Sight reading vs Playing by Ear?

[piccolo_whitley]

It's an age old question that causes fuses to blow at each end of the spectrum, but in reality is the answer really black and white?

Be sure to watch the video to the end - I'd love to know your own experience and how it related to what I talk about in the video...

 

[SteveCS]

Hi Scott. From one Brit to another I'd like to offer a real middle-ground.

You made some interesting comments in the video on learning new music and drew some pretty clear distinctions between reading, sight-reading and playing by ear, with which I largely agree. The part that jumped out at me the most was where you talked about memorisation through transcription in tiny chunks but without actually writing anything down as being the most effective way, and it is this I think I want to talk about.

The problem with that process is you are using two different mental processes at the same time, namely analysis - working out the 'What' - and committing 'What' to memory. With no clear demarcation and with no validation there is a real danger of memorising 'What' before you even know what 'What' is, you have the wrong 'What' or you have 'What' wrong. And if you haven't written anything down you have no line in the sand to go back to, so you are forced back to the beginning of the process. All of which just causes confusion, frustration and loss of time.

It is well known that writing stuff down - be it music, words or numbers - is the single most effective way of committing something to memory. I have found the most effective way to learn by ear is to write stuff down in Standard Notation as you Analyse it. Then stop and validate what you have written. Edit the notes and make corrections and re-validate until everything is correct. Then write it out again in complete form, i.e. a proper score in Standard Notation (with dynamics, articulations and as much other detail as possible), before committing it to memory through repetition and practice by reference to your score. By having a validated point of reference there is no need to constantly go back and change what you have memorised to something else, which is what slows the process down and leads to insecure memory. In my experience the process of analysis, writing, validation and editing before practice: 1) reduces the overall learning time; 2) improves the accuracy of learning; 3) improves accuracy of recall; 4) dramatically improves long-term retention; 5) improves performance because you get way beyond just learning the notes; and 6) improves reading skills (for free).

 

[Goatrope]

I think the video framed the "sight reading vs playing by ear" discussion very well, with the lists of goals and desires at the start. I found those connections in alignment with my own experience, based on my personal journey of 45 years. (Rock bands, cover bands of different genres).

I would not deny the value of writing things down, or transcribing them as a means to memorize. It's just too slow and impractical in my environment.

You could characterize that as laziness or prudence. In my situation, I have a short amount of time to commit set lists or songs to memory so that I can perform them in an enjoyable way. As a journeyman, I hit all the landmarks for my band mates, and I'm able to fill in the blanks by knowing the basics of the groove. All this while being able to dynamically interact and improvise with the other musicians.

Maybe if I'd spent all these years sight reading, I'd be faster at it. It hasn't held me back from achieving my goals, for not being proficient.

Now, without my developed ears, I'd be dead meat.

So I think the approach, and the value one places on one or the other, depends primarily on their goals.

 

[WrapRough]

As someone who is learning to read and transcribe, this was an interesting video. I am in the SteveCS camp here. There is an Anthony Wellington video somewhere where he talks about writing as a way of learning to read, which I completely agree with. Learning songs by ear is fairly easy. Obviously the harder the song, the longer it takes. But there are only so many notes, so you will get there. I think the majority of people have good ears even if they dont know they do. In fact, sing a short passage to most people and they can sing it back. Only the truly tone deaf would likely struggle with that. So, really, what have you trained? IMO, not much. You are doing something that humans can naturally do without much struggle. Then fumble around on the instrument and find the note.

But now try writing that down... wow, different ballgame all together! Now you need to know the key, so you need understand key signatures for the score, and you need to understand the rhythm and how to write that out. Is that a dotted 16th there? 8th note? OK, now my brain is working.

Committing to memory - again, for me personally at least, is easy. Almost impossible NOT to remember a song I have played a few times. But hey, if I forget, I just look at my score. When I was younger and had piano lessons, my teacher would stop me mid-song, point to the score, and say "where are you?". Of course I would have no idea as I was playing from memory. She was always envious that I could remember a piece without looking at the sheet music. She leaned too heavily on sight-reading, so I do understand your point there.

My goal is not to be able to take any piece of music for bass, cold, and play it. I dont need to take reading to that level. But what I do need and want, is to be able to learn any song from a score without ever hearing it. IMO, learning that skill is greatly expedited by transcribing. As Anthony says "If you can write it, you can read it".

 

[jj.833]

I watched with interest till ca 4:10 where your video seems to be taking the course to 'you either play by ear only OR you play from sheets only'. That's where I stopped watching.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

I would not deny the value of writing things down, or transcribing them as a means to memorize. It's just too slow and impractical in my environment.

It's kind of taken out of context.
And I understand your position about the discussed subject, but...

The topic/video is about LEARNING!
Your comment is about not having time because of your BUSYNESS as a musician (an accomplished musician).
Now, how did you get from not playing the bass to
a journeyman, (who)... hit all the landmarks for your band mates?

 

[Goatrope]

It's kind of taken out of context.
And I understand your position about the discussed subject, but...

The topic/video is about LEARNING!
Your comment is about not having time because of your BUSYNESS as a musician (an accomplished musician).
Now, how did you get from not playing the bass to
a journeyman, (who)... hit all the landmarks for your band mates?

Well, the OP asked to know my experience, so I was replying to him. You should do the same, as I didn't ask for your opinion.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

I didn't ask for your opinion.

WHAT???

You are saying it at the BASS MUSICIANS OPEN FORUM???

 

[Slevage]

The best musicians I've played with can do both at a level that is beyond expert.

 

[SteveCS]

...
I would not deny the value of writing things down, or transcribing them as a means to memorize. It's just too slow and impractical in my environment.
...
Now, without my developed ears, I'd be dead meat.
...

I can relate to this. There have been plenty of occasions where there just hasn't been the luxury of time to write out anything beyond the most rudimentary of charts and a good ear (thanks to formal training as a child I still just about have that) is essential in those situations. Once the heat is off it is a matter of priority if something gets the full transcription treatment or not. If I think I will never have to see the tune again I probably won't bother, but if there is something worth preserving or learning from then I might write something out. But I agree, it is not a "fits all models" solution.

 

[Goatrope]

WHAT???

You are saying it at the BASS MUSICIANS OPEN FORUM???

Absolutely. The OP asked a specific question, and I answered it.

You seem to be focused on correcting responses, or proving one approach is best, and I'm not engaging in that activity.

Feel free to ignore my posts. No hard feelings on this end.

 

[JRA]

nice video, @piccolo_whitley! well done.

FWIW: one of the many TB members i admire says he can't read a lick. he is so talented and passionate and accomplished = big whup! it makes no difference for some players. just wanted to put it out there that there are probably a lot of EB players who don't bother with reading and some of them are the best!

It's an age old question that causes fuses to blow at each end of the spectrum, but in reality is the answer really black and white?

of course not! why even pose the two constructs/methods as 'in opposition to one another'? you stated yourself at the beginning of the video that you admired sight-readers --- and those who could do both! i'd have been more supportive of your thesis if it hadn't been so binary, a one vs. the other argument. you don't need to be a stellar "sight-reader" to benefit in a huge way from being able to read music. whether at a "deciphering" speed or a "playing" speed = reading helps your brain 'listen' in a way that can enhance what you want/need to hear.

i voted "false dichotomy."

I'd love to know your own experience and how it related to what I talk about in the video...

both @SteveCS's POV and @WrapRough's evolving experience is much closer to what mine has been over the years.

IME/IMO, both is better!!

"always be learning all you can, in as many ways as you can: if it's all about the music" = that would have been my message.


TBH: i've been a writer and an arranger all of my 'musical life' so standard notation has always been a part of it.

 

[smeet]

In the US at least, musical education in schools *used* to make sure that every student got a basic understanding of musical theory and understanding. No extra time needed. Not as true any more, sadly.

Should I learn to read and write English? Or concentrate on speaking and listening? Maybe if I learn to read it will hurt my ability to rap? I think the OP is a good post in many ways, but throwing fuel on the "fight" between the two doesn't help. Everyone should know how to read music at least at a basic level. Sight reading is different, but once you can read even a little, a few minutes a day will over time make you a competent reader.

I like the points you make at the very end of the video. Good, solid advice. But, the contrasting of relative benefits of reading and not reading was a pretty biased list, basically perpetuating the myth that if you learn to read it will hurt your ability to groove and improvise.

A good musician combines the skills - when you see a score you can hear it in your head, and when you hear a melody you can see it notated in your head.

 

[Joe Nerve]

Haven't watched the video (working right now), but this jumped out at me while reading responses...

It is well known that writing stuff down - be it music, words or numbers - is the single most effective way of committing something to memory.

I truly believe this to be an individual thing, and it's NOT been my experience.

Everything I play has been learned by ear, not so much by choice but rather by the fact that I never learned to read and believe I have some sort of mental block. It would also not be practical, given the type of work I've done with my bass over the past 3 decades, BUT...

A while back I had a gig with a woman playing a bunch of Jaques Brel songs(along with a handful of jazz standards) at a French Restaurant every Wed night. I had no choice but to chart the tunes because it was a last minute gig, plus new songs were often added without time to learn them. I played that gig for over a year, and never memorized any of those songs. Its the only gig I ever had where that happened. I play in a wedding band presently, and have to learn all kinds of tunes. I learn them by ear, and by NOT using cheat notes - memorize them all. The few times I was forced to write songs down, those songs were gone from my memory immediately.

RE the whole topic in general... IMO its best to be able to do both. Both have advantages as well as limitations.

 

[LBS-bass]

This is always a controversial topic. I see it as two types of learners who really do not have a way to understand each other so they'll always be saying their own way is better.

Committing musical things to memory seems to be much harder for some people than it is for others. I'm in a similar camp with @Goatrope in that my ear skills far outpace my reading skills, and have served me well over the years. But what does it mean to everyone to put it into memory? There's a question we rarely ask.

For me, there's a little recording device in my head that records everything I hear. It's constantly on playback and it's always giving me some form of musical entertainment as I go about my day. If I thoughtfully listen to a song a few times, it goes more deeply into some part of my memory, and the parts are all in there, more or less. The arrangement definitely is, in terms of song form. Then it's a matter of digging the specific lines out and figuring out the best way to put them on the fingerboard.

For that I go back to the original recording (if available) and work pretty intensively with that until I know that what I have in my head is the same as what's on the record. This usually involves refining individual runs and turnarounds. If I don't have the record? Well, I just wing it. The arrangement is already in memory, the changes are, too, and most of the notes I need also are.

I never taught myself this "skill," it has always existed inside my head. The only teaching required involved the discipline needed to sit down and refine these songs by transcribing what's in my head to the fingerboard. This is why my sightreading is so poor; it's because I never had to hear my music teacher (or myself) play a piece more than a few times before I was playing it back for her by ear. She didn't know that, and to me it sort of seemed like the end goal, anyway, so it never occurred to me that I should do otherwise and keep my eyes on the score once I knew the piece.

I don't think everyone learns music the same way. I have only encountered a small handful of people who think about music the way I do. So while I appreciate the OP sticking up for learning by ear, I'm not sure it's something that will be as easy for others as it is for him. I do think it's an important skill to work to develop, just as I think sightreading is hugely important to develop, and I wish I'd gotten better at it than I am.

Right now I'm working with a couple of drummers who are heavy readers. Both of them stutter and stall when their eyes are on the page. But once they really know the music and stop looking at the page, they fall into the groove much more readily. To me, that's the value of reading. It gives you a way to learn the music that's universal to anyone else who can read the same musical notation you understand. But I do think that the best grooves come from players who will ultimately put the book down and play what they have committed to memory.

 

[LBS-bass]

I had no choice but to chart the tunes because it was a last minute gig, plus new songs were often added without time to learn them. I played that gig for over a year, and never memorized any of those songs. Its the only gig I ever had where that happened.

My husband has been in the same group for something like eight years. Every Wednesday they come over here with their books and put them on their stands and play through pretty much the same group of songs they have been playing for eight years straight. He's the the only one who is not using written music at this point, which happened at my urging. It boggles my mind that they can play those songs for that long and not know them.

 

[mrcbass]

Not a fan of the "either/or" mentality. Sheet music, charts, tabs, ear - are all tools. The more of them you can use effectively, the better off you are.

Perhaps the preference of music vs. ear has to do with how one learns music to begin with. I came up in music on horns (trumpet, trombone, etc). This level of music in jazz/concert/symphonic bands is heavily reliant on playing the written part (jazz solos excluded), so being able to read music is essential. I always learn best when there is some sort of notation involved.

I noticed that OP is "self taught" and learned to play by using his ear. His preference is to continue to learn this way.

Others learn on tabs best - again, probably how they learned to learn. (Coming from a horn background, tabs weren't a thing. I confess to being a bit of an anti-tab snob.)

But, the more of these tools you can wield, the more valuable you are. For my needs - bass player in cover bands - I find that combination of charts (lyrics w/chords) and playing along works best for my learning pace. I've used charts and "proper" music in a few cases where that one little bit isn't clearly discernable with my normal routine. My "proper" music sight reading on bass is poor (can't keep my eyes on the page) and tabs give me fits - but I can use either tool to learn if needed.

YMMV. We all learn differently and it's important to understand what tool or combination of tools works best for you. Don't limit yourself to one or the other. Yes, I fully agree with OP that becoming proficient at sight reading ("proper") music is a long arduous process and for most of us, is probably not very useful. But understanding how to read music in general is very useful.

If for nothing else, I find that having some sort of chart on songs I learn to be very useful for long term needs. Haven't played a song I "learned" in a couple of years? I pull out my chart and have the song back under my fingers in a few minutes. I don't find this to be as true when I try to recall a song I learned with any chart.

 

[Goatrope]

My husband has been in the same group for something like eight years. Every Wednesday they come over here with their books and put them on their stands and play through pretty much the same group of songs they have been playing for eight years straight. He's the the only one who is not using written music at this point, which happened at my urging. It boggles my mind that they can play those songs for that long and not know them.

Interesting!

This is something that happens to me, and maybe it's just how I learn, or not learn.

When I've created a little cheat sheet, for those times when I had no time to really learn a song, I've sat that piece of paper on the floor, or taped to the back of one of the mains.

What I found was, the longer I used it, the more dependent on it I became. The faster I stopped looking at it, the faster I could memorize.

This seems to be how my brain works, and perhaps there are others who've experienced this phenomena.

 

[Pings Bass]

My biggest challenge lately is getting my nose out of the book. Memorization is highly under-rated, and was rarely emphasized in years of formal training.

When I was playing sax in a Latin band, the wife of one of the rhythm section guys asked how come the horn players all had books, but nobody else in the band needed them. I tried to explain that a bajo sexto player really just had to memorize 8-32 bars of chord changes, but the horn parts are very particular in their timing and intervals, and I was a hired side man not inclined to memorize a hundred songs out of the book that the leader may or may not call on a given job.

But for bass... no excuse! Except... I just haven't committed the time to memorizing the books for my current projects.

 

[LBS-bass]

Interesting!

This is something that happens to me, and maybe it's just how I learn, or not learn.

When I've created a little cheat sheet, for those times when I had no time to really learn a song, I've sat that piece of paper on the floor, or taped to the back of one of the mains.

What I found was, the longer I used it, the more dependent on it I became. The faster I stopped looking at it, the faster I could memorize.

This seems to be how my brain works, and perhaps there are others who've experienced this phenomena.

Same here. I used to do a monthly gig with a guy I know and we didn't really rehearse. He had all of his charts online and I'd upload them to my iPad and we'd go play that show every third Saturday, or whatever it was. With the charts in front of me, I never really learned his songs very well and was a lot more dependent on them than I would have been if I'd otherwise just listened, instead.

Right now I'm learning repertoire for a new band and I had to explain to them last week that I don't have a book because making notes, for me, will come later, after I've learned the songs and understand what my trouble spots might be. Generally the only "note" I ever need to make is which note is the first note I play. Once I am oriented that way, my fingers do the rest.