dots vs ears

[colomon]

Yeah, I don't know the circumstances, but I have certainly heard "professional" recordings of Irish traditional music that sounded exactly as if the player had never actually heard an honest-to-God traditional musician.

That's actually pretty close to par for the course for professional classical musicians playing music inspired by traditional music, too....

Of course, in both cases, it may not be learning from the dot that was the problem -- there are plenty of so-so to outright crappy recordings of Irish music to learn from, and a lot of them have greater exposure than the good stuff.

[johnkerr]

In fact, I wonder is there anyone on these forums who actually believes you can learn the heart of irish music by never ever listening to a single note of it?

No, but you can't say the same about the converse. There are lots of great Irish trad musicians (some of the best actually) who can't read a note of printed music. Some of them (Mike Rafferty for one, IIRC) don't even know the name of the notes they are playing. They learned and play entirely by ear and aural memory.

I would bet there isn't...which makes me wonder why this "dots vs ear" thing keeps coming up in the first place.

Because "ear" is required, while "dots" are optional. Naturally, there are always those who are weak in the ear who want to advance the position that ear is merely optional. Thus the eternal "dots vs ear" argument. Unlike the beer ads, though, this is not a case of "less filling" vs "tastes great"!

[Denny]

Naturally, there are always those who are weak in the ear who want to advance the position that ear is merely optional.

...and those for whom the very mention of dots sends them off in a fury.

I missed the post in this thread that suggested that dots were more than a tool.

It was mentioned that if you can read the dots well enough you can hear the pitch and tempo as notated.
This, it seems to me, would sugest that the ear is developed enough to recognize the pitches and intervals between them.
No?

[Screeeech!!!]

The ear players on these forums seem to come across that one has to listen to every reel played by a confirmed ITM player before one can play it properly. But surely once one knows how a reel feels in ITM then one can play any reel in ITM?

A jig is a jig, a hornpipe is a hornpipe. Once you know what they are supposed to feel like in ITM then surely you can take the dots to any of them and play it with the correct feel and ornament it however you please to get the required feel.

Or am i missing something?

Please don't blast me. These are genuine questions that seem, to my mind, to be being overlooked here.

listening is much more important in Irish Traditional music than most other genres. One person put it at 40% for ITM, for other genres, sheet music might give 80% or 90%.

I think this is a little bit of ITM snobbery. You can't play classical music from the dots unless you know how to play classical music, you can't play ITM from the dots unless you know how to play ITM, you can't play blue beat, and ska from the dots unless you know how to play blue beat and ska, etc., etc.. It's all the same thing, they're absolutes, there aren't any percentages in it.

I really don't see why ear players have to keep dissing notation players. Just because you heard a few people who learned from notation who were pants doesn't mean it's the notation's fault. It's the fault of those people for not learning the genre. Whether you play by ear or notation in any given genre, you must learn to play in the feel of the genre in order to play the music in that genre.

They are plenty of awful ear players out there as well as notation players.

[Denny]

I think this is a little bit of ITM snobbery.

It is the Folk vs. the Gentry issue.

It should die down in an other couple of hundred years...

[David Levine]

But surely once one knows how a reel feels in ITM then one can play any reel in ITM?

A jig is a jig, a hornpipe is a hornpipe. Once you know what they are supposed to feel like in ITM then surely you can take the dots to any of them and play it with the correct feel and ornament it however you please to get the required feel.

I think this is a little bit of ITM snobbery.
Whether you play by ear or notation in any given genre, you must learn to play in the feel of the genre in order to play the music in that genre.

They are plenty of awful ear players out there as well as notation players.

I think this is by and large true. I don't dis the dots; I like the dots; the dots are my friends. Where's the snobbery? I find some classical musicians intolerable. I don't even answer anymore those who imply that, given their classical expertise on the instrument, it will be a walk in the park to play ITM. They tend to play stiffly and without passion.
I know that the music will survive their "corrupting" influence. More important, in time these classical players might be assimilated by ITM and make a genuine contribution, like so many of the hot-dog younger players who are stretching the tradition.

[Wanderer]

...and those for whom the very mention of dots sends them off in a fury.

I missed the post in this thread that suggested that dots were more than a tool.

I missed it too, which is why I wondered in the first place

More often here, I see "dots haters" (I use the term loosely) bring this up than the reverse..I may have missed the rare occurance where someone here has said "I never need to hear a lick of irish music to know how to play it", but I know I've heard a hundred times the equivalent reverse dogma with the same strawman as the reasoning.

Really, please, someone point me to a post that says that the ear is entirely optional..I really don't recall ever seeing it. If such a post doesn't exist, I'm still left wondering why the some people keep beating on this dead horse?

[BillChin]

Or am i missing something?

Please don't blast me. These are genuine questions that seem, to my mind, to be being overlooked here.

listening is much more important in Irish Traditional music than most other genres. One person put it at 40% for ITM, for other genres, sheet music might give 80% or 90%.

I think this is a little bit of ITM snobbery. You can't play classical music from the dots unless you know how to play classical music, you can't play ITM from the dots unless you know how to play ITM, you can't play blue beat, and ska from the dots unless you know how to play blue beat and ska, etc., etc.. It's all the same thing, they're absolutes, there aren't any percentages in it. ...

There are no absolutes, but there are strong tendencies. If a person shows up at a session with a folder full of sheet music and starts pulling sheets and asking musicians for tune names while people are playing, what are the regulars going to think? It just isn't done. Not to say that it can't be done, but it is poor manners, bad etiquette, and demonstrates a poor understanding of the genre.

Similarly, if a person signs up for an community based classical orchestra, but doesn't know how to read sheet music, what will probably happen? The leader will probably not let him/her in, unless they commit to learning how to sight read, and are far above average talent for that group.

Take that same person who doesn't know how to sight read and have him/her show up at a session. If they have a good ear for music, they will have found home. Or switch it, and take the sight reader to the classical orchestra, and he/she will feel right at home, because virtually everyone else will have a folder full of sheet music and the leader will say turn to page such-and-such or we are going to practice this-or-that and please pull out your sheet music.

There is no right or wrong in learning to sight read or learning by ear. Neither is "better" than the other, and both are extremely useful. However, there are definitely tendencies in how certain music is performed, practiced and propagated.

My bottom line, is for people to enjoy their music. Dots, ear training, whatever, have a good time.

[clark]

It was mentioned that if you can read the dots well enough you can hear the pitch and tempo as notated.
This, it seems to me, would sugest that the ear is developed enough to recognize the pitches and intervals between them.
No?

This is an interesting notion that strikes close to home for me. My father was a professional Jazz musician. He had an amazing ear and an amazing ability to produce musical charts when necessary. When we would go out to listen to music, he would concentrate very hard (almost a trance like meditative state) with his eyes closed. He told me that when he does this he sees a score appear in his mind of the muisic he is listenting to as it is being played. When this happens then he is able to recall and write down the music as long as it is within three or four hours of hearing it. He said he has ripped off some great riffs that way!

He was always surprized that I - or everyone - couldn't do this. He thought that all it took was practice because he wasn't always able to do this. But what he failed to realize is that he was always able to distinguish what note was being played just by hearing it - perfect pitch - and what an advantage that is.

There is recent evidence in the pediatric audiology research (sorry I teach pediatrics at University of Hawaii) that "tone deafness" does exist. In the experiment infants were exposed to a repeating tone that was suddenly changed in pitch. When the pitch change came the infant was given some milk in a bottle. After a few trials the infant, upon hearing the change in pitch, would anticipate the bottle and get excited; therefore, you could see that the infant could hear the difference in the pitch. What was then done was the pitch change was gradually narrowed until the infant could not hear the difference. There was quite a wide range of ability. Most could decern well within a quarter or even an eighth of a tone, but a few would get excited at just a few cycles difference. To the researchers it sounded like the same pitch, but these few babies and the instruments could hear the difference. On the other end of the bell curve there were a few infants who could not hear a difference between pitches 1.5 steps apart. It would be interesting to see if this last group grew up to be those people who can't seem to carry a tune at all. American Idol try-outs thrive on people from this end of the bell curve for the comedy relief ala William Hung.

I suspect people with perfect pitch are those who have an ability to decern very fine nuances of pitch change - and who are musicians. Exposure to a particular set of pitches is necessary for reference. A jack-hammer operator with perfect pitch may be able to hear the fine differences between jack-hammers; but wouldn't label them with note names.

Anyway, it is not necessary to have anything like perfect pitch to learn tunes by ear. I can learn a tune by ear during a session ...but I can't seem to remember it the next morning. That's what I use the dots for.

Clark

[BillChin]

...and those for whom the very mention of dots sends them off in a fury.

I missed the post in this thread that suggested that dots were more than a tool.

I missed it to, which is why I wondered in the first place

More often here, I see "dots haters" (I use the term loosely) bring this up than the reverse..I may have missed the rare occurance where someone here has said "I never need to hear a lick of irish music to know how to play it", but I know I've heard a hundred times the equivalent reverse dogma with the same strawman as the reasoning.

Really, please, someone point me to a post that says that the ear is entirely optional..I really don't recall ever seeing it. If such a post doesn't exist, I'm still left wondering why the some people keep beating on this dead horse?

It is funny because I find most of the vitriol on the other side. That the mention of learning by ear as the best way, brings personal attacks and more. Nothing wrong with using dots as a tool, but it is not the way ITM has been handed down over the past hundred or two hundred years. Perhaps it is evolving and changing and sheet music and music stands will become common at sessions all over the world. Then again, perhaps not.

[bradhurley]

Nothing wrong with using dots as a tool, but it is not the way ITM has been handed down over the past hundred or two hundred years.

Well hold on, that's not true either. A lot of great tunes would have been lost forever if they hadn't been written down in the great collections. And a lot of traditional players learn tunes from these collections. Look through the liner notes of CDs of respected traditional players and you'll find that many of them have learned some of their tunes from books. And they're not embarrassed to admit it.

[michael_coleman]

I don't even answer anymore those who imply that, given their classical expertise on the instrument, it will be a walk in the park to play ITM. They tend to play stiffly and without passion.
I know that the music will survive their "corrupting" influence. More important, in time these classical players might be assimilated by ITM and make a genuine contribution, like so many of the hot-dog younger players who are stretching the tradition.

You wouldn't believe how many I've come across who think that because they play violin they can then play fiddle.

[Wormdiet]

I don't even answer anymore those who imply that, given their classical expertise on the instrument, it will be a walk in the park to play ITM. They tend to play stiffly and without passion.
I know that the music will survive their "corrupting" influence. More important, in time these classical players might be assimilated by ITM and make a genuine contribution, like so many of the hot-dog younger players who are stretching the tradition.

You wouldn't believe how many I've come across who think that because they play violin they can then play fiddle.

Happens on flute occasionally as well.

[fearfaoin]

Of course, in both cases, it may not be learning from the dot that was the problem -- there are plenty of so-so to outright crappy recordings of Irish music to learn from, and a lot of them have greater exposure than the good stuff.

This is a good point... listening is important, but perhaps more
important is who you listen to. How do you make that choice?
Taste is subjective, but surely there's some yardstick to identify
carriers of the tradition.

[Wormdiet]

Of course, in both cases, it may not be learning from the dot that was the problem -- there are plenty of so-so to outright crappy recordings of Irish music to learn from, and a lot of them have greater exposure than the good stuff.

This is a good point... listening is important, but perhaps more
important is who you listen to. How do you make that choice?
Taste is subjective, but surely there's some yardstick to identify
carriers of the tradition.

There's always the "Matt Molloy" yardstick, if we want to get ugly.

Funny how the big bugaboo topics have a way of morphing into each other. Where's MurphyStout when we need him to lay down the smack?