulation is a lot more nebulous and subjective. Some people seem to regard every II V I as a key change, whereas I think of them as temporary tonicisations/secondary dominants and true key changes are less frequent (most typically in the B section of an A A B A tune). You can hear them both ways.

My general approach for this is - only change the tonic when it's absolutely clear that you should.

So, for example, I'd actually regard a tune like Stella as having only one true key change* at the most - the move to V in bar 13. But there's obviously lots of secondary dominants going to IV and IIm and so on.

In terms of practicing sight reading - get used to:
- charts with one key signature for the whole thing (Real Book and most lead sheets)
- classical charts with key signature changes (Mehegan transcription book, also Dick Hyman IIRC)
- charts with one key signature at the beginning that they can't be bothered to print out on each line for some reason (New Real Books)
- charts with no key signature (Aebersold Real Book and many other published transcriptions) and Big Band charts where literally anything might happen haha.

*which is not the same thing as saying you can play Bb major all over it haha

[cmajor9]

This seems like a pretty good summary of the hodge-podge of ways you can expect to see charts written.

And whether you think of it as solfeg (syllables) or degrees (numbers), understanding and mentally translating notes into a system of tonality can really help you understand the music and carry that understanding (and licks, etc.) across keys.

[joe2758]

Reading thinking solfege is the next step after getting decent at reading by note names. That's what you learn in music school. Couple posters here should check their attitude.

[Christian Miller]

Reading thinking solfege is the next step after getting decent at reading by note names. That's what you learn in music school. Couple posters here should check their attitude.

Is that how you read Joe?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[joe2758]

yeah, I think in solfege

[Christian Miller]

yeah, I think in solfege

Including on the guitar? Might encourage me to work on this myself. I can see a lot of advantages.

[joe2758]

Yeah on guitar too. Both are useful and no one who reads like that doesn't know the note names on their instrument. I would say for melodies completely solfege, two note intervals solfege for the bottom note and the top note sort of automatic (this skill I developed by following Sor's method and playing all his exhausting exercises in 3rds and 6ths), and chords solfege for bottom note and note names for the other voices.

full disclosure I have never been a pro and haven't had to site read on a job, but I got through a couple years of music school where it was tested. I also don't have any trouble analyzing scores in weird keys.

[Christian Miller]

Yeah on guitar too. Both are useful and no one who reads like that doesn't know the note names on their instrument. I would say for melodies completely solfege, two note intervals solfege for the bottom note and the top note sort of automatic (this skill I developed by following Sor's method and playing all his exhausting exercises in 3rds and 6ths), and chords solfege for bottom note and note names for the other voices.

full disclosure I have never been a pro and haven't had to site read on a job, but I got through a couple years of music school where it was tested. I also don't have any trouble analyzing scores in weird keys.

I'm always interested to learn stuff.

I do analyse and hear stuff by functional degrees, just because it is so incredibly useful, but I don't think it's primary engine of my reading such as it is. I will explore...

[joe2758]

Shouldn't difficult for you as someone who already knows solfege. You just sing along as you read and you'll site read at the same level that you can sight sing.

[charlieparker]

Shouldn't difficult for you as someone who already knows solfege. You just sing along as you read and you'll site read at the same level that you can sight sing.

Yeah, when I do sight singing, I look at what note is the root and then sing movable do based on scale degrees and then just flatten or sharp based on the key. I actually don't do that when I'm on an instrument because the notes are in different locations but with the voice these differences are less apparent. Interesting idea that might lend itself to shape based sight reading on the guitar.

[rpjazzguitar]

How does this work?

You see a note, and the next note, and you can sight sing them. You know the interval.

Now, you find the first note on the guitar (meaning you have to know the fretboard) and then you find the next one by the shape of the interval? Bearing in mind, of course, that the shape depends on which strings you're using.

But, since you have to know the fretboard to find the first note, wouldn't you already know where the second one is the same way, without thinking about the interval?

I understand the value of sight singing/solfege, but I don't see how it helps with reading. I am always willing to learn something.

[joe2758]

How does this work?

You see a note, and the next note, and you can sight sing them. You know the interval.

Now, you find the first note on the guitar (meaning you have to know the fretboard) and then you find the next one by the shape of the interval? Bearing in mind, of course, that the shape depends on which strings you're using.

But, since you have to know the fretboard to find the first note, wouldn't you already know where the second one is the same way, without thinking about the interval?

I understand the value of sight singing/solfege, but I don't see how it helps with reading. I am always willing to learn something.

The primary thing I'm talking about is scale degrees, not intervals. If I play or sing Do la sol ti la sol, i'm not thinking "ok do to la is a major 6th, la to sol is down a second" and so on. That would correctly be considered ridiculous

[Mick-7]

The primary thing I'm talking about is scale degrees, not intervals. If I play or sing Do la sol ti la sol, i'm not thinking "ok do to la is a major 6th, la to sol is down a second" and so on. That would correctly be considered ridiculous

o.k., but it seems redundant to me because they are synonymous. For example, in C major, C-D is a major second, C-E is a major 3rd, etc. So if you know the major and minor keys and notes, you know the intervals (both ascending and descending).

[joe2758]

The difference is scale degrees are single notes and intervals are the distance between notes

[Mick-7]

The difference is scale degrees are single notes and intervals are the distance between notes

Yes but within a key they are interrelated, like two sides of the same coin, at least that's the way I've always thought of them. It is of course different with atonal music, like say Twelve-tone music, but they don't use solfege for that, do they?

[joe2758]

Yes but within a key they are interrelated, like two sides of the same coin, at least that's the way I've always thought of them. It is of course different with atonal music, like say Twelve-tone music, but they don't use solfege for that, do they?

Sure you can say they are inseparable (if there at least 2 notes), but there is a difference in approach. I'm not sure where exactly that is though because to you it seems I'm adding an extra step and to me it seems you are lol.

I think note names would work best for atonal music, but I've never played it

[charlieparker]

Sure you can say they are inseparable (if there at least 2 notes), but there is a difference in approach. I'm not sure where exactly that is though because to you it seems I'm adding an extra step and to me it seems you are lol.

I think note names would work best for atonal music, but I've never played it

Scale degrees also impy relationships within a key which intervals don't.

[GuyBoden]

I'm an interval number person, I remember having a book on Ear Training that used numbers for all the scale intervals.

Here are the Preview Pages from Hal Leonard site:





From this book: