-
Originally Posted by Jazzaluk
-
08-25-2010 11:08 PM
-
quote=Jazzaluk;94649] My favorite Montreal guitarist is Greg Clayton. He can play three hours of captivating BeBop (Jazz Standards) from memory.
... and you know Greg can read anything!
-
08-26-2010, 12:22 AM #78TommyD Guest
Hey fellas! I have an idea! Let's debate how many angels can dance on the head of a pin!
tommy/
-
Originally Posted by TommyD
-
Originally Posted by FatJeff
-
Originally Posted by Reg
-
Good afternoon, all...
Where to start? I am one of the 'hundreds or thousands' referred to by Jazzaluk. I don't get that much satisfaction from my reading attempts, except, as with all challenges that I take on, I wouldn't do it if I didn't want to.
The motivation? For me (complete amateur, no pretentions for any career or professional competence...) is, having acquired the Joe Pass method, to be able to benefit. It's all on a stave. I'm working at it (with Mickey Baker, I & II, also written out that way...).
The time I have (choose...) to spend is finite; I got much more to progress with and understand from a 1 hour video of Joe Pass than I shall get from 3 months with the sheet music (and a bonus dose of belly laughs from the 'fluffs' and asides on the tape ...'I never noticed this guitar had 22 frets before..?'. Hilarious...). I'll do the work, as best as possible, as I'm stubborn, but for me, it's not an efficient way of going to where I want to be. Mickey Baker is similar; the web site, with it's Guitar Pro compatible files is marvellous. makes things clear faster (that's the original reason for writing out the scores in the first place...). Isn't it rather the result that counts, than the means?
Aimer est le grand point, qu'importe la maîtresse ? Qu'importe le flacon, pourvu qu'on ait l'ivresse ?
Alfred de Musset
Extract from La coupe et les lèvres
That's why I don't read (or at least, very badly...). I don't think I'm alone (not that that ever stopped me doing what I do...). I can't read Latin or Greek in the original, either; there are gems for classic scholars that I shall never know in there, as the modern English translations are not as profound, apparently, as the original text. Tough on me, but I'll live.
Was that worth 2 cents? (Money Orders, cheques or PayPal accepted...)
Incidentally, I'm not sure that this is the right thread or forum for the arithmetic question on celestial dancing (or have I missed something..?)
-
I love how people (even people who play jazz) say that jazz is improvised. That is technically incorrect.
I can play a jazz chart (either reading or from memory) and it not be improvised at all; including a solo. Just like sight-reading is one part of musicianship, improvisation is one part of jazz.
If we define jazz as improvised, then that is a slippery slope leading to the declaration of all "jazz standards" as not really jazz since if it is written down or memorized, then it isn't improvised.
Further, you can improvise in plenty of other genres of music. Beethoven was known to improvise melodies as he composed, yet we don't call it jazz. Blue grass players, while playing a descendant of jazz, improvise all the time but I've known some to slap you if you say it sounds "jazzy".
~DB
-
Originally Posted by lindydanny
Originally Posted by lindydanny
-
I think maybe improvisation is the wrong word, perhaps extemporise would be more approriate, John Coltrane called it extrapolation,-"new lamps for old". I think the swing element sets jazz apart from other musical genres.. Back to sight reading, what about blind jazz musicians like Lennie Tristano; surely they would have to rely solely on their aural senses.LG..
-
Speaking from one who has put in the time... into becoming a musician. Playing is not a struggle or challenge, it's very enjoyable. The improvisational part of jazz I enjoy is the interaction between players with the skills,( instrumental abilities, have the ears and are able to use them, understand theory well enough to know when something's implied, where it could go, where it usually goes and always know where the groove is). This interaction can be on tune from memory or from a chart we see for the first time. Sight reading is not a straight jacket... that's a silly analogy, how does that work... some one who is able to read , which for some reason is difficult for most guitarist, can't cover the easy skills. Most of the professional rhythm section players I know or run into at all types of gigs, (were not talking about traditional or commonly referred to as classical players, I'm referring to jazz players), Know how to read... and they all can definitely covers the performance skills. What jazz players are able to do is read the chart and also hear what might be implied by the chart. That might be reflection or interpretation of whats been played before or improvise what might work, all the time being aware of context. All this being said... I play gigs with non-reading musicians, or those who struggle with charts and have a great time... Don't let one of the many reasons for not being able sight read be an excuse for not being able to sight read. If you don't want to SR... don't... It sure seems like more would come from explaining theoretical differences between b13 and #5, how to develop harmonic phrasing skills or different re-harmonization techniques and how to apply them to your soloing or comping, rather than philosophical differences... Best Reg
-
Paul, that article does make some great points. I'd agree that guitarist came to notation and notation came to piano.
Larry, I'll go with supporting reading notation and sight reading as individual skills within the realm of being a musician. Obviously someone who has the physical limitation of not being able to see notation can't master that skill set (at least not as we would understand it). But, I will stand beside the simple fact that a good musician will do everything they can to be a better musician. My experience is that a blind musician will typically kick any other musician's but at playing by ear. Why, because THEY PRACTICE IT ALL THE TIME! If I practiced sight reading at the same pace, I'd master it too!
Reg, in your posts you make some good points. I just wish I could read them.
~DB
-
Originally Posted by bob32069
But I digress. My theory for why guitarists are poor sight readers (and often poor at many things musically): open chords. New guitarists start by learning open chords rather than notes. This is terrible for technique but also for knowing any notes on the guitar other than the open strings and the first 3 frets of the low E and A strings. And the more they play open chords, the less they are willing to learn anything else.
On the flip side, however, I only know one classically trained pianist (out of the 20 or so that I know) that can improvise even just a single bar of music...At least most guitarists can wail a little on the blues scale, and of course Django and Wes' inability to read music didn't seem to hold them back too much...
My sight-reading still stinks, but I think it's pretty low-priority so I only spend about 15 minutes a day working on reading music (i.e. unfamiliar pieces).Last edited by coolvinny; 08-28-2010 at 06:08 PM.
-
Sheesh, you guys are overlooking the obvious.
Carrots, more carrots.
-
Originally Posted by NSJ
The only BASIC, ESSENTIAL requirement of being a musician is to be able to make music. OK, I recognize unintended hyperbole when I see it, and I accept that one of the most basic, essential requirements of being a fully-rounded, Western trained musician is being able to sight-read music. So are having at least one second instrument, an understanding of sonata form, the ability to write arrangements with four voices and being able to conduct a small choir, among other things. That doesn't mean we should dismiss those who haven't got that kind of musical background as some kind of sub-musician. My dear old daddy, for example, couldn't read a note, but played a boogie-woogie piano that could get your dead grandparents up and dancing, and could coax a tune out of practically any instrument if left alone with it for five minutes. Very few flamenco guitarists are acquainted with musical notation. How many Irish fiddle players have we known who could just blow those conservatory types off a stage? And so on. These are not non-musicians, I'm talking about good musicians who would probably make most of us look woefully inadequate in a real-world performance situation, including those of us with advanced sight-reading skills.
I'm not denying that sight reading is tremendously useful, and there is no real excuse for not acquiring some reading ability. Neither is there any excuse for not being able to play by ear, or follow chord charts, come to that.
-
JGR,
Your "dear old daddy" didn't have TAB... he had ears! Same with the fiddlers you mentioned.
That's why they can play the way they do. They had to work for it.
-
Well said JohnRoss.
RonD...Of course they had to work for it...you have to work for everything in music. The question is, where should you apply your effort. For some, the skill of sight reading may be essential to hang with the "real musicians", for others there may be more value added in developing an ear and acumen for improvisation.
-
Funny vid... Hey John... what do you call a good guitar player who can cover most performance skills but not sight reading. Then what do you call a good guitarist who covers performance skills and can read well. Then what do you call a guitarist with good performance skills, can read well, can cover on lets say three other instruments. Understands traditional music theory as well as jazz theory, can compose in traditional instrumental and vocal forms as well as jazz and pop etc... I'm taking for granted, being able to play by ear as one of the performance skills. This could be the start of great guitar player joke.... I've changed my direction....what ever you do don't waste time on sight reading... I know it's too late for many of you, but don't spread the sickness, there might not be a cure. Mind reading could be the next great performance skill, and no tabs needed... sorry I don't know where I'm going... best Reg
-
That video is awesome.
~DB
-
08-28-2010, 06:12 PM #95nullnaught Guest
Tablature has ruined me.
-
Originally Posted by Reg
-
Sight-READING is nothing. Sight-SINGING, on the other hand. Now you're talking about music!! Sing all that shit!!
-
Originally Posted by larry graves
Is that Stevie in the audience... Reg
Hey... how do you sight sing with out sight reading.......(fake it, no one will know)Last edited by Reg; 08-29-2010 at 11:11 AM.
-
Originally Posted by franco6719
-
I like to read. I like the fact that notes occur on multiple places on the neck.
It ends up being like "The Count" on Sesame Street, who loves to count.
Lots of people like math. It applies to inteervals, to lots of stuff. There's definitely a math element.
But .........
A while ago, I met somebody to play duets and Real Book tunes and ...
I had a gruesome discovery:
Although I could find the notes better than ever, I was helpless with complex rhythms.
We played Desifinado and the quarter note triplets and other constructs derailed me.
My point: Learn the notes but you WILL need to be able to read rhythms well.
I have two possible resources for myself:
1) Leavitt's Melodic Rhythms
2) Louis Bellson's book, which I haven't obtained yet.Modern Reading Text in 4/4 For All Instruments
RIP Nick Gravenites
Today, 05:48 PM in The Players