another ear/dots post..

[amar]

ok, really now, this is not a which is better post..
I am just curious about one thing. I don't know how to read the dots, I learn everything I play by listening alone.

I know there are people out there that think I should learn the dots, I know there are people that think the best way to learn tunes is by ear. Ok, that's settled.

My question:
Are there people out there that think if I were to learn the dots, that in fact it would be a 'bad' thing to do?

[talasiga]

Amarji,
Not a month goes by without some flautist or whistle player coming to me amazed by my ability to play along and improvise on music I have never heard before. Invariably they request me to give them paid lessons in how to do this. Mostly, they are better instrumentalists then me, highly trained and able to read musical scores better than me. Invariably, during the lesson it becomes obvious that they have an obsession about notating (sheet music notation) what I am teaching them and yet I am not teaching them notatable stuff BUT , rather, sharing an approach which involves the feeling ear, a mode cognisant brain and a kinesthetic approach to rhythm.

It is currently my prejudice, based on experience, that those who come to music through the caste markings of dots remain, more or less, dotted for life. Those who have already come to music, casteless and dot illiterate, will benefit from the dots at a later time. Of course I may be wrong in my prejudice. I am happy to admit this for I am not a person without hope.

I have not voted in the poll as yet.

[amar]

Amarji,
Not a month goes by without some flautist or whistle player coming to me amazed by my ability to play along and improvise on music I have never heard before. Invariably they request me to give them paid lessons in how to do this. Mostly, they are better instrumentalists then me, highly trained and able to read musical scores better than me. Invariably, during the lesson it becomes obvious that they have an obsession about notating (sheet music notation) what I am teaching them and yet I am not teaching them notatable stuff BUT , rather, sharing an approach which involves the feeling ear, a mode cognisant brain and a kinesthetic approach to rhythm.

It is currently my prejudice, based on experience, that those who come to music through the caste markings of dots remain, more or less, dotted for life. Those who have already come to music, casteless and dot illiterate, will benefit from the dots at a later time. Of course I may be wrong in my prejudice. I am happy to admit this for I am not a person without hope.

I have not voted in the poll as yet.

thank you. that was very insightful.

[Tommy]

My question:
Are there people out there that think if I were to learn the dots, that in fact it would be a 'bad' thing to do?[/quote]

Very good question, and you are brave for asking it here. In that the arugment over which way is better will come up. Try to ignore that arugument for now, and gain insight towards your answer.

There are basicaly three ways to learn a given subject. Seeing. Hearing. Doing. There are no two people that learn the exact same way. In our school years we may have thought the facts were what we were to learn.
But another important thing to learn is how to learn.

Some may learn music better by hearing the notes.
Some may learn better by seeing the dots.
Then with either of the two - rote learning by doing.

There are others on the board that do not engage in the arugment of the best way to learn music, and they are content to use a combination of all three.

I do not belive one way is better for everyone, but the way that works for each one is best.

Happy Holidays

[talasiga]

.....
I have not voted in the poll as yet.

There is no poll option for me.
As you will see from my earlier post, my poll postion would be:-
approach the dots (or other tablature) only after you have experienced interaction with the music without them first.

[Random notes]

I cannot play by ear, and that's all there is to it. I ascribe this deficiency to a lack of musical talent. I enjoy music and very much want to make it myself, but I have a terrible time learning a piece. For me, there is no choice. I need to have an aural reference to learn the shape of the piece, but the only way I can get the notes is to read the music.

I envy anyone who can learn a piece by either method, and cling to a flickering hope that, with time and practice, I will find that learning comes easier. To hope that I will be able to "fake it", i.e., follow along and then improvise, is probably too much. My greatest fear is that I may be condemned to be a music critic.

Regarding the matter at hand, is it not possible that a persons hard-wiring may determine which method must be used? Would that not be the root of "talent"?

There are counterexamples to Talasiga's proposition that someone who learns by dots is locked into playing off the page for life. Quite a few talented players have come from classical training to cross over into jazz. The fact that there are many excellent players who cannot make the transition from dots to improv does not prove that their early formal training is an impediment. Perhaps their talent is inherently limited to creating music from inkspots. There are physicists who have trouble writing a comprehensible paper and authors who have trouble figuring change. And then there are people like Feynman and Hawking who are adept at both arcane math and verbal communication.

The endless nature of the "dots v. ears" debate may simply be a symptom of the fact there are two distinct styles of learning music that are accessible to two distinct groups of people, and that there are only a few exceptional individuals whose talent encompasses both.

Or not.

Roger

[Screeeech!!!]

Some good points there Roger.

The way i see it is that some people like life safe and sure, they like to know what's going on and what's going to happen next. Other people like to live on the wild side, they don't care what's coming next, they'll manage it somehow when it arrives.

Both types of people play music, and there's a whole range of people in between.

Personally, i can improvise fine with people i know really well and play with regularly, but throw a stranger in the mix and i haven't got a clue what's going on.

It's nothing to do with talent, it's simple human psychology. We are what we are. Enjoy your music however you want to.

Back to Amar's question. No i don't think it's a bad thing to do. There's tons of notated music out there to be enjoyed.

[Feadin]

I have learned rythm/reading music and learning by ear at the same time. I mostly learn new tunes by ear, but I consider that being able to read music gives me a better understanding of rythm. I've heard hundreds of soundclips in the internet (both in the forums or external sites) that, though the players seem experienced, they break the rythm many times... many people add ornaments and they don't seem to understand or care about the lenght of the notes.
Of course they are great musicians that can't read dots, but it depends on the person.
So in my opinion reading music won't hurt at all, and even if you don't write/read music often later and keep learning by ear, the rythm basics will be very helpful. Be sure to start from the beggining and with a good teacher or experienced musician though. It's not just to asociate notes with dots

[peteinmn]

What Tommy and Random Notes said.

I simply cannot (after some years of trying) learn a piece without looking at the dots. Having said that, once the basic notes are in my head, I have little trouble "fooling around" with the piece to improvise, add grace notes, etc. Of course, I also listen to how others play the piece to get a sense of how it should sound.

I don't know what all the fuss is about. Since the objective is to be able to play the music, any way we can get there seems equally valid. Unless you can convince me that there is something mystical or magic about learning only by listening and that I will never be able to express the music properly unless I learn it only by ear, I believe the argument is pointless. Show me some empirical evidence that says so.

Bit of a tempest in a Teapot if you ask me.

[colomon]

The problem is, if you are interested in playing traditional music, there's so much going on in the music that the very best sheet music cannot tell you; and standard run-of-the-mill IRTrad sheet music falls far short of that level.

And it's not just understanding some generic "Irish style", whatever that is. It's the tradition of how to play that particular tune you're playing. Take two tunes that are very much alike in their basic shape -- say "The Merry Blacksmith" and "The Devils of Dublin". The outlines of the tunes are much the same, but there are a host of variations that are standard on the "Devils" that would seem completely out of place on "Blacksmith". It's all in the tradition of how the tune is played, and even super-detailed transcriptions like Grey Larsen's will only key you in to a tiny part of that. And that's only the bluntest level; there are many fine details too subtle to represent using standard music notation. That's why people emphasize listening.

This isn't to say that notation isn't a great tool -- it absolutely is. I would cry like a baby if I could get a Grey Larsen-style detailed transcription of any of Peter Horan's recordings. It would be a terrific study aid for working with the recordings, because it would let me focus on how to make it sound like Peter does, rather than spending half my time trying to figure out exactly what notes he's playing. (Better yet would be detailed transcriptions of every one of Peter's recordings of a given tune... what a treasure trove that would be!)

[Crevan]

I don't think that learning the dots will do your playing any harm at all. Once you learn them, you can simply choose not to use them if you want to. I need to use both dots and ear to play. I can manage learning a song by ear if I have to but I prefer to have the actual notes handy so I don't have to guess. I can't learn a song by just the dots alone. They only compliment my understanding of a tune.

[Denny]

Can you read poetry?
Can you repeat poetry that you have heard?
Can you make up poetry as you go?

Separate skills, may or may not be complementary.

[Unseen122]

Learn 'em. It can't really hurt. I have always read the dots but I can learn by ear, but not from recordings only in a Session envirment can I learn by ear. Why? I have no idea but that is just the way I am. I find if I know the basic tune it is very easy for me to pick it up regardless of if I am reading it from a sheet of music or if someone is playing it right in front of me.

[Lambchop]

Amarji,
Not a month goes by without some flautist or whistle player coming to me amazed by my ability to play along and improvise on music I have never heard before. Invariably they request me to give them paid lessons in how to do this. Mostly, they are better instrumentalists then me, highly trained and able to read musical scores better than me. Invariably, during the lesson it becomes obvious that they have an obsession about notating (sheet music notation) what I am teaching them and yet I am not teaching them notatable stuff BUT , rather, sharing an approach which involves the feeling ear, a mode cognisant brain and a kinesthetic approach to rhythm.

It is currently my prejudice, based on experience, that those who come to music through the caste markings of dots remain, more or less, dotted for life. Those who have already come to music, casteless and dot illiterate, will benefit from the dots at a later time. Of course I may be wrong in my prejudice. I am happy to admit this for I am not a person without hope.

Amar, what everyone has said is valuable, but what Talasiga has said is inspired.

If you can learn from hearing alone, then you are blessed. You are especially blessed to have been able to escape being taught any "correct ways" to do music that interfered with your ability to learn from hearing.

But, you know, there are different approaches to every subject, and sometimes when we employ other methods or look at things from a different angle, things add up in such a way that the sum is greater than the total of the individual parts. Sometimes, we may achieve insight and understanding that might not have happened otherwise.

No harm will come to you from learning to read the dots, but you might benefit from it. Your understanding of music may deepen and grow and you may achieve insight.

And, who knows, your intellect is sufficient that, armed with the knowledge of dots and what is apparently an extremely good ability to play from ear, you may be the person who is finally able to provide complete notations of existing performances.

For ITM, there isn't much dot-reading to do. You'll learn it far more easily than you think. You'll find it simple and uncomplicated, and you may be surprised to find that the dots only give you a rough outline of the tune--the general shape with the high spots and the lows, and none of the diddling in between. The dots do not represent what you hear in your head--they're not even close. And, often, the dots are incorrect transcriptions or don't match the version of the tune which you're listening to. At that point, you'll understand why I mentioned the need for "complete notations of existing performances" above.

Everyone has a purpose in life, Amar. Perhaps that is yours.

[BillChin]

Go ahead and spend some time learning to sight read. You might take to it like a baby duck to water, and it can open up entire new worlds to you. However, you might be "dot-dyslexic" like a good percentage of the population. If this is the case, there are better uses for your time and energy. If it isn't required, and it isn't enjoyable, there are many more noble pursuits to force yourself to do.