Who doesn't read music?

[Ed Goode]

I’m a fluent reader, been reading music my whole life (well, since I was in 2nd grade). For a fact, I landed lots of gigs I never would have if I didn’t read. That meant I was better able to feed my family. But does that make me a better bass player than anyone else posting in this thread? Of course not ...

In my opinion only (really, no kidding, just my opinion) it’s limiting if you’re not musically literate. Doesn’t mean that you can’t play, doesn’t mean you don’t groove, doesn’t mean I’m better than you in any way EXCEPT that I can read, where maybe you can’t. If all things are equal except for the reading part, I’ll get the gig. That’s where reading matters.

 

[Pops OB]

Just think how much Hendrix, Clapton, Michael Jackson, Eddie Van Halen and the Beatles could have made had they only known how to read music! Yes, it can help, but it’s timing that plays a big role. I know plenty of starving musicians. Some read music and some don’t.

 

[JC Nelson]

After several years of pit gigs including Le Miserables, and hundreds of wasted hours memorizing scores by listening to the music, last year a cello player came in with no practice time and played the score nearly perfect by sight reading. I decided at that point to learn to read. Learning is painfully slow in the beginning, however well worth the effort.

For those just learning to read, the thing that really helped me was to learn where to play each scale on the circle of 5ths and the notes in each scale. The sharps and flats at the beginning of a piece of music (key signature) will tell you what key to play in. Just jump to that scale and all of your notes are there.

We live in a time now when you can find sheet music for nearly every song. You can even run a recorded piece through a program that converts to written music.

Every moment you spend learning to read will come back to you in time you save in the future.

 

[SteveCS]

... had they only known how to read music! Yes, it can help, but it’s timing that plays a big role. ...

Presumably and hopefully you mean being in the right place at the right time, and not the mystical grooooove that, according to myth and legend, abandons anyone the minute they open a score?

 

[Pilgrim]

I read music, but I'm rusty enough that it takes a couple of runs through a number to sort it out. If I had regular need to read music, it would quickly get easy.

At present, the bands I play with use ChordPro files and I work from them. I seldom duplicate the original bass line, but I'll make sure to get the hooks.

 

[Sbassman Scratch]

I read bass and treble cleff at a 2nd grade level, but I go completely stupid if I have to switch between the two. If I’m practicing a song in one and later in the other, my brain stays in the first, and sometimes gets stuck there for days, so later I still read E for G, or wharever.
My respect for keyboard players has increased accordingly.

 

[Marlon Carbone]

Probably a limited analogy, but there are, I am told, between 6,500 and 7,000 (known) languages in the world, many of which have no written form.

We would never presume to say that, because none of them can read their mother tongue, none of them can speak it.

I would guess that most of the world’s cultures and languages also have a musical tradition of some sort. But if their spoken language has no written form, how likely would it be that their music does have one?

Are there, by that lack, no musicians? I don’t understand why there is such division over a particular skill. Is storytelling at least preserved by having a written language? Certainly, it is, but storytellers far predated writing. It seems to me that reading well is a valuable skill, but not invalidating other skills.

Just a thought. I read and write English fairly well, but read and write music quite poorly. I see that as a lack in my skill-set, but I don’t allow it to keep me from playing.

I'll run with this. You don't necessarily need to be able to read and write music to be a musician. You need to be able to speak music. That means knowing the rules of the language so you can be accurate in your ability to discuss concepts. So you should (at the very least) know the concepts of music (e.g. theory) in order to call yourself a musician. Once you know theory, reading and writing is a fairly easy step that only requires a little repetition.

I will say this too... when you have a language that isn't written, the transfer of knowledge is warped from generation to generation.

A lack of language skills... or even a lack of intelligence... does not stop anybody from saying (or, indeed, typing) nonsense, hurtful things, stupid concepts, and even fighting over all of that. I'm just saying you can't say you're an English speaker if you can only parrot the words that are said to you. You can even use English words that sound nice together, but don't make any sense... that still doesn't make you an English speaker. If you don't know the meaning of what you're saying, you aren't a speaker of that language.

I mean... think about Jon Anderson (singer for Yes). I love Yes, but their lyrics make no sense at all. Jon Anderson, however, thinks very highly of his English skills. So much so, that he attempted to write a novel (Part of it is online, on his web site). The writing is unreadable because it's like his lyrics... it makes no sense.

Can he call himself a writer? Can he call himself a wordsmith? Sure! But you won't hear me agreeing with him. And, I think it's a slap in the face to writers like Poe, Shakespeare, and even guys like Stephen King.

Still, this is a long way off of the OP, which is just to get a general sense of how many people have to read at their gigs.

 

[1st Bass]

Having a written language is an advantage in every way.

Being able to use that written language fluently and, not only able to “make sense”, but able to bring pleasure to the reader (regardless of genre) is to be desired.

My mother was a piano-teacher, and read very well: I sincerely wish that I had better mastered that skill. But the fact is, I read like a toddler sucking his thumb while spelling things out one letter at a time. Sad, but true.

 

[DWBass]

I am in agreement that reading (in some form) or at least understanding music should be a requisite depending on the situation. At the very least, one should know the notes on the fretboard. Knowing the basic shapes of chords (Major, minor, augmented, diminished, etc.) and how root notes fit in. However, a lot of this is thrown out when you have alternate tunings and now you have an entire new language to decipher. I grew up playing mostly r&b and funk music during a time when there was no sheet music for it. There still isn't. Those who did read maybe took the time to transcribe but most of us used our ears playing along to the record or the radio. I've seen some old time blues cats who tuned their guitars so all they had to do was bar everything. They just play. Is there a school or book for that? I see the importance of knowing how to read music but I personally place an equal amount of importance on ear training. As a kid, I was playing stuff on my mom's piano long before knowing what the notes were. My mom was amazed. She started me on piano lessons. I remember a friend of my mom's who owned a small record label challenged me one time. I may have been 13 or so. He gave me a Coltrane record and told me to learn the bassline to Greensleeves (Africa album). I played it almost immediately. It wasn't a hard song but I can pick things up by ear pretty quickly.

 

[DWBass]

Having a written language is an advantage in every way.

Being able to use that written language fluently and, not only able to “make sense”, but able to bring pleasure to the reader (regardless of genre) is to be desired.

My mother was a piano-teacher, and read very well: I sincerely wish that I had better mastered that skill. But the fact is, I read like a toddler sucking his thumb while spelling things out one letter at a time. Sad, but true.

My mom needs sheet music or else cannot play.

 

[1st Bass]

My mom needs sheet music or else cannot play.

You are lucky! My mom has been dead twenty-one years, and can't play at all. Ah, well....

I play by ear, piano, violin, guitar, etc. and make no claim to being a musician. Used to think I sorta was, but after a few years on this forum, seeing what REAL musicians can do, I have abdicated that claim, and simply enjoy making the music and playing for others, to my limited ability.

Peace to all, and blessings for the New Year.

 

[Durham52]

I'll run with this. You don't necessarily need to be able to read and write music to be a musician. You need to be able to speak music. That means knowing the rules of the language so you can be accurate in your ability to discuss concepts. So you should (at the very least) know the concepts of music (e.g. theory) in order to call yourself a musician. Once you know theory, reading and writing is a fairly easy step that only requires a little repetition.

I will say this too... when you have a language that isn't written, the transfer of knowledge is warped from generation to generation.

A lack of language skills... or even a lack of intelligence... does not stop anybody from saying (or, indeed, typing) nonsense, hurtful things, stupid concepts, and even fighting over all of that. I'm just saying you can't say you're an English speaker if you can only parrot the words that are said to you. You can even use English words that sound nice together, but don't make any sense... that still doesn't make you an English speaker. If you don't know the meaning of what you're saying, you aren't a speaker of that language.

I mean... think about Jon Anderson (singer for Yes). I love Yes, but their lyrics make no sense at all. Jon Anderson, however, thinks very highly of his English skills. So much so, that he attempted to write a novel (Part of it is online, on his web site). The writing is unreadable because it's like his lyrics... it makes no sense.

Can he call himself a writer? Can he call himself a wordsmith? Sure! But you won't hear me agreeing with him. And, I think it's a slap in the face to writers like Poe, Shakespeare, and even guys like Stephen King.

Still, this is a long way off of the OP, which is just to get a general sense of how many people have to read at their gigs.

I hope I haven't misunderstood what you're saying, but your comments did make me think.

I take your point that understanding the theory of music makes it easier to communicate and discuss concepts, all be it only with other people who know music theory and I'm not sure a person either being, or not being, a musician can be determined based on their ability to understand and communicate music theory. (I also assume you are referring to western music theory?) Surely an accomplished Australian Didgeridoo player is a musician? Or a tribal American drummer is a musician? Or an early 20th centaury blues player in rural America was a musician? Though I doubt any of them could discuss western music theory with you.

I can read music and I have a reasonable level of understanding of music theory, but even if I had the greatest knowledge of theory imaginable it wouldn't make me a musician based on that knowledge alone, I'd still have to be able to play music. Which ever way we look at it to my mind playing music makes someone a musician and a knowledge of theory is a plus, but a knowledge of theory doesn't necessarily make someone a musician, nor does a lack of knowledge of theory disqualify someone from being a musician. Paul McCartney has had no traditional musical training and can't read music, yet he can play guitar, bass, drums and piano. He has also written possibly more classic and/or popular songs than any other songwriter of the last one hundred years. I think he's probably a musician...

 

[micque]

Being a raging ADHD person, I can hyper focus on some things and playing bass is one of them, I've learned to read tabs, but only for learning a track, doing the homework part, but there is no way that I can read music and play at the same time, of course the music we play is Rock Jazz blues fusion sort of thing, Frank Marino, Jethro Tull, Yes, etc...

 

[Beejay772]

Music comes on sheets?

 

[TobyTheBass]

I can read music quite well but I mad the choice not to with bass because I just find it easier

 

[Medford Bassman]

I am in agreement that reading (in some form) or at least understanding music should be a requisite depending on the situation. At the very least, one should know the notes on the fretboard. Knowing the basic shapes of chords (Major, minor, augmented, diminished, etc.) and how root notes fit in. However, a lot of this is thrown out when you have alternate tunings and now you have an entire new language to decipher. I grew up playing mostly r&b and funk music during a time when there was no sheet music for it. There still isn't. Those who did read maybe took the time to transcribe but most of us used our ears playing along to the record or the radio. I've seen some old time blues cats who tuned their guitars so all they had to do was bar everything. They just play. Is there a school or book for that? I see the importance of knowing how to read music but I personally place an equal amount of importance on ear training. As a kid, I was playing stuff on my mom's piano long before knowing what the notes were. My mom was amazed. She started me on piano lessons. I remember a friend of my mom's who owned a small record label challenged me one time. I may have been 13 or so. He gave me a Coltrane record and told me to learn the bassline to Greensleeves (Africa album). I played it almost immediately. It wasn't a hard song but I can pick things up by ear pretty quickly.

I agree with some of what you say. However, I remember classmates from college who were majoring in music and just about all of them were required to transcribe by ear. I find this useful in two ways. One, it builds solid ear training skills and two, by requiring to transcribe onto paper, allows a solid understanding of musical notation. As with anything in life, the more you do something, the better you become. In my current band, we don't use sheet music, mainly just chord charts, an occasional tab and mostly listening to recordings. every so often, if i don't have the time to woodshed the song by ear, i may pickup the sheet music for it and i find I can get the general gist of the song faster.

Also, on occasion I have been asked to provide bass for musical theater and I find that helps to keep up my sight reading chops. Plus, there's no way I could just listen to a recording of a broadway musical and play it correctly in performance because often musical directors, cut parts, multiple measures, etc if they need to for a performance. The musical directors I've worked with will cut major sections, or rearrange parts and without a working knowledge of reading music, i think a person would be lost. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Marlon Carbone]

I hope I haven't misunderstood what you're saying, but your comments did make me think.

I take your point that understanding the theory of music makes it easier to communicate and discuss concepts, all be it only with other people who know music theory and I'm not sure a person either being, or not being, a musician can be determined based on their ability to understand and communicate music theory. (I also assume you are referring to western music theory?) Surely an accomplished Australian Didgeridoo player is a musician? Or a tribal American drummer is a musician? Or an early 20th centaury blues player in rural America was a musician? Though I doubt any of them could discuss western music theory with you.

I can read music and I have a reasonable level of understanding of music theory, but even if I had the greatest knowledge of theory imaginable it wouldn't make me a musician based on that knowledge alone, I'd still have to be able to play music. Which ever way we look at it to my mind playing music makes someone a musician and a knowledge of theory is a plus, but a knowledge of theory doesn't necessarily make someone a musician, nor does a lack of knowledge of theory disqualify someone from being a musician. Paul McCartney has had no traditional musical training and can't read music, yet he can play guitar, bass, drums and piano. He has also written possibly more classic and/or popular songs than any other songwriter of the last one hundred years. I think he's probably a musician...

I don't want to hijack this thread, but you didn't misunderstand me. I would not consider those people musicians. I would consider them proficient players, but not musicians. Just like I can build really wonderful things in wood, but would never consider myself a carpenter. And, Sir Paul can read and write music (he took piano and music lessons young in life). So, I would consider him a musician.

 

[SteveCS]

I don't want to hijack this thread, but you didn't misunderstand me. I would not consider those people musicians. I would consider them proficient players, but not musicians.
...

Then, IMHO, you are doing most of the world's music a great disservice and showing it's proponents the greatest disrespect.

 

[Durham52]

Then, IMHO, you are doing most of the world's music a great disservice and showing it's proponents the greatest disrespect.

I have to agree, but then like the poster being quoted and responded to, we are all just expressing our own opinions.

As for Paul McCartney reading and writing music, he said in 2017, while doing a performance and Q&A session, that he could not read or write music and had never studied music theory. Both he, other members of the Beatles and George Martin have said in the past that when they were working together, Martin was the only one who could read and write music notation. I'll take him and them at their words, especially given the ammunition such admissions would provide to the "they're only making popular music" crowd.

 

[Dr_Benway]

I have to agree, but then like the poster being quoted and responded to, we are all just expressing our own opinions.

As for Paul McCartney reading and writing music, he said in 2017, while doing a performance and Q&A session, that he could not read or write music and had never studied music theory. Both he, other members of the Beatles and George Martin have said in the past that when they were working together, Martin was the only one who could read and write music notation. I'll take him and them at their words, especially given the ammunition such admissions would provide to the "they're only making popular music" crowd.

That's true. Paul would sing the part to George and he would transcribe it. So, who knows how successful the Beatles would have been without Producer Martin's ability to help them realize their ideas.

As for reading. I learned to read at a very young age and promptly forgot all of it once I started working full time as a musician. I never needed more than a Nashville numbers type chart in a session and I'm lucky enough to be able to hear something and play it back with no trouble. Regardless of the instrument. I was originally trained in piano and picked up guitar on my own. Didn't start playing bass until I was working in a recording studio and constantly having to fix or replace poorly executed bass parts.

Fourteen years ago I lucked into a career as in-house sound/recording engineer at a performing arts center/school. I was also required to teach audio classes and ended up creating educational content, using student musicians... Long story short, I had to go back and relearn everything I'd forgotten and then much more. I had to create charts for students to read. The first transcription I had to do was the vocal chart for Bohemian Rhapsody. It was a mess, but we got through it. The students were kind and pointed out mistakes I'd made.

Here is a link to a practice run we did at lunch time

I've been doing charts ever since. It really helps with vocal arrangements if I have the chart written out. Even with my gigging band, I usually have all the parts notated. I don't believe I would have ever been able to figure out how to play Good Vibrations with a three piece power trio and make it work, without working the arrangement out on paper.

It's funny, that during most of this time, I was writing and not site reading. A few years back I got another assignment from the curriculum department. They wanted original arrangements of public domain songs that they could use in music lessons. All they gave me was a melody line on a lead sheet and some directions about what they wanted to achieve in the lesson. The first time I had to play a melody from one of their lead sheets, I found myself looking at the notes and picking out the melody with no problem. just like reading a book. Since then I've managed to become more and more proficient. I really wish I'd never let that skill go by the wayside.

I see lots of posts disparaging site-reading here, but it's the language. You will become a better musician if you learn it.