-
Hey wolf... transposing and rearranging charts while in studio is still going on, at least for many of the smaller budget sessions I see. And the same with many gigs. What's even tougher is transposing and arranging a tune with no chart on the fly you don't really know...live at gigs.
-
10-14-2014 06:04 AM
-
reg..appreciate your work on this site..my studio work was in the late 60's - early 80's mostly small studios..and a varied mix of "producers" who hired you..some were good and knew music..others were selling "pizza" ..most of the musicians I worked with were pros who just needed the work..a few times I happened to meet the people who actually wrote the charts..most times they didn't write the tune..it was a singer/songwriter who could not write music..so this person/musician was hired to write out charts..and most times it was a "rush" job so the accuracy was in question thus the rearranging factor..most guys who do studio type work have seen this..
Originally Posted by Reg
yes the no chart/and you don't know the tune - is lots of fun..iI try to play behind the keyboards on that kind of deal..hoping he/she knew what they are doing..but this kind of stuff pushes you to go beyond your limits and loose that tight feeling in your gut.
-
Quick question: did you (any one of y'all) learn to read music 'in position'? (That is, play everything you read with open strings and on the first few frets of the guitar, and then read in positions further up the neck?)
-
Not initially. But after I learned different scale positions, I noticed that I would utilize them for reading when convenient. Oftentimes however, the music just doesn't necessarily line up in that manner.
-
I did. But I'm trying not to think that way anymore. I try to read ahead as much as I can and prepare myself to make smooth moves without have to jump into "position". Most lines you see do require you to move around the neck. Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
-
Thanks. That's good to know. I'm using some Barry Galbraith material to work on my reading but it assumes one knows how to read. (I do; I just haven't done it consistently enough to be quick about it and I want to be.)
-
What are the stages of reading?
The gold standard would be the studio pro who can read (and play) new music the first time, boom, no prob.
The, um, 'no standard' would be unable to 'read them dots' at all.
The beginner knows EBBDF, FACE, and some symbols.
But what does it mean to be in intermediate reader?
I know one wants to be as good as one can, but it helps toward that end to work step-by-step from the beginning to the highest level one can.
Is it better for someone to learn by reading as many different things as possible or by spending more time with a few things in order to start seeing, so to speak, words rather than a succession of letters?
Which is more effective (for most students)?
-
Some more thought about developing reading skills...
So when you improvise... do you use and play fingerings and melodic material that you basically have internalized, you don't really need to think about how to finger or pick what your playing, hopefully also hearing.
Generally you don't magically come up with new patterns or fingering, maybe once in a while, but not that often. You may hear a figure in your head and play basically as you hear it... usually your ahead of what your playing. That thing about being in the moment, you know feeeeeeling it... well it's somewhat overrated. you really have to be able to perform at a very high level to be actually in the moment. That reactionary aspect takes very developed skills.
Again, that's why I really stress the learning all the positions, scales, arpeggios, all melodic patterns etc... at least the basics with fingerings.
All positions of,
Maj and all modes (term used for starting on each degree of scale)
Har. min.
(Har. Maj, beginning to become required)
Melodic Min
All the symmetrical patterns,
Dim.
Whole tone
Aug
Pentatonic
Blues and Bebop patterns
There all very mechanical, with respect to fingerings and picking
Anyway, just as you hear what your playing... you need to hear what your reading. You should be able to sing the lines, at least in your head. So maybe that aspect of rereading can help your abilities of hearing what your reading, I don't really know, just thing out loud.
-
Thanks, Reg. Originally Posted by Reg
This is a lot of stuff but it suggests to me that working with Barry Galbraith's material is a good idea for me. The first book ("Fingerboard Workbook") is about fingering and is, mainly, a series of 20-40 measure pieces with names like Eb Major and C7. He's teaching how to move around the fingerboard in a useful way.
The second book (-which I haven't started) is 'daily exercises' in the harmonic and melodic minor modes. #3 is comping (-which I may do before I do #2), then #4 is two-part Bach inventions, and #5 is "Guitar Improv," a set of solos over standard progressions. I think if I work through that, I will be a long way down the road, both as a reader and as a player. We shall see....
-
Mark - One can always take the 'step-by-step' approach, like starting with the simplest Sor or Carcassi studies and progressing to more advanced levels. That is the approach a good classical guitar teacher would use with a student. I think the next step would be to tackle more challenging works like lute music arranged for guitar. I realize this is "classical" music, but it is guitaristic in flavor. I suspect you could find many videos on YT of guitarists playing the etudes, so you can hear what you are reading, an advantage surely.
Alternatively, one could learn off the notation functions on BIAB, if I have understood its capabilities. (I have never owned the software or used it yet, though I would like to get it.) In that respect I believe you can get the program to create solos to jazz standards and then you can read off the notation. That is a level that would get you up to speed with jazz tunes more quickly, especially if you are more concerned about learning to read single note lines rather than more sophisticated polyphonic lines.
By the way, there are several transcriptions on YT of tunes played by Joe Pass and others fine guitarists. Just last night I was reading and playing through several transcriptions of Ted Greene's first album with songs like Just Friends, Danny Boy, and several others. I would caution, however, that these would be extremely challenging if only because Ted often recorded with his guitar detune up to one and a half steps, which would be confusing initially. The Joe Pass and Wes Montgomery transcriptions are quite good, however. Some easier to read than others if one is not that adept.
JayLast edited by targuit; 10-16-2014 at 10:34 AM.
-
Generally the rhythm is the first step...And most important for live performance. I still fake my way through 16th notes at faster tempos. I get the rhythms right and accented or target notes. It may sound perfect... but there may be melodic mistakes.
So I would believe that for beginners and intermediate reading skills... get your rhythmic chops together first. It doesn't matter if you get the notes right if the rhythm's wrong.
I've logged many hours reading through Bellsons "Modern Reading Text in 4/4, His Odd Time Reading Text is also really good. But don't even bother if you don't have the basics down.
"Syncopated Studies Designed To Develop Accuracy and Speed In Sight Reading"
You won't memorize them, it will last a life time.
Then read fake book charts, there are plenty between CS and HL
-
Reg, Originally Posted by Reg
When reading through Bellson did you Johnny One Note it? Or did you apply the exercises to a progression and try to work thru it in real time??
-
Hey DJ... years ago I use to try all kinds of things... Basically until you get up to 16th notes, anything will work, even chords, but once you get to 16ths at decent tempos, it's rally hard to just get the patterns right with somewhat of groove or feel.
You also get use to lousy notation, no imaginary bar lines and occasional mistakes which are there to keep you honest I hope.
The preface spells out how to approach... Understand and be able to breakdown rhythmic figures, which leads to being able to recognize rhythmic figures.
I also would read through fast, eventually each page becomes a study, you don't stop, get through it. Then figure out why you made mistakes... fix the problem. (don't reinforce it)
I'm not a fan of playing slowly and forcing through repetition being able to play something faster.
Like I said... it's still one of the standards.
-
I appreciate this thread and aspire to reach a higher level of reading. But I realize that many of us are nearer the beginner level than the advanced one. For those, this YouTube video might prove helpful. (It focuses on reading a fakebook chart. The main example used is "Alice In Wonderland.")
-
yea I noticed a few typos....extra 1/8th rests etc....and some other things that you don't see much....like 1/4 rests on the offbeat. Originally Posted by Reg
-
As I read this thread, I think back to sometime in the early 80's when I was approached to play guitar in a local little theater production of 'Evita' with, as I remember an 8 piece group. Thinking it would be a cool way to make a few $$$, I said "sure" - boy, did I get a trial by fire. I hadn't really read much except to sit around the house and read standards out of fake books (remember when THOSE were kept under the counter?). I really wasn't familiar with Andrew Lloyd Webber's writing - it was all over the place - weird time and key changes all over the place. I think our first rehearsal was 3 days before opening night! We did pull it together and I didn't make an idiot out of myself so I guess verything went OK.
Another old story: One evening Buddy Rich was on the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson and they went through their usual banter for awhile. When it came time for Buddy to perform, he proceeded to go sit down in the drummer's spot (now this was back in the day of Doc Severinsen, Tommy Newsome, and probably Bob Bain on guitar) and just ripped through some modern type big band tune, After he finished, he sat back down and told Carson: "I've played that song on the road with my band for six months and these guys just sightread it better than I've ever heard it!" Now, folks, that's 'sightreading'. That's why I've always been in awe of the studio guys - Tedesco, Budimir, Bain, Mottola, Smith, not to mention the Nashville guys who go in and do head arrangements, make a mega hit record and are out the door in a couple hours and they do 4 or 5 of those a day.
I'm just getting started rehearsing for a production of "Best Little Whorehouse In Texas" where I switch off between guitar and pedal steel - we officially open this coming Thursday but will have pre performances Tueday and Wednesday for family, volunteers and staff. Sometimes you have to put it togther in a hurry - it's not the hardest music in the world but when you have to cue off actors,it sometimes gets a little uncertain.
-
Yea... sight reading does also involve all the somewhat coded directions of what to play when and where etc... like the old days of someone giving you driving directions on a napkin.
But that aspect really doesn't take that long, it's a fairly short list of directional aids or symbols... Yes is required to perform the tune or music with other musicians.... but those directions don't really mean much if you don't understand the music.
Just for info... when a section or verbal note say's open, they're saying stay here until your cued. There will be a physical cue to move on, usually by the soloist.
-
I have never understood this idea you have of using notation software to improve your jazz playing or reading. I've been using notation software since they first started with Professional Composer back in 1985, the Mosaic, Sibelius. I've always used it to write music and to provide charts for my band, other musicians and students. But I just don't get this passion you have, like a broken record, about using it for learning jazz and reading music. Reading, for me, is much different than writing. It's almost the opposite process for me. I'm creating the rhythms and notes in one and interpreting and deciphering in another.
Like Skip said, whatever works and floats your boat. But cool. Go for it.
-
Well, as a well-trained classical guitarist at one time, I am in agreement that most classical guitarists are lousy sight-readers, but my studio, jazz and pit experience changed that. I can recommend the practice of solfege, or sight-singing, as a good basis for improving sight-reading. Try either Pasquale Bona or Danhauser methods.
Sight-reading something like the Ravel Pavane is more of a parlor trick than anything else, since classical pieces need to be investigated thoroughly for interpretation purposes, and really, one rarely gets something like that put on the stand. I think the demands of the Broadway-style arrangements are the true test for guitarists: they are more thoroughly written than jazz or big-band charts, but somewhat less involved than classical solo pieces. And they must be read at sight; most Broadway or national tour shows give you one 4-hour rehearsal the day before the show opens. Nailing those parts is essential, and a show like Hello, Dolly can be a nightmare, since there is a banjo double and the music NEVER stops. On the other hand, Man of La Mancha is beautifully written for flamenco-style guitar, and really fun to play.
-
This kinda sound like the problem I am having memorizing tunes. I will spend a week (or two, or three if I was lazy) learning a tune to play it with my instructor, only to purge it from memory once a new tune is assigned. When it comes time to play the tunes I already know (All 3 of 'em) I don't even want to most of the time. Originally Posted by Skip Ellis
-
ronjazz - I agree about decent charts - they can be a rarity by the time they're re-rented, over-erased and sent out to another theater. I'm doing Best Little Whorehouse In Texas right now and parts of it are almost unreadable plus vocal cues are few and far between. Thankfully, though, there are some spots with longer dialog where you can catch your breath. We have a piano, pedal steel, fiddle, 2nd keyboard (bass) and drummer with a full electronic kit crammed into a space about 6'x6'. Plus, my amp and steel seat are also in there - makes for togetherness, for sure!
-
Yea steady working gigs... can get old. Shows and Musicals... for the most part are work, union gigs that build up your retirement...or smaller productions, you get paid. Hotel and club contracts... late nights.... same music over and over and over. Yea work, you get paid and you either enjoy it or you don't.
But sight reading skills do help. Rehearsals are for notes and changes not on the charts.
Skip, we're all small fish in small ponds.... would you really want to be a big fish?
Getting back to reading charts, more in the jazz style... Marks vid of example of how to read through fake book chart was cool. I would think vids and info in and of that style are very useful.
It's just what it is.... most won't and really don't care about getting sight reading skills together. There are just too many other aspects of getting musicianship together and not enough time.
But if your young... get it together. For the rest of us... just get together enough to be able to use charts as memory aids.
I do notice that many players get use to reading certain styles of charts and notation... with pretty much all new charts and arrangements being produced with software and printers. Try and not get locked into one style or look of charts. Also like I always push... see the Form of the chart first. You can't read the music if you don't know where your at.
-
A question from the beginner's corner: after you learn the elements of reading music, how do you transition from reading note by note to word by word (or phrase by phrase.)?
Do you just gradually start to see larger units or is there a way to learn to see them as larger units? With words, in text, it is easy to tell by the space on either side of a word that it is a word, but music is not like that.
-
Hi Mark,A question from the beginner's corner: after you learn the elements of reading music, how do you transition from reading note by note to word by word (or phrase by phrase.)?
Do you just gradually start to see larger units or is there a way to learn to see them as larger units? With words, in text, it is easy to tell by the space on either side of a word that it is a word, but music is not like that.
I would put this way:
It is not space between the words that helps us to destinguish words but understanding of the meaning and language. The same thing with music...
If one can speak and understand language he should not have problem with it.
So the idea is not to teach writing as music, but to teach music and then how to put it down or read from paper.
Musical semantics is so much underestimated... though no matter what style it is jazz, pop, classical music - music always speaks, otherwise we would not have been able to perceive it as some certain event, as an essence and unique entity.
So my answer is to teach music first of all not reading or writing.
Other wise... imagine a foreigner who doe not understan language but tries to learn how to read and write - it will be very hard for him and his speach will be hardly meaningful in phrasing and intonation.
-
Actually, when one is learning to read English, for example. it is the space on either side of it that tells you 'this' or 'other' or 'sometimes' or 'see' is one whole word. Sometimes writers leave out the spaces in well known phrases to suggest a run-on manner of speaking. For example, the imperative fuggedaboutit. (For 'forget about it.') Such use assumes an experienced reader. Originally Posted by Jonah
Reply With Quote
Afternoon in Paris
Today, 03:50 AM in The Songs