Why cant we all read?

[Tampabass]

No, you haven't. Every time someone has advocated the value of learning to read music you've had some sort of counter argument against it.

Nobody said reading music would guarantee results. It just opens doors. Why discourage that?

 

[Brad Johnson]

The downside of being a "devil's advocate" here -- arguing against the value of reading music, just for the sake of arguing, when one really knows better -- is that some players here, particularly the younger ones, will take that argument at face value.

And they'll think that what THAT GUY says here about how reading music really isn't that worthwhile must be true, because THAT GUY is such a solid player, etc.

For those younger readers, please take note of the fact that NOBODY has come up with a list of the benefits of NOT learning to read music.

Why? Because there are none.

One last time... I am not arguing against the value of reading. I am pointing out that many of the exaggerated results of reading come from people who refuse to really think before they right.

If people can't understand the difference, that's cool... and to be expected.

 

[Febs]

Jimmy is right, as far as I can see now, you're trolling. This is just getting pointless and tiresome...

Every time Brad gets involved in a thread, three things happen:

(1) No matter how long the thread was before he got involved, Brad virtually instaneously becomes the top poster.

(2) No matter what the thread was previously about, it becomes a thread about Brad Johnson.

(3) No matter how civil or interesting the discussion was before he got involved, the thread becomes a pointless morass about who said what to whom, until the moderators step in and put the thread out of its misery by closing it.

Just put him on your ignore list. Trust me, it makes TB a much more enjoyable place.

 

[Tampabass]

One last time... I am not arguing against the value of reading. I am pointing out that many of the exaggerated results of reading come from people who refuse to really think before they right.

If people can't understand the difference, that's cool... and to be expected.

arguing for the sake of arguing? To be expected.

 

[Brad Johnson]

No, you haven't. Every time someone has advocated the value of learning to read music you've had some sort of counter argument against it.

Really. That is simply ignorant. Willfully so because the posts are still there. By all means don't reference them to find out how how woefully wrong you are.

Nobody said reading music would guarantee results. It just opens doors. Why discourage that?

Again, the posts are still there. They are speaking of what WILL, not MIGHT result. That's WRONG. And worse.


Apparently this is above many pay grades.

 

[Brad Johnson]

arguing for the sake of arguing? To be expected.

Apparently beats the heck out of reading for comprehension, eh?

Bye.

 

[eSmith]

Brad, what's with all the mock offence when you know full well your just playing word games. You said it right here:

In my case I typically don't even pick up my instrument to learn it

That to me indicated a totaL LACK OF PRACTICE.

So your reply full of offence cannot be taken seriously nor can your incorrect claims that others are putting words in your mouth by accurately interperting what you say.

After clearly indicating above that you don't typically practice, this reply is just silly:

Did I say I don't practice?

Wow. Now I'm recommending against practice AND reading. All without actually having to write those sentiments.

Reading (words) isn't fundamental, it's apparently much harder than it seems.

-eSmith.

 

[Brad Johnson]

You don't need the oral skills to read your tax statment out loud. Lets see how well you do if you don't know how to read it.

Lots of songwriters do not perform the music they write, mostly because they cannot do it well, however, that goes both ways and the person who CAN perform it, unless they can read, cannot write.

Sure, even a blind pig finds a truffle from time to time just like hacks sometimes stumble upon a decent song or a hook to entertain the masses but consider this:

Turn the lights out in a room and throw darts randomly at a board. your bound to get one or two on target but that is a pretty hit or miss method and a poor way to go about playing darts. You certainly cannot advance past the abilities of those who play with the lights on.

In the musical world, do you want to stumble around in the dark or play with the lights on?

What I have to question is the guy against the wall who is trying to defend AGAINST someone turning on the switch for others? Brad, what do you have against OTHERS learning to read so much that you are online here arguing against it.

And, ya, I also what to know the benifits of NOT learning to read so I can compair it against the large list of reasons why a player should.

-eSmith.

It's cool. I understand that you really haven't understood a word I've said.

 

[JimmyM]

Wow, read much?


It's not an invention, it's what people have actually said. I quoted them several times. On rare occassions they even address the hyperbole. More often than not they don't. People are unequivocably stating what WILL happen if you learn to read. They are stating what the results WILL be. That is likely a piss poor choice of words on their part but no one put them in their mouths.

no brad, it's just that the obvious doesn't need to be stated. obviously you need to work at reading to get the benefit. obviously you still need to practice your instrument. only someone who is doing a phony devil's advocate act on the internet would pretend that we're saying you don't have to apply yourself to make it work if we don't point it out every single time we mention the benefits.

What's getting old is the inabilty of so many to work within the common language on this forum. If you're not guaranteeing a result, don't speak in terms that specifically guarantee a result. How hard is that?

my new space age washing machine liquid guarantees cleaner clothes and brighter whites, but it's patently obvious to anyone that if you leave it in the box that it's not going to do anything except congeal over time. same for reading, and castigating someone for not pointing that out is a bunch of crap, and it's one of the big reasons why so many people get on you in these arguments. so just to make you happy:

GUARANTEED RESULTS DO NOT APPLY IF YOU DON'T WORK AT IT.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Brad, what's with all the mock offence when you know full well your just playing word games. You said it right here:

That to me indicated a totaL LACK OF PRACTICE.

You know it's strange... it indicated to me that I'd gotten to a point where I didn't need to hold my bass to learn how to play a song on it... because I've practiced.

It's cool. I understand that you really haven't understood a word I've said.

So your reply full of offence cannot be taken seriously nor can your incorrect claims that others are putting words in your mouth by accurately interperting what you say.

Seriously I have no idea what you're smoking. read the thread again and see if you feel the same way. This time without offense.

After clearly indicating above that you don't typically practice, this reply is just silly:

-eSmith.

Again, I didn't say I didn't practice. That was simply you jumping to an ill advised conclusion.

Funny stuff.

 

[Tampabass]

and with that, I bid a fond adieu.

For the non-readers, please look at (some of) these posts as simply encouraging you to unlock the door to greater appreciation/understanding of music by learning to read music.

It may take a while, but I promise you that with some effort you'll get there. 99.9% of music readers will tell you that it is indeed worthwhile. Don't let those .1% who say that learning music won't guarantee anything (d'oh!) discourage you from making the effort.

And pay no attention to the "devil's advocate" in the crowd. He makes a lot of noise, but behind the smoke and mirrors there's apparently not much wisdom to be gained from him. He'd rather argue than have a meaningful discussion. As usual.

 

[Ed Goode]

Man, this thread is full of the chuckles

Columbo wouldn't even be able to figure what the heck has happened here .....

Thanks, fellas, you all have made a VERY boring conference call quite entertaining ....

 

[Brad Johnson]

no brad, it's just that the obvious doesn't need to be stated. obviously you need to work at reading to get the benefit. obviously you still need to practice your instrument. only someone who is doing a phony devil's advocate act on the internet would pretend that we're saying you don't have to apply yourself to make it work if we don't point it out every single time we mention the benefits.

You know, Jimmy, I would've thought the obvious wouldn't need tobe stated either but after being here this long I know you can't take anything for granted.

Hey, did ya here, now I'm against practice too.

my new space age washing machine liquid guarantees cleaner clothes and brighter whites, but it's patently obvious to anyone that if you leave it in the box that it's not going to do anything except congeal over time. same for reading, and castigating someone for not pointing that out is a bunch of crap, and it's one of the big reasons why so many people get on you in these arguments. so just to make you happy:

GUARANTEED RESULTS DO NOT APPLY IF YOU DON'T WORK AT IT.

And even if you do the results are not guaranteed.

You guys are killing me.


I read treble clef for trumpet from maybe grades 3 through 12. By the logic here I should've been able to play ANYTHING.

When I talk about playing, I mean whatever the music is AT SPEED. Just incase the obvious is deluding anyone else.