 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Clive
Date: 2007-05-07 09:02
Hi
Not directly clarinet related, but certainly related to my progress with instrument.
Over some years I always found visual recognition of notes was just not quick enough, and practise with "flashcards" didn't seem to help. Of course I cheated and simply wrote the note name on the sheet. I thought that this was obviously a bad idea and would simply slow the inevitable learning process. However I was surprised in my last lesson ( only the second!), that my teacher seemd to endorse- well not oppose anyway- this process. So I wonder what the opinion here is; does it help or hinder? Probably I'll get many shades of opinion, but that's still OK.
An ancillary question: if I never play except from my own sheet music ( almost certainly will be the case), does it even matter?
Clive
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2007-05-07 09:36
Well...not sure where you are aiming at, but here's how I experience the notes on the sheet:
- I see a blob of ink on the sheet and press the appropriate keys. I do not consciously recognize the note as a "C" or "E" or whatever. I don't see three different octaves, I see some 36 different fingerings for 36 notes and that's what I do. Thus, playing an octave up or down is a challenge of its own, and I don't even think of transposing-on-sight.
- If someone asks me for the name of this and that note, I have to do some thinking (and counting lines). I know this is not perfect yet, but I'm improving. I doubt that writing note names on the sheet would help me with my playing.
- similarly, if someone asks me to play a "D" I have to think longer than when someone just pointed to the sheet and say "play this". But I'm not very spontaneous with "left" and "right" either.
So, it seems that - at least in my case - the sight-reading process takes a different route from the eyes to the fingers than when note names are involved. Sight-reading seems to bypass my brain. If you have to think while playing you might be too slow (no offence meant). If you had to think in order to find the car's brake pedal...ewww.
So, flash cards and the like don't look tempting or at least promising to me. Practising does.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2007-05-07 09:49
writing in the note names is not bad- it can help. also, try to read different excercise/song books. even going through a few lines of a new piece very slowly will help if you do it every day.
Post Edited (2007-05-07 09:57)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2007-05-07 14:12
I seem to recall reading somewhere about the learning process for clarinet that somewhere along the way the "note naming" stage is eliminated as Ben has mentioned above. (I assume you have learned about the "f-a-c-e" , "every good boy....algorithm). I still have some issues with the notes far above the staff.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clive
Date: 2007-05-07 16:19
Thanks guys
Ben:
That's most interesting. What you are doing certainlt eliminates a whole stage in the translation process. For me the (mental) translation from note name to fingering is not yet automatic, and the only notes that are completely automatic are open G, C and low G. In particular D and E even when correctly read from the page, leave my fingers in some doubt, and on the right hand, even when I know which finger to raise or lower, I don't always get it right. I guess this is just a learning process. You are certainly right that whatever process one uses, "thinking" nust not be a part of it, and it must be intuitive and instant. Again I'm sure this is practise, practise,practise.
skygardener:
D'ya know that if I already know the melody, I find the sheet music relatively easy to follow, but when otherwise, I am completely stumped. Of course much of the point of reading music is to be able to play a piece which one has never heard before.
BobD:
Yes I learned the face and every good boy aids, but translating like that is just too slow. Like you I have recognition problems for notes both ( in my case) above and below the staff. At present I just don't see how I'm going to progress, as having written the note names down, I tend never to look at the staff itself, so there is no practice going on. I'll be really happy if somebody tells me this will come in due course!
Clive
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: pewd
Date: 2007-05-07 16:32
fwiw, i prohibit my students from writing in note names.
others will disagree, ymmv
i see the note names, chord and scale patterns, key signature, etc. as i play, there is no translation process, i instantly know what the note is when reading music.
imo, this is essential for mastery of the instrument, you need to be fluent in the treble cleff 'language'. its like learning another language other than your native one - if you are fluent, you think in that language, you don't take time to translate everything.
computerizied note id programs are very helpful
this one is helpful, and free:
http://www.emusictheory.com/drillNoteReading.html
some basic piano instruction is also helpful
- Paul Dods
Dallas, Texas
Post Edited (2007-05-07 16:33)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jmcgann
Date: 2007-05-07 16:34
IMHO it is important to not get overwhelmed by the many.
Get friendly with the few:
1. Select just a few notes (say C D E).
Write them out randomly, no timing stems, just noteheads, in all comfortable octaves, on a page of manuscript.
Play through the page, slowly, quarter note=50, one note per beat. Repeat.
Repeat again. You may be able to turn the metronome up for the 3rd repeat.
Stick with this page until you can automatically react to the pitch required and find it on the horn. When you are comfortable:
2. Add the note F to the above formula. Write a new page with 4 notes, random order, and repeat the above.
3. Add G...
4. Add A...
5. Add B...
That'll get you comfortable with your C scale as a point of reference.
Next week: Start with #1, adding flats and sharps randomly.
Ditto to numbers 2-5. Don't worry if it sounds unmusical- this is to develop the craft of reading and not to be playing beautiful melodies.
Over a month of focused work you'll be fluent enough to sight read slowly.
THEN be sure to sight read (real music) slowly, something new every day.
A good reference, hard to find but JW Pepper had it last I checked, is "Music Speed Reading" by David Hickman. Don't worry about the "speed" part!
For the Rhythmic end, "Rhythmic Training" by Robert Starer is excellent. Again, eliminating the variables of pitch (as we did above with rhythm) and isolating just the rhythmic aspect allows you to make faster progress and not become overwhelmed. Good luck and have fun!
www.johnmcgann.com
Post Edited (2007-05-07 16:44)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tobin
Date: 2007-05-07 16:37
Hello again Clive,
It will come in due course if you take the time to continue familiarizing yourself with the note names.
The more connections you have to a thought or memory the faster your brain can access and use the piece of data. Subsequently you and your fingers/tongue will actually move faster when you are truly familiar with these (seemingly) insignificant bits of information.
So I teach my students to know the picture, the note name, and the fingering equally well. Those that don't are less secure in their playing (generally).
Taking it a step further I require my students also to be able to name all of the notes in any scale up and down (one octave) without having the clarinet in their hands (so that they think the letter names first not relying on their finger/calisthential memory).
I believe that the intellectual knowledge of the scale up and down one octave actually will direct the fingers to execute well in every octave.
James
Gnothi Seauton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: allencole
Date: 2007-05-07 16:44
I'm pretty successful in getting students to read well, but I'm not sure that you'd view these things as shortcuts--there's no escaping the need to condition yourself.
1 - Scale practice, taking special note to look at the key signature. NOT to name the sharps/flats, NOT to count the number of sharps/flats, but merely to associate the physical appearance of the key signature with a THOROUGHLY learned major scale. (minors can be dealt with later)
2 - Recognition of common patterns, particularly scales-in-thirds and arpeggios. If you practice these enough, you can execute them as a unit, or follow them like a graph when you encounter them in the field.
3 - Ceasing efforts to find formulas or rules of thumb that will allow your brain to interfere with the direct communication of your eyes/ears and your fingers. Knowing how scales are constructed is great, but not a subsitute for practice. Knowing what sharps/flats are in a key signiture is great, but not a substitute for practicing the scale involved.
Your brain must be free to count rhythm, surpervised closely by whatever you do to feel the pulse. Your fingers need to respond directly to what your eyes see, with a minimum of mental processing in-between. When notes come at you faster and faster, your scale should take over and the notes become more of an up-and-down graph.
This is what disappoints most people. You have to have all the knowledge, but trying to actually employ it in real-time reading is less effective than the physical behaviors that you program via repetitive practice.
If you're at an early stage, try learning a few major scales, and play the appropriate scale (indicated by the key signature) before and after each attempt at reading. This will make you more brave about following the 'graph' when you don't recognize a particular note. Don't be afraid to take a couple of chances. Just redo whatever passages you get wrong so that your most recent memory of it will be of playing it correctly.
Allen Cole
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2007-05-07 17:16
pewd wrote:
> i see the note names, chord and scale patterns, key signature, etc. as i play,
> there is no translation process, i instantly know what the note is when
> reading music.
But do you think note names, or do you simply press Txxxooo when you see that spot with that ledger line stub below the staff? When I idly glare at the score during breaks, I know it is a C, but when I play? See, press, honk. I don't care what the name of that note is at this moment. No time.
But: we often get score sheets that are - quality-wise - below all standards, especially marching book stuff. So instead of spending hours on a copier to get a readable result, I hack the part into Lilypond and create my own sheet. This helps a lot in learning note names, recognizing (repeating) patterns (and variations thereof), and get you a "reference" midi file for free. This way I can learn one or two pieces per week, and my general "reading skills" have improved a lot. Nerdy approach, I know, but it works.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MichaelR
Date: 2007-05-07 18:40
Clive,
I hear ya! I have the same problem. It really hit home when I was playing some Klose exercises for mechanism and found I could do them by memory better than I could if I tried to read the music.
jmcgann's advice - about how to get to where the association with the ink splat and the fingering is automatic - is what I've been doing lately. It does help. It also reminds me of the hours of drilling I did in high school typing class.
In addition to his advice I'd encourage you to always read. Doing long tones for warmup? Have them printed and consciously look at the notes as you play them. Same for scales. Yes, you can play a C Major scale by memory, but looking at the printed notation while playing it will help forge the association you're seeking between page and fingers.
Just in case - do you wear glasses? Do you have any physical problems reading the page? Recognizing and eliminating that source of confusion helps.
side note to Ben - lilypond is great! Clean printing, midi for "free", resizing the page to fit your needs. it's a favorite tool.
--
Michael of Portland, OR
Be Appropriate and Follow Your Curiosity
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Terry Stibal
Date: 2007-05-07 19:10
How I envy all of you soprano players, listening to your explanations and laments about music reading. Someday, should you really want a challenge, you should try sight-reading and transposing on the fly a part for the bess clarinet in A (and written in the bass clef, to boot). There's a challenge for you worthy of the term...
I just finished a production of The Music Man, one where the bassoon player (who just happened to be me) was not up to the "Marian The Librarian" vamp that goes on forever and ever. (My bassoon does not have a whisper key lock; without one, the part is difficult for even an experienced bassoon player.)
So, I picked up my bass clarinet and just played it there. Did I make a quick transposition from bass clef to treble clef, and then from C to a Bb instrument, all in the confines of my none too capacious brain? Nope, i just used the very handy Eb to Bb/C bass clef to Bb treble clef gimmick and read the music as I played.
A bit of a trick, just like the A to Bb one of reading the tops of the notes, but (most importantly) a trick that works. Amaze your friends, dazzle the crowd and try it yourself!
With the Marian part, I generally read the first note in a group (lots of repeated groups in that one), and then followed the flow of the part for the rest of the "instructions", figuring out the intervals in my head.
But, don't get me started on tenor clef, or on the triple transposition that I would have to do to make that work from bassoon to bass clarinet...
Someone once proposed a convention to settle the notation issues involved with bass clarinet, English horn and viola. I'd just as soon have shot all of the composers who refused to note them in treble clef, myself. Sure, we might have lost little Dickie Wagner, but for the most part it would have been a good thing (to channel Martha Stewart).
Just why a bassoon part needs to shift into tenor clef for two bars, all this to avoid two ledger lines above the staff, is well beyond my ken. Flute and clarinet players seem to get along just fine with more than two lines, why not bassoon players?
The ultimate bad taste example of poor notation seems to have been a movement of a piece called Jubilee, by a modernesque American composer named Chadwick. This worthy wrote the tune in question for bass clarinet in A at a time when no new bass clarinets had been built in that pitch for some thirty years. To compound insult, he also included a mixture of Italian and English notations on the part. And, the music wasn't that good in any event...
leader of Houston's Sounds Of The South Dance Orchestra
info@sotsdo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: pewd
Date: 2007-05-08 02:50
>But do you think note names
yes. i'm not thinking fingerings - those are automatic
- Paul Dods
Dallas, Texas
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clive
Date: 2007-05-08 10:08
Thank you all very much for your replies, a bit too much to reply to individually.
I s-h-o-u-l-d wear glasses all the time really, but have some problems ( because of a medical condition) in focussing and re-focussing, so tend not to do so unless really necessary, like driving and watching TV where the field of focus is essentially constant. My comfort zone without glasses is ( not more than) just under arms' length, so I make sure the music is no further away than this which seems to work.
I particularly like the idea of writing random Cs Ds and Es ( and playing them), then adding Gs when competent etc etc, and will definitely try this as it seems to teach the note recognition and fingering memories simultaneously, thanks!
Continuing the theme of being able to read melodies of which I'm familiar but not others: I find that I can ( and mostly do) play "Strangers in the Night" almost without looking consciously at the music ( although it's there for fall-back purposes) and I suspect such familiarity is counterproductive in the learning process, although valuable in the area of fluency. In particular from scatch I n-e-v-e-r needed to look at the note lengths as the melody and timing are so familiar to me. Most interestingly I now find that I can whistle the melody without ever stumbling over a note, which wasn't previously the case which is a bonus.
An ancillary question I have- which I guess is as much physchological as musical-is: why-in general- can I whistle or sing ( aaargh!) a melody, and know instinctively whether the next note is up, down , or the same, but when I play the clarinet ( or even fiddling around on a keyboartd) I essentially lose that ability. My best guess is that with the voice I have a memory for the right note, and simply don't need to calculate whether it is up/down or whatever, which begs the further question whether this will eventually become automatic in playing an instrument simply by familaiity? what is your experience/opinion?
Thanks again
Clive
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jane84
Date: 2007-05-08 10:18
Yes, it will help when you're familiar with the instrument. I tend to think in cl. fingerings when asked to prima vista-sing notes, because that makes it easier (sometimes I even move my fingers, which I imagine looks a bit weird...:)
-jane
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2007-05-08 22:55
> sometimes I even move my fingers, which I imagine looks a bit weird...:)
Joe Cocker does it all the time, and he sounds great.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
