The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Posts 1 to 25 of 112
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    I'm posting this thread because sight reading notation is a skill which is important for a serious musician to develop, even those who play guitar. (A nod to all who maintain that guitarists are congenitally unable to read notation - .)

    I have created a library of personal transcriptions of jazz standards in standard notation using Sibelius software. I often carry these around even to work as sheet music to study or reflect upon in 'down time' moments or when I need a break. One often cited reason to do transcriptions or even simple lead sheets is that they help you really learn a tune to the bone. I do not do these out of necessity to learn or play the tunes, but because it gives me great pleasure as sheet music in itself (perhaps for some that would be hard to understand). And I also use the midi tracks created to rehearse songs and improvise solos and various arranging ideas.

    But it also struck me the other day as I was perusing a transcription of Martin Taylor's solo version of Georgia on my Mind that there are intrinsic benefits to "sight-reading" sheet music of songs that you know very well. First, it is a kind of mental rehearsal of a tune, much like you see downhill skiers replaying mentally the twists and turns of a race course before the event. Secondly, for those who are not terribly fluent at reading notation period, reading the sheet music of a song that you already know helps your general sight-reading skills, as you imprint the visual of the dots on the staff in association with the melody and harmonic flow that you already know. It is this last aspect that is particularly valuable to keep your reading skills honed.

    I put the term 'sight-reading' in quotes because some musicians limit the meaning of the term to reading the notation of a new unfamiliar tune in real time, which may be true, but in my experience the more you read notation of any type of music - classical, jazz, popular - the better your pattern recognition of those elusive dots on the music staves.

    In fact, when I rehearse or improvise over an arrangement to the midi files of my transcription library of tunes, often I don't even truly read the measures themselves so much as follow the architecture of the melody and harmony lines. What I mean here is that I already know the melody and harmony, but as I play along to the midi files I just use the architecture of the measures (actually reading through the bar lines) as an exercise in focusing on target tones. This may be odd to think about, but what is important is not to read each note with perfect accuracy, but rather to anticipate where your solo or chordal playing is going. In other words, even if I am not playing the melody strictly but rather improvising a solo over harmony, this approach helps you to create coherent lines, focusing on target tones and the general flow of the melody. With experience you sort of improvise the line in-between these guide tones on auto pilot. Much easier than reading the measures note-for-note. And I'm all for 'easy'.

    Not sure if I'm explaining that concept clearly, but it is very valuable as a skill in your bag o' tricks. Any thoughts or reflections on this concept?

    Jay
    Last edited by targuit; 10-10-2014 at 09:37 AM.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    I'm one of those that separates reading from sightreading. My sightreading skill varies all over from not doing it enough daily. I fully agree that learning to sightread is about pattern recognition, as I've said in other posts it more about eye training to see notation the way we read words in a book. There used to be good computer programs for working on sightreading that would flash notation then remove it so you had to learn to see/memorize patterns fast. At first would do rhythms only and first half of a measure, then the second half. As you got better you would have it flash whole measure and more with time. Then it would start with pitches again with half measure and doing intervals, scale fragments, basic chord shapes. Real nice practice tool.

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    I use clarinet books - Klose and others, as well as transcriptions of jazz solos, primarily not guitarists, to practice sight reading. I find it important to practice sight reading with material you are NOT familiar with. Sometimes I'll even turn the page upside down so I can't predict the music.

    There are basically three areas the you must compute simultaneously:

    1)recognizing, knowing and understanding the symbols on the page,

    2) being able to count the rhythms

    3) location of notes on the guitar.

    I teach my students to do these separately until each of these three categories can do done with out lag. Eventually all three dissolve so you no longer need to separate them. But if you get hung up you know where the problem is.

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    Interesting comments. My point - perhaps somewhat elusive - is that for those who are not strong sight readers, reading notation of arrangements of songs where they already know the melody and chords as played in a particular key familiar to them - Misty would be a credible example - gives them an identification between the melody that they already know and the dots on the sheet music.

    The other point I'm making is that mentally rehearsing a song where you learn to identify chords and melody notes in various positions on the fret board reinforces your skills.

    Henry, I don't quite get the idea of turning the music upside down, as once you learn the pattern recognition, it works best right side up. But, then again, different strokes .....

    Jay

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    The point is to defeat ear recognition. Plus once I've exhausted reading the piece I can just turn it up side down for the exercise of reading. That's the point.

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by henryrobinett
    There are basically three areas the you must compute simultaneously:

    1)recognizing, knowing and understanding the symbols on the page,

    2) being able to count the rhythms

    3) location of notes on the guitar.

    I teach my students to do these separately until each of these three categories can do done with out lag. Eventually all three dissolve so you no longer need to separate them. But if you get hung up you know where the problem is.
    This has helped me totally. Still working at it, but breaking it down has helped alot. Thanks, Henry!

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by henryrobinett
    The point is to defeat ear recognition. Plus once I've exhausted reading the piece I can just turn it up side down for the exercise of reading. That's the point.
    Another thing to try that helps the eyes and gets more mileage out of a piece of music is to read in patterns. Read down the measures like first measure of each line, or in diagonal patterns. So more reading material and forces you to memorize the measure quick so you can move to the next location.

  9. #8
    Henry, I don't quite get the idea of turning the music upside down, as once you learn the pattern recognition, it works best right side up. But, then again, different strokes
    Yeah. That's why you keep those two terms separate. It's confusing. You guys are talking about two completely different things.

    The point of pure sight reading is to play something unfamiliar. Now, there ARE levels of reading at the edges of one's ability in which it's necessary and even helpful to work things out and review, but that's not "sight reading". It's just confusing to call it that if you're talking about something else.
    Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 10-10-2014 at 11:36 PM.

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    I know. Sight reading means reading something accurately for the first time.

  11. #10

    User Info Menu

    Many good points here. But there is one practice I have never understood well - reading melody instruments' notation rather than guitar music. Given that a melody instrument like horns must play only one note at a time and the guitar is polyphonic, what is the point of reading single note melody lines when you need to read polyphonic lines with the guitar?

    Even the violin which is more akin to the guitar than horns or woodwinds presents no specific advantage over guitar music, imo. Or to use another example, Bach's sonatas and partitas developed from violin and cello music incorporate harmony. So why not use the more polyphonic works to develop one's reading skills?

    As far as the Suzuki method compared to reading notation, there is a kind of link, though my understanding of the Suzuki approach is to get kids hooked on using their ears and rote repetition to get a handle on music and performance. What I'm referring to is more a matter of helping musicians who do not read well acquire the pattern recognition by 'reading' music where they already know the melody.

    As someone who has read music notation fluently since early adolescence, I don't need to work at it, since I have read notation in some form virtually daily for fifty years. But I still read on these forums musicians who regret not reading better or never really acquiring this skill. So I suggest that one remedy is to "read" what you already know to imprint pattern recognition. But that is emphatically not the Suzuki method goal.
    Last edited by targuit; 10-11-2014 at 02:42 AM.

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    Matt, I acknowledged the difference between sight reading and reading, though I think it is artificial to a degree. For example, if I threw the music of Bach's Partita no. 2 which includes the famous Ciaconna (Chaconne) in front of a guitarist with weak reading abilities, he may be familiar with the music but not capable of (sight) reading it. Of course, few musicians are truly capable of reading complex notation like Bach or even more pertinently like Britten the first time in performance tempo. Most jazz music notation, especially predominantly single note lines, is much easier to read than Bach or Britten. But when I hear seasoned jazz musicians talking about reading horn lines for practice or reading them upside down, I begin to wonder about how good their reading skills are in the first place.

    Just out of curiosity, who among us here can sight read and play the Chaconne at a much slower tempo? Would that be too difficult or something you can do properly at a slower tempo?

    Jay
    Last edited by targuit; 10-11-2014 at 03:02 AM.

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    Because as a working jazz guitarist the charts I'm given to read on the band stand look like horn charts. They're either single melody lines or harmony or melodic parts to go with the horn players or to be played with the bass. Most guitar parts, at least the ones I see, for guitar are not written harmonically like in classic guitar. Chord symbols are used. Sometimes you'll have brief passages where three or four note voicings are used, but not that often. The challenge is reading and keeping up with the single nte lines of the horn players. I'm talking sight reading here. Not where you can take the part home and work out fingerings.
    Last edited by henryrobinett; 10-11-2014 at 02:57 AM.

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    Ciao, Henry. Yeah, I realize that most notation for jazz guitarists involves single note lines, unless you are playing movie scores or something like that. But I frankly don't generally have a problem reading jazz charts unless you are playing something you don't know at all at fast tempos. Of course, the further out you get from traditional harmony music, the more difficult that is if you don't know the tune at all.

    I find that the best readers are pianists hands down.

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    I've played with many horn players, violinists and drummers who could read anything you could throw at them mistake free.

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    And for the most part I'm not talking Real Book jazz charts. I'm really thinking of either big band or small ensemble original music or arrangements. Sometimes the part writing is intricate and can be tricky.

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    Yes, but horn players are reading single note lines, not polyphonic or music written on two staves in different clefs like pianists. Big difference.

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    Not that much different. When the music is fast and intricate with a lot of time and key signature changes, accidentals I don't think any one is in a contest for whose part is harder. No one I know even thinks like that. The piano is a two handed instrument. They learn to read like that from day one. No biggie.

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    Also in jazz most piano parts, like guitar, aren't as hard as the horn parts. For the piano you might have some passages that are fully written, but it's most often symbols with maybe some indications of voicing, melodic parts, harmony. Look at the piano parts for most big band charts. Chord symbols. Sometimes the melodies written are merely cues the the trumpets are playing.

    Have you you ever played in a big band or jazz ensemble? It'd be a great experience if you haven't.

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    Yes, I've played in jazz fusion bands during college and post-college. Then I got the brilliant idea to go to medical school. Forget about how that worked out. Never got the opportunity to play in a big band setting.

    I'm of two minds when it comes to parts written out in 'real book' style, with a melody line and printed chord symbols (Dm7b5, eg.) On the one hand, I like to improvise off 'lead sheets', as the notation cited is a form of short hand - simple to read. So reading Dm7b5 tells me all I need to know, especially in the context of a well known standard. One the other hand, I also like reading full notation without the Dm7b5 chord indications, because one way I "improvise" is to use not just target tones but also other tones in a full notation stacked block chord as ways to play off the melody. With full notation you call literally pick a note in the three, four or five part stack to use as your "guide or target tone". Now, I know that most of us already use the "tricks" or principles of "play the 3rd or the 7th, enclosures, embellishments, et al. I do, too. I also just like sometimes to harmonize with the melody instrument in thirds or sixths. But when soloing off a chart in full notation, you have a pool of notes right in front of your eyes - this for those who insist that CST is the way to go. I am not a CST guy - to me you already have 3, 4, or more notes in the chord to begin with. You only have twelve tones to work with, so add in the 9ths, 11ths, and 13ths as sharps or flats - not a lot of (chromatic) notes left to choose.

    Btw, I am also a self-taught pianist as a second instrument. I love playing the piano, but I still struggle with reading the bass clef fluently in real time. Most of the time I think "up a third" or just "cheat" by using my ears and that 'follow the architectural line" thing I cited in the original post.

    Henry, as an aside, a couple of things. One is I like your music. I have a bunch of 'engineering' questions I would love to ask you about. For example, I wish you could comment on recording and mastering vocals. Your expertise would certainly be appreciated. And just some curiosity things like do you work with Pro Tools or something else. I still don't have a computer DAW and I have both Macs and PCs, so I'm undecided as to which way to go. I currently record with a Korg D1200 digital 'legacy' recorder, but not much editing capability and limited mastering tools. What is your professional preference? I'd bet Pro Tools.....
    Last edited by targuit; 10-11-2014 at 04:16 AM.

  21. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    Matt, I acknowledged the difference between sight reading and reading, though I think it is artificial to a degree.
    I'm really not trying to be antagonistic at all here. I appreciate the fact that you changed the way you used the term in succeeding posts. But in terms of your saying that it's largely artificial, I have to disagree. Terminology has to mean something, or we don't know what we're talking about.

    For me, the term "sight reading" is probably in stronger need of disambiguation than any other term thrown around on the boards. I don't know what you call the kind of reading where you practice, clap out rhythms, work complex things out or generally learn to read. I'd just call it "reading practice" I guess. But I'd never heard the term "sight reading" used for anything other than real sight reading until I came here.

    Growing up in school band, we did daily work on reading as a group, usually harder concepts not fully internalized, but we also worked on sight reading. That was reading off the page, cold, the first time, and it's a completely different skill.

    Now, there are a ton of us guitarists who have never had any of the formal training and experiences that I'm describing there. We get on the inter-webs and throw around terms loosely that confuse people and make us look like illiterate-guitarist stereotype that we hate.

    I've seen too many threads where people are asking how to learn to read music, and then, in response , well-meaning participants recommend that they only play music they've never seen before. Well, of course, if you've never played, this is not the advice you need.

    You need some repetition and rote working-things-out. The real problem in discussing these things is confusion in the terminology itself. I'd like to see the ambiguity on this term die.

    This thread is another good example. You and Henry are talking past each other. He's talking about sight reading in a jazz context on the bandstand. That is (rightly, I think) the kind of response you're going to get when you use the term "sight reading" on a forum of jazz guitarists.

    I think your original idea is a good and valid one, by the way. I think there's some value in reading things you already know. For me, it reinforces fretboard knowledge and gives a connection between the ears and eyes. I think you're largely talking about mental practice away from the instrument, and that's cool. The whole conversation is fine.

    I just don't want to call it "sight reading".
    Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 10-11-2014 at 09:54 AM. Reason: Big thumbs on small phone

  22. #21

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    That's cool, Matt! I get the distinction, and after fifty years of playing classical and jazz guitar, I'm a very fluent reader. But even I don't like to be in the situation of reading a composer's music cold on the bandstand. However, there is an enormous difference between sight reading horn and single line melodies and full classical guitar sheet music. Night and day (hmmm...sounds like a good song title). I also acknowledge that some rhythms can be tricky or elusive and some charts more complicated than others. In fact, that is why I think practicing reading with tunes that you already know is a big help. Practicing randomly generated or 'unmusical' lines - not so much. I understand perfectly what Henry is saying, as he understands me.

    Btw, although I no longer "practice" rhythms or use some esoteric program that flashes random music for a second or two, I read serious classical guitar pieces and compose music on a daily basis. I think reading skills are best approached in a harmonic context, like guitar etudes or pieces. Single line reading is so elementary that it is nearly inconceivable that one cannot apprehend it. I learned reading notation gradually from the very first classical guitar lesson I took - fifty years ago. And I still maintain that using notation software is the best way for someone who understands how to read but is not very proficient to become better, once they conquer the somewhat steep learning curve of notation software.

    But it is all just an opinion. What kind of music do you teach - classical, jazz, rock, country? All of the above?

    Btw, I read the link to Wikipedia - interesting. I had left untouched that third definition - reading silently and hearing the music. That skill comes over time but is very important. If you were doing a session with complex lines, you would be a fool not to 'sight-read' your part beforehand. On the other hand, that article mentioned auditions of musicians at one university by rotating from four music stands and playing cold. A lot easier if it is single note lines.

    Jay
    Last edited by targuit; 10-11-2014 at 10:28 AM.

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    Well what I was talking about was big bands and smaller jazz ensembles. Not really like a fusion group, in most instances. But it could be. I can imagine Pat Metheny's band would be a lot like that. Where each member has their own distinct written part arranged for specifically what the arranger/composer wanted. I only ask because you sound relatively inexperienced. Many came up in school where we played jazz big band or in ensembles and later in musicals where you could see the charts others played and the relative difficulty.

    In terms of studio stuff I use Digital Performer primarily, but I also have a slightly older version of Pro Tools and LOgic. Hell none of my DAWs are current. I just rarely find the need to upgrade. It's expensive and causes havoc with my system, until I upgrade the OS, normally by force and then I HAVE to upgrade.

    The key for recording good vocals is FIRST have a good vocalist. Next have a great mic, mic pre, maybe a good compressor and a good DAW. Though DAW to DAW they sound the same, so that's not the issue. Workflow is.

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    What is your favorite studio mic for male vocalists? I have the jones for that cool little Neumann TLM 102 condenser, but don't have the scratch at the moment.

    I also have thought of getting the Apple Logic Pro 10 to use with my MacBook, but I have an old Sibelius program on my home PC. But I think the Apple product is cheaper ($200) though I would have to get a new USB interface as well. But everything is on hold till this economy picks up or I win the Lottery.

    Not for nothing, Henry, but from what I read on this site, I would venture that I am likely one of the better (sight) notation readers on the Forum, based on my classical guitar experience and the fact that I read complex charts like the works of Britten and Henze nearly daily. As I asked earlier, how many out those here would be comfortable reading Bach lute suites, Benjamin Britten, Debussy, etc? As an example, a simple work like Pavane pour une enfante defunte by Ravel?

    Jay
    Last edited by targuit; 10-11-2014 at 02:23 PM.

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    Almost every classical guitarist I know does not sight read well. You keep insist on misusing the word. Words are important. They read well but if given a chart with harmony or unison with a alto player, sight unseen, tune counted off, can you hang? That's sight reading.

    I saw Mike Stern sight read a very fast bop blues on a Steve Slagel gig in NYC. ON THE BANDSTAND Steve pull out this chart. Stern said "Whats this??!" It was a small club. 55? I was two seats away right in front of Stern so I could hear the whole thing.

    Steve said, "You'll be fine". Completely bored. Stern whined. Asked what the tempo was. Asked if he wanted him to play those lines. It was a really fast, convoluted bop blues. And STERN NAILED IT. The room erupted in applause. It was no small feat. THAT'S sight reading. I couldn't have done that. I would have folded like a deck of cards.

    Neumann's are great, for the most part, but are over priced. Look at the Peluso line.