Question for Guitarists who Read Notation

[1001gear]

You mind explaining that?

[Jefferson_D]

Ignoring the book's instructions because you have a more efficient system, or because you are in a specific instance where something else makes sense, or you are looking for a specific effect, or being creative looking for a new sound or new way to get something - wonderful.

 

Ignoring a book's instructions because it's hard to learn - not so good. IMO.

[jonfinn]

EDIT: Sorry everyone, I probably should have posted this in a different forum. I don't know how to delete my post. Any feedback is appreciated nonetheless.

 

Hello Forum,

 

I'm guitarist who has been playing a good while (~18 yrs) and recently decided to learn how to read music notation. I'm working through a book designed for guitarists to learn how to read music.

 

The book suggests picking directions (upstrokes or downstrokes) for particular notes/rhythms. At times, the book's picking suggestions seem counterintuitive, and I feel it would make more sense for me to pick the notes in a different direction than suggested.

 

As I'm new to reading music, I'm not sure if it's important for me to hang in there and try to follow the author's picking direction suggestions, even if they don't make sense to me. I guess my question boils down to this: am I making a mistake if I pick notes according to the way that feels natural and easiest to me, or is there some reason that it's important for me to know and use a specific approach for picking directions when reading music?

 

I hope that made sense. Thanks in advance.

 

-Peter

 

This is the original question. It sounds to me like the book is suggesting a "down stroke on downbeats/up-stroke on upbeats" technique. If that's true, I think it's valid for a beginning reader because it helps make physical associations for certain types of rhythms. No method like this is ever perfect.

 

For me, a far more important question is WHY you'd want to learn to read music. In my opinion, if you learning simple rock tunes to play with your local band, there's no reason at all because you want to memorize it anyway.

 

If you're trying to understand the music better and believe that standard notation will help that process, I think it's a great idea. Except that learning to read vs. learning to SIGHT-read are really two different processes to me.

 

Sight-reading is the process of creating the illusion that you know a piece of music well enough to perform it. Notice the use of the word "illusion" in that sentence!

 

I think the best way to learn to read music is to just do it. A lot. Don't look for shortcuts. Play what's written. If you can't decipher it, study it until you can. Tablature is fine and useful, but tends to be used by mediocre musicians to convey information that is unreliable at best.

[RockViolin]

 

 

For me, a far more important question is WHY you'd want to learn to read music. In my opinion, if you learning simple rock tunes to play with your local band, there's no reason at all because you want to memorize it anyway.

 

 

Sight-reading is the process of creating the illusion that you know a piece of music well enough to perform it. Notice the use of the word "illusion" in that sentence!

 

 

I agree with your post on the whole, but would hasten to add that the reading of music, does not interfere with or prohibit it's memorization. Whether one learns a song by playing along with the recording over and over, or they learn it from printed music, the result can be more or less the same.

 

And by the same token, some people's sight-reading is more than adequate to render an outcome equivalent to having 'known' the piece well enough to perform via any other means. And even if they spend a week playing it repeatedly, taking it apart from various angles, it may not improve upon what their initial reading provided. And so there is no illusion, only a different means to the same end.

 

[Jiri Dolezal]

Hi! Please keep in mind that learning to sight-read on the guitar is a long term process and it`s generally advisable to see the end result right now. In other words, if you plan to become a session guy, then you`re gonna need sight-reading (not necessarily, but very likely). If you want to jam, or just learn a bunch of rock solos, etc., it`s probably a too tedious and gruesome process. Best!

[RockViolin]

Hi! Please keep in mind that learning to sight-read on the guitar is a long term process and it`s generally advisable to see the end result right now. In other words, if you plan to become a session guy, then you`re gonna need sight-reading (not necessarily, but very likely). If you want to jam, or just learn a bunch of rock solos, etc., it`s probably a too tedious and gruesome process. Best!

 

In a way, it's like Peter has announced that he's quitting smoking. And here are his smoker 'friends' offering him cigarettes and telling him he probably shouldn't or couldn't do it anyway.

 

He's been playing for over 18 years. He probably knows what he can do, as he is. He seems to want more.

 

He says he's learning to read. That's not the same as sight reading. Sight reading is being able to read whatever is dropped in front of you, cold. Some people are very good sight readers, and depending on the difficulty of the music, it might not be at all apparent by listening that they are playing whatever it is for the first time. It is an advanced reading skill, not unlike reading (words) aloud. And being able to do it well takes about as much time and effort.

 

But being able to read well enough to make your way through a piece in order to learn it, is not as tall a mountain to climb by a long shot. Once one has some basic proficiency, it can also be a much more efficient way of learning a piece of music presuming it has been written down... as opposed to having it spoon fed to you, or a repetitive process of hit and miss stabs at picking it up by ear. The latter being about as tedious and gruesome as it gets, depending on the ears.