Help! I can ONLY play by ear?

[excane]

Your ear is your best tool, but it always helps to read music. I would force yourself to find the patience and sit down and study. It will only help you in the long run.

[Richard Lindsey]

Originally Posted by lawsonman

No offense taken. And I was in no way trying to imply that people who read were not good musicians or had no imagination what so ever.All I was trying to get across is the fact that just because a person can only play by ear doesn't mean thay can't be a very good musician.But if your goals are higher,reading is a necessity.

I hear you.

[Rudreax]

Originally Posted by lawsonman

No offense taken. And I was in no way trying to imply that people who read were not good musicians or had no imagination what so ever.All I was trying to get across is the fact that just because a person can only play by ear doesn't mean thay can't be a very good musician.But if your goals are higher,reading is a necessity.

Why can't more people think like this? Always good to see a humble guy.

OP, get a teacher and start looking up sites on the internet.

[Jim Carr]

If you don't spend every ounce of effort you can on developing your ears, you are doomed to be a hack. One of the ways you can improve your ears is by studying ear training with a private teacher or in classes. Reading music is integral to that type of study, meaning that as you improve your reading, you will also improve your ear through sight-singing, dictation, transcription, sight-reading, etc.

All that said, being able to play what you hear is an essential skill for bassists that can be improved independent of notation. As a kid, I sang in a children's choir that learned everything by rote and sang from memory. Later, after piano and french horn lessons, I started bass at age 13. On bass, I used no notation, even though I could read.

At first, I learned a few songs from friends, and then started figuring out songs from recordings. LP's, 45s, and AM radio were my constant companions when I practiced. I often sat in my Mother's kitchen, listening to the radio trying to play everything I heard, no matter what it was. By the time I was 16, I could play the bass lines note for note on every song on a half-dozen Beatles albums and several Rolling Stones, Beach Boys, Kinks, and Byrds LP's as well (guess I should add a Kingsmen and a Ventures album, too). By then, I could pick up the bass part on just about any song on the radio before the song was half over.

It was an era of simple pop songs, but a great era for do-it-yourself ear training.

For new bassists now, things are much harder because bass playing has been raised to much a higher level of virtuousity and sophistication, and several dominant styles have exploded into thousands of sub-genres. Finding music with bass lines at a level of difficulty that is "just out of reach" is hard. Internet radio or a well-stocked ipod might be a way to start, with a device to blend your bass with the ipod/radio/audio source (protect your hearing at all times).

You must learn to play well by ear. Yet, if you don't read very very well, you will not have much studio work or get hired by a big name act, and will probably never learn to play much Jazz. Your knowledge of theory and appreciation of the inner workings of all forms of music will be limited in a profound way. Note, I don't claim you won't be able to be one helluva bassist in a lot of styles. You just won't have access to a lot of the musical knowledge and insight that you may desire.

Imagination can be limited by ignorance. It can be sparked by knowledge and experience. Imagination is not stifled by knowledge or skill, it is stifled by being devalued, suppressed and ignored.

[fdeck]

Originally Posted by Jim Carr

If you don't spend every ounce of effort you can on developing your ears, you are doomed to be a hack. One of the ways you can improve your ears is by studying ear training with a private teacher or in classes. Reading music is integral to that type of study, meaning that as you improve your reading, you will also improve your ear through sight-singing, dictation, transcription, sight-reading, etc.

All that said, being able to play what you hear is an essential skill for bassists that can be improved independent of notation. As a kid, I sang in a children's choir that learned everything by rote and sang from memory. Later, after piano and french horn lessons, I started bass at age 13. On bass, I used no notation, even though I could read.

At first, I learned a few songs from friends, and then started figuring out songs from recordings. LP's, 45s, and AM radio were my constant companions when I practiced. I often sat in my Mother's kitchen, listening to the radio trying to play everything I heard, no matter what it was. By the time I was 16, I could play the bass lines note for note on every song on a half-dozen Beatles albums and several Rolling Stones, Beach Boys, Kinks, and Byrds LP's as well (guess I should add a Kingsmen and a Ventures album, too). By then, I could pick up the bass part on just about any song on the radio before the song was half over.

It was an era of simple pop songs, but a great era for do-it-yourself ear training.

For new bassists now, things are much harder because bass playing has been raised to much a higher level of virtuousity and sophistication, and several dominant styles have exploded into thousands of sub-genres. Finding music with bass lines at a level of difficulty that is "just out of reach" is hard. Internet radio or a well-stocked ipod might be a way to start, with a device to blend your bass with the ipod/radio/audio source (protect your hearing at all times).

You must learn to play well by ear. Yet, if you don't read very very well, you will not have much studio work or get hired by a big name act, and will probably never learn to play much Jazz. Your knowledge of theory and appreciation of the inner workings of all forms of music will be limited in a profound way. Note, I don't claim you won't be able to be one helluva bassist in a lot of styles. You just won't have access to a lot of the musical knowledge and insight that you may desire.

Imagination can be limited by ignorance. It can be sparked by knowledge and experience. Imagination is not stifled by knowledge or skill, it is stifled by being devalued, suppressed and ignored.

Words of wisdom.

[Richard Lindsey]

Originally Posted by Jim Carr

Imagination can be limited by ignorance. It can be sparked by knowledge and experience. Imagination is not stifled by knowledge or skill, it is stifled by being devalued, suppressed and ignored.

Big +1.

[lunarpollen]

Even a lot of earlier great jazz musicians of the swing era couldn't read music. Sure this meant that certain bandleaders wouldn't hire them for their orchestras, but plenty of them had great careers and recorded some great stuff in bands where their ear playing and instinctual understanding of the sound of music were sufficient.

For many years now, I've been using one of my favorite chords in my own music, and it's only very recently that I learned that it's commonly known as a "diminished 7th" chord. Knowing what it's called or what notes are in it in any particular key does not help me use it. In fact a lot of times worrying about the names of chords and notes etc. gets in my way of making music.

[Dr_Funkdamental]

Another +100 to Jims post. I have a similar story as I started a gospel player in a small country church. Theres a hymn book, but nobody uses it. They pretty much have most of it memorized. The first 15 min of our service was called "Devotional", which meant anyone could just break out singing a song that was on their heart. Talk about ear training. After about 7-8 yrs of that, there wasnt much of anyone I couldnt follow. Through the yrs Ive done some gigging, and even some recording, because I had good groove and satellite ears. However in wanting to expand my playing (and a few dismisses) I had to bite the bullet and sit down and try to read. Its not as hard to advance as ppl think, you just have to commit to it, just as ppl commit to slap and double thumbing.

[Richard Lindsey]

Originally Posted by lunarpollen

Even a lot of earlier great jazz musicians of the swing era couldn't read music. Sure this meant that certain bandleaders wouldn't hire them for their orchestras, but plenty of them had great careers and recorded some great stuff in bands where their ear playing and instinctual understanding of the sound of music were sufficient.

For many years now, I've been using one of my favorite chords in my own music, and it's only very recently that I learned that it's commonly known as a "diminished 7th" chord. Knowing what it's called or what notes are in it in any particular key does not help me use it. In fact a lot of times worrying about the names of chords and notes etc. gets in my way of making music.

I think you both exaggerate and romanticize the extent to which some musicians of that era couldn't read music. Sure, you could find exceptions, but I can assure you that the ability to read was the norm for people working in those types of bands; not reading would have been a notable exception. That doesn't mean that they could all sight-read flyspecks cold at 300 bpm, but by and large, those guys could read. They usually had to, and that's how music was more often taught back then.

As for your second comment, if you KNOW this stuff, you never have to "worry" about it. It isn't knowing the names of the notes and chords that's hanging you up, it's NOT knowing them well enough. No one here advocates worrying. And in fact, knowing what it is might well help you use it one day, or at least to better understand something you're hearing. In general, it probably is not a good idea to be too definite about the uselessness of something that you don't have a good command of, because you may not be in the ideal position to judge.

With respect, I suggest you reread Jim Carr's post above, especially the last sentence.

[jnewmark]

Just to play Devil's advocate here, there are many famous musicians who did'nt read or write music, yes even JAZZ musicians. Just to name a few: Dave Brubeck, Wes Montgomery,Django Reinhardt,Erroll Garner,Chet Baker, and Irving Berlin, who only could master the black keys on a piano, and " wrote" his songs in F# and used a transcriptionist. I'm not discouraging anyone from learning how to read, but, obviously, it is not the only way to get " famous " or into a recording studio. Seemed to have worked for those fellas.

[Rudreax]

Originally Posted by jnewmark

Just to play Devil's advocate here, there are many famous musicians who did'nt read or write music, yes even JAZZ musicians. Just to name a few: Dave Brubeck, Wes Montgomery,Django Reinhardt,Erroll Garner,Chet Baker, and Irving Berlin, who only could master the black keys on a piano, and " wrote" his songs in F# and used a transcriptionist. I'm not discouraging anyone from learning how to read, but, obviously, it is not the only way to get " famous " or into a recording studio. Seemed to have worked for those fellas.

Naturally, there's no offense intended here, but for each of those musicians, you could probably name at least five that also made it but did know theory and how to read. The cats you mentioned are among the rarities in music; the chances of any of us here reaching that level are slim to none.

[Jim Carr]

Originally Posted by jnewmark

...there are many famous musicians who did'nt read or write music, yes even JAZZ musicians. Just to name a few: Dave Brubeck...

Ya gotta watch out for those liner notes, they exaggerate. It was true to a degree when he was an undergrad, later he fixed it. My wife actually worked with Brubeck in the 80s--cool guy.

This is an excerpt from the PBS interview (http://www.pbs.org/brubeck/talking/daveOnCreative.htm)

Q: In terms of the creative process, what was the most important thing you learned from your teacher, Darius Milhaud? I mean, is it counterpoint? Is it polytonality ? Is it composing music in a couple of different keys? What was it that was so important, that he gave to you?

DAVE: A strict background in counterpoint and real respect for Bach. And then when it came to composition, absolute freedom. He didn't impose what he knew, or did in music at all. We were absolutely free. He never pushed his type of thinking on any of us.

Q: So when did you write "The Duke," which I gotta tell you, that is one of my favorite pieces of music. It's a complicated piece of music. Tell me about it.

DAVE: I wrote this in my head. A lot of times, when I'm driving the car, I'm beating out the rhythm on the steering wheel, which can drive Iola nuts. I was taking my son Christopher to nursery school. On the way back, I ran into the house, sat down at the piano, and got some manuscript paper and wrote it out. And I thought, boy, this is a pretty good tune. And it became a tune that a lot of other jazz musicians play. [emphasis added]

America loves the "native genius," it's part of what makes us so anti-intellectual, no?

[w33nie]

Originally Posted by Bass_masta16

I can't read music either. It all looks like Japanese to me

People can learn to read Japanese

[Michael Campbel]

Originally Posted by w33nie

People can learn to read Japanese

And how hard can it be, a gazillion KIDS have done it! =D

[Grayson C.]

My take on it:

Learning how to read music is useful, however, it's exactly what it sounds like - reading. being able to read music will NOT automatically make your verbal (instrumental) communication any better anymore than learning to read english suddenly makes you a fluent speaker of the language - they are two entirely different realms, reading and speaking. If you can speak exceptionally well and have no interest in learning how to read, all the more power to you. Just be aware of the issues that will come along with it. All of these can be overcome, such as inability to write down your own work, but if you've got a good memory and a good ear, you may not need that. Being able to play with creativity and passion is not something that can ONLY come with learning to read, and if you feel that you're way is better then stick to it. Reading isn't a requirement to be a good musician, despite what anyone else may tell you. It's a useful tool, and I recommend it highly, but again - it's by no means required.

[DudeistMonk]

If you take 1 music theory 101 course at a college you will walk out with an understanding of written music and basic theory (chords, scales, modes, time signatures, intervals, very basic chord progressions)...Then if sight reading is something important to you then you can pursue it on your own from there. Honestly you can come to understand written music in a few hours, its reading it at speed that takes practice.

...although I guess being 16 this might be a little difficult, I do remember my HS having an option that let someone take a community college class for HS credit though.

[phektus]

Better have it and not need it than need it and not have it - Michael Angelo Batio

[Audiophage]

Well, you say you can't learn it, so just give up now.