Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers (it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

SEARCH
the Forums & Piano World

This custom search works much better than the built in one and allows searching older posts.
(ad 125) Sweetwater - Digital Keyboards & Other Gear
Digital Pianos at Sweetwater
(ad) Pearl River
Pearl River Pianos
(ad) Pianoteq
(ad) P B Guide
Acoustic & Digital Piano Guide
PianoSupplies.com (150)
Piano Accessories Music Related Gifts Piano Tuning Equipment Piano Moving Equipment
We now offer Gift Certificates in our online store!
(ad) Estonia Piano
Estonia Piano
Quick Links to Useful Stuff
Our Classified Ads
Find Piano Professionals-

*Piano Dealers - Piano Stores
*Piano Tuners
*Piano Teachers
*Piano Movers
*Piano Restorations
*Piano Manufacturers
*Organs

Quick Links:
*Advertise On Piano World
*Free Piano Newsletter
*Online Piano Recitals
*Piano Recitals Index
*Piano Accessories
* Buying a Piano
*Buying A Acoustic Piano
*Buying a Digital Piano
*Pianos for Sale
*Sell Your Piano
*How Old is My Piano?
*Piano Books
*Piano Art, Pictures, & Posters
*Directory/Site Map
*Contest
*Links
*Virtual Piano
*Music Word Search
*Piano Screen Saver
*Piano Videos
*Virtual Piano Chords
Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#1887686 - 04/27/12 07:11 PM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Maechre]
gooddog Online   content
4000 Post Club Member

Registered: 06/08/08
Posts: 4804
Loc: Seattle area, WA
I believe you can do (almost) anything well if you have the right tools and the right work ethic.
Edit: and the right teacher


Edited by gooddog (04/28/12 11:36 AM)
_________________________
Best regards,

Deborah

Top
Ad 800 (Pearl River)
Pearl River World's Best Selling Piano
#1887694 - 04/27/12 07:35 PM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Maechre]
keystring Online   content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 11721
Loc: Canada
Originally Posted By: Maechre

But she said to me today: "If you're not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be a good one. It's just how your brain works."

The first thing is to ask what lessons are about. Some teachers may think it means to teach you to play certain kinds of music, so it's about the music. Sometimes it can resemble coaching: student plays, and teacher says this is the wrong note, this is too fast, this can be louder. Better: a teacher tells you that you need to know all your chords, know how to count, so you're told what to aim for and then you have something to help you play. Both of these teachers may think that a student "has" abilities that you as a student come in with. Imho, this is wrong. Skills are taught: students get developed. Since there are all kinds of teachers, this won't be happening with all teachers.

Can you imagine a child entering school, teacher plops a book in front of him and says "Oh, you have no natural reading ability." No - reading is taught methodically: alphabet, phonics, spelling, grammar, story writing, rhymes. Does this teacher know how to teach sight reading? Is she giving instructions and guidance to make it happen? (Hopefully something more than "read lots of things every day slightly below your level).

Top
#1887739 - 04/27/12 08:53 PM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: pianoloverus]
Orange Soda King Offline
6000 Post Club Member

Registered: 11/25/09
Posts: 6070
Loc: Louisville, Kentucky, United S...
Originally Posted By: pianoloverus
Originally Posted By: Batuhan
Quote:
The better one can sight read, usually the faster one can learn a piece.


No if he or she is a good sight reader but technically weak cant learn faster.
Technical ability is directly linked to sight reading ability. One can't be a good sight reader if one has poor technique.


I'm not sure about that, because one of my good friends sightreads probably 50 times better than I do (okay, an exaggeration, but he really is a few leaps better than I am), but my technique is a few leaps better than his. This is also true with a few other people I know.

Although, I will agree with Batuhan that I think TECHNIQUE is the most important factor in how quickly you learn a piece (although being a great sight-reader may be close 2nd, or at least 2nd). If your technique is great, you spend less time working out technical difficulties and just learning the music. Poor sight-reading is probably a stumbling block only when first learning the piece of music.

Top
#1887761 - 04/27/12 09:59 PM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Maechre]
nocturne152 Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/21/12
Posts: 447
scrolled down. saw an ass.
_________________________
"The instrument should be your needle, and the music should be your addiction."

- Oscar Peterson

Top
#1887762 - 04/27/12 10:00 PM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Mark_C]
RonaldSteinway Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/11/08
Posts: 1492
Originally Posted By: Mark_C

Ronald pal, with all due respect I don't think there's a whole lot to that. Also I'm not sure how you think your personal observation would be capable of detecting such a thing. I mean, among other things, you'd need an accurate way of measuring intelligence, plus a larger sample size than I imagine has been possible. smile


Mark,

I used to teach kids ( a lot of kids), I did the preview classes before they even signed up to the class. I observed hundreds of them. I taught everyday (this was during my college years and after my college year too). Imagine 4 hours a day with 8 to 10 kids in a class from Monday to Saturday many years. Therefore, I have enough samples to come up with my conclusion. I believe few people here in the forum had that much exposure to teaching kids. During my teaching years, I need to be able to detect their thinking capability so that I can adjust my speed. One thing that I find interesting is that smart kids always have their eyes on the book while they are playing. They understand what is written in the book, yet slow kids do not see the relation between what they are playing and what written on the book. That is why I said smart people are better sight readers. Sight reading ability pertains to your thinking capacity. It is totally like a computer, the CPU needs to be fast in order to execute complicated tasks. The faster the CPU, the shorter time is needed to finish the job.

Assume two people have the same note reading ability, counting ability, music theory knowledge and technical ability. What differentiate these two people if one can sight read faster than the other? Must be brain capacity.

Top
#1887764 - 04/27/12 10:04 PM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Maechre]
ChopinAddict Offline
6000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/29/09
Posts: 6109
Loc: Land of the never-ending music
I think it was not a nice thing to say and teachers should be more encouraging. It is true that we are all better at certain things than others, but this does not mean that we cannot get better or even achieve satisfactory results if we make an effort.
_________________________



Music is my best friend.


Top
#1887766 - 04/27/12 10:10 PM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Maechre]
RonaldSteinway Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/11/08
Posts: 1492
Originally Posted By: Maechre
But she said to me today: "If you're not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be a good one. It's just how your brain works."

I'm sure that's true in some respects, but can't I improve -- can't I become at least decent, maybe to be able to do the things I want? The brain is malleable. I'm 19 years old. I've got a lot of years behind me, and I've only been playing seriously for about 3 years. But I've also got a lot of years ahead of me.

I won't give up on this, but I'm interested to hear all your thoughts.

Can I become a decent/good/great sight-reader/reader? What about in ten years?


Your teacher was being honest. If I were the teacher I would not say that. I would find a way to help so that the students reach his or her optimum ability. Everyone's job is to practice to achieve the best he or she can do, and accept the reality.

Top
#1887776 - 04/27/12 10:35 PM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Maechre]
KP10 Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 01/14/12
Posts: 4
I am sure your teacher is wrong. The main thing that helped my sight-reading was having to read a hymn for the school chapel service every morning at school. This taught me to quickly recognize the harmonies. especially as I did not play them as written, but with an octave in the left hand, the right hand playing the melody and filling in the chords.

I also accompanied choirs and often had to read various combinations of parts at sight: this helps reading rhythm and counterpoint. It also trains you to keep going, to keep time and not drop any beats, even if you make some mistakes. You can't stop when you are accompanying a choir.

I think you are lucky to be learning jazz and improvisation. When your reading is very fluent, you can get lazy and it is sometimes an effort to play things by ear.

Top
#1887778 - 04/27/12 10:46 PM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Maechre]
Kreisler Offline



Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 13796
Loc: Iowa City, IA
Originally Posted By: Maechre
But she said to me today: "If you're not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be a good one. It's just how your brain works."


I offer myself as proof that her statement is completely absurd. I was hideous as an undergrad. I now learn and perform about a dozen programs every year accompanying faculty and student recitals at the local university. I've also worked as a pianist for choral groups, a regional symphony, and a variety of musical theater groups.

Reading can be learned. It's not easy. Expect to disappoint yourself and others from time to time. Get over it and get back to work.

The most important thing to do? Don't expect to get better at sight-reading with solo literature. Nothing compares to having to accompany another person; you're accountable, you're sharing the musical experience, and you cannot hide.

Other things that are important:

Build technique. If you're tense, reading only makes it worse.
Become FLUENT in theory. Don't just know theory, be fluent in it.
Build a repertoire. Quantity matters. The first violin sonata you play will be very difficult. The 10th violin sonata you play will be much easier. The eight you learn in between is why.
_________________________
"If we continually try to force a child to do what he is afraid to do, he will become more timid, and will use his brains and energy, not to explore the unknown, but to find ways to avoid the pressures we put on him." (John Holt)

www.pianoped.com
www.youtube.com/user/UIPianoPed

Top
#1887779 - 04/27/12 10:52 PM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: RonaldSteinway]
keystring Online   content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 11721
Loc: Canada
Ronaldsteinway,
- Did you teach individuals one-on-one, or did you teach students as a class in a group. I suspect the latter.
- If the students that you consider smart had their eyes in the books, can we assume that these were not beginners who had never learned a single thing, but rather students who had had enough prior instruction to know how to read?
- Is it possible that the things you taught depended on reading, so that the kids who advanced quickly (were smart) did so for that reason?
- If you had kids who did not "see the relation between what they were playing and what was written on the book", what strategies did you adopt as a teacher to give them that skill? Or did you assume that the ability displayed was the ability you had to work with, rather than to develop?

In general, teachers at more advanced levels teach the subject, while teachers at the absolute beginner level teach the student (develop the student). If you receive the previously taught students, you are also receiving the product of that teaching, and as an advanced teacher (if you are) you are less likely to take on the task of developing such abilities.

If there is a lack of ability in any area, that will translate into having difficulties. For example, I was self-taught and although I have a good instinct for music, I have major technical handicaps to overcome. I cannot demonstrate what is "in me" because of the tools I do not have. A very concrete example is that I had a clumsy way of playing chords, and for that reason my chords were harsh, uneven in sound, and had poor timing - not because I had no sense of tempo, but because my movements were jerky. In the same way, someone who has not been taught reading (including matching notes on page, music, and the instrument) will appear to be not that smart.

There's a major discussion going on about that in the teacher forum atm.

Top
#1887788 - 04/27/12 11:17 PM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: RonaldSteinway]
Mark_C Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 19797
Loc: New York
Originally Posted By: RonaldSteinway
I used to teach kids ( a lot of kids), I did the preview classes before they even signed up to the class. I observed hundreds of them.....

But unless I'm missing something, now you're not talking about sight reading, are you?

You're talking about READING. (Right?)
Before, you said you meant it about sight reading.

You think the same things apply?
They don't -- not necessarily. I'm not saying that sight reading has nothing to do with "intelligence," just that they're not related to the extent that you said.

Originally Posted By: RonaldSteinway
[The] teacher was being honest....

No, the teacher was being wrong. smile

Originally Posted By: Kreisler
I offer myself as proof that her statement is completely absurd....

Love it!

BTW, to say something I said before but a little louder, in fairness I think we have to wonder at least a little whether she didn't quite say (or mean) what was posted. I think it's not impossible that she didn't. (Sorry for the triple negative.) ha
Sometimes if we change a word or two, it can change the meaning a lot.

Top
#1887793 - 04/27/12 11:30 PM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: keystring]
RonaldSteinway Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/11/08
Posts: 1492
Hi,

Here, let me answer one by one.

1. The discussion below pertains to group lesson for total beginners.

2. I taught them totally from scratch. Therefore, I know that they knew nothing when they joined the class. Even when I taught them clapping base on the value of the notes, I can tell who are smart or not smart. For example a quarter note is one count, and quater rest sign. Then show them how to do it, and show the relationship between clapping and the notes. Smart kids will see the relation, slow kids will just show a blank expression and just copy my hand movements. From just a very simple rhythm, you can tell who will be able to sight read better later.

3. The strategy is to give the slower kids more attention and give extra time after the lesson. But of course, it is impossible to concentrate all the time to help the slower kids. But again, the Yamaha method does not stress on developing the reading ability at young age. It stresses more on developing the hearing ability at young age.






Originally Posted By: keystring
Ronaldsteinway,
- Did you teach individuals one-on-one, or did you teach students as a class in a group. I suspect the latter.
- If the students that you consider smart had their eyes in the books, can we assume that these were not beginners who had never learned a single thing, but rather students who had had enough prior instruction to know how to read?
- Is it possible that the things you taught depended on reading, so that the kids who advanced quickly (were smart) did so for that reason?
- If you had kids who did not "see the relation between what they were playing and what was written on the book", what strategies did you adopt as a teacher to give them that skill? Or did you assume that the ability displayed was the ability you had to work with, rather than to develop?

In general, teachers at more advanced levels teach the subject, while teachers at the absolute beginner level teach the student (develop the student). If you receive the previously taught students, you are also receiving the product of that teaching, and as an advanced teacher (if you are) you are less likely to take on the task of developing such abilities.

If there is a lack of ability in any area, that will translate into having difficulties. For example, I was self-taught and although I have a good instinct for music, I have major technical handicaps to overcome. I cannot demonstrate what is "in me" because of the tools I do not have. A very concrete example is that I had a clumsy way of playing chords, and for that reason my chords were harsh, uneven in sound, and had poor timing - not because I had no sense of tempo, but because my movements were jerky. In the same way, someone who has not been taught reading (including matching notes on page, music, and the instrument) will appear to be not that smart.

There's a major discussion going on about that in the teacher forum atm.

Top
#1887797 - 04/27/12 11:37 PM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Mark_C]
RonaldSteinway Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/11/08
Posts: 1492
Originally Posted By: Mark_C
Originally Posted By: RonaldSteinway
I used to teach kids ( a lot of kids), I did the preview classes before they even signed up to the class. I observed hundreds of them.....

But unless I'm missing something, now you're not talking about sight reading, are you?

You're talking about READING. (Right?)
Before, you said you meant it about sight reading.

You think the same things apply?
They don't -- not necessarily. I'm not saying that sight reading has nothing to do with "intelligence," just that they're not related to the extent that you said.


I used sight reading and sight playing interchangeably . But what I am talking about is sight playing. In order to sight play well, one needs to have the ability to read the note fast, clap the rhythm in their mind fast, find the key to press. All these components need to be put together fast, and intelligent people who have fast thinking brain can do easier than those who are slow. Don't you agree?

Top
#1887801 - 04/27/12 11:47 PM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: RonaldSteinway]
Mark_C Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 19797
Loc: New York
Sorry, you lost me. In that post where you talked about teaching, it seemed you weren't talking about music or reading music at all -- were you? -- but just about reading.

Top
#1887805 - 04/27/12 11:55 PM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Mark_C]
RonaldSteinway Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/11/08
Posts: 1492
Originally Posted By: Mark_C
Sorry, you lost me. In that post where you talked about teaching, it seemed you weren't talking about music or reading music at all -- were you? -- but just about reading.


When you teach a beginner, you start from teaching reading on a white board. You do not teach a complex notes. Just teach how to read and clap the rhythm written on the white board. Even this simple exercise will give me the idea who will be a good sight reader later. A smart kid will see the relation between what they clap and what written on the white board.

The next step, teach them the notes. For the first day, for example, teach only C, D, E. Smart kids can remember the notes fast. Slow one will not remember for weeks.

The next step, send them to the keyboad. Teach them where C, D, E. Again smart kids can remember this thing fast. Slow kids will not remember until several weeks.

Now combine the three components. Using simple rhythm such as :

Press(one count) -- Rest (one count) -- Press (one count) -- Rest (one count)

Instead of clapping, use the thumb to press C. OK...Smart kids will remember what C looks like, and know where the C is. Slow kids will be totally lost.

By the way, I did not teach this thing in one day. Slow kids will quit if I combine everything in one lesson.

Note : This is a group lesson format (8 to 10 kids in a class)

Top
#1887806 - 04/27/12 11:56 PM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: RonaldSteinway]
Mark_C Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 19797
Loc: New York
I don't think we're communicating -- probably best to leave it at that.

Top
#1887817 - 04/28/12 01:21 AM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Maechre]
Arghhh Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 12/31/08
Posts: 1146


Found this on the collaborative piano blog today smile

Top
#1887824 - 04/28/12 02:32 AM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: RonaldSteinway]
keystring Online   content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 11721
Loc: Canada
I have seen several ways of teaching reading. None of them resembled what you just described. You have described one single way. If not all students can learn from this way, it does not mean that the students are "stupid" - it means that this way of teaching is not effective for those students. In good teaching, we look at teaching strategies and methods. We don't try to figure out who is stupid and who is smart.

Top
#1887825 - 04/28/12 02:34 AM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: keystring]
Mark_C Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 19797
Loc: New York
Originally Posted By: keystring
I have seen several ways of teaching reading. None of them resembled what you just described. You have described one single way. If not all students can learn from this way, it does not mean that the students are "stupid" - it means that this way of teaching is not effective for those students. In good teaching, we look at teaching strategies and methods. We don't try to figure out who is stupid and who is smart.

IMO the bigger problem is that considerations of reading and sight-reading don't overlap nearly enough for any of that to be relevant.

Including, that many excellent readers have trouble with sight reading.
And while I don't know for sure about this other side of it, I'd bet also that many people who have trouble with reading are excellent sight readers.

Top
#1887826 - 04/28/12 02:35 AM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Arghhh]
nocturne152 Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/21/12
Posts: 447
Originally Posted By: Arghhh


Found this on the collaborative piano blog today smile



hahahahahahahahahaha
_________________________
"The instrument should be your needle, and the music should be your addiction."

- Oscar Peterson

Top
#1887829 - 04/28/12 02:48 AM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: pianoloverus]
BDB Online   content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 06/07/03
Posts: 21658
Loc: Oakland
Originally Posted By: pianoloverus
Originally Posted By: Batuhan
Quote:
The better one can sight read, usually the faster one can learn a piece.


No if he or she is a good sight reader but technically weak cant learn faster.
Technical ability is directly linked to sight reading ability. One can't be a good sight reader if one has poor technique.


Josef Hofmann was a poor sight-reader. In his heyday, nobody ever questioned his technique. There are great pianists who can play better by ear, and he was one of them.
_________________________
Semipro Tech

Top
#1887837 - 04/28/12 03:31 AM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: RonaldSteinway]
AZNpiano Offline
5000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/07/07
Posts: 5510
Loc: Orange County, CA
Originally Posted By: RonaldSteinway
Assume two people have the same note reading ability, counting ability, music theory knowledge and technical ability. What differentiate these two people if one can sight read faster than the other? Must be brain capacity.

Don't forget personality!

Kids who are less self-conscious, who aren't afraid to be wrong and make mistakes, who won't hesitate to try new things, are much better sight readers than those who are overly-cautious perfectionists, unwilling to be wrong in front of others, unwilling to try new things, and thinking "OMG, I can't do this" everytime they sight read.

I've worked with very smart kids who can't sight read to save their lives. They are just SO careful, it slows them down.
_________________________
Private Piano Teacher and MTAC Member

Top
#1887847 - 04/28/12 04:21 AM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Maechre]
Sand Tiger Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/25/12
Posts: 1067
Loc: Southern California
Elsewhere on this forum I found a blog about learning to sight read:
http://pianosightreading.blogspot.com/2008/01/background.html

The blog is a good story. It took that blogger about four years of steady work to become really good at sight reading. When he started the blog, he thought one year of two hours a day would be enough to reach the desired level of proficiency. At the end of that one year of hard work, it was not near enough time invested to get to where he wanted to be. I am sure that some others would make it there in one year at two hours a day, because they start with more natural ability.

There is hope. However, if a person identifies with the story of that blogger when he started, it might be a very long road to proficiency.

I believe that some people take to sight reading like ducks to water. Many of them are on the forum. Many are piano teachers. They might get as far as the blogger did in four years, in a few months. Others are more like frightened cats being hurled into a pond when doing sight reading. I believe that like most things related to music, talent helps, as does inclination, training, desire, and time. As an aside, the music director at my church is phenomenal at sight reading, much better than most professional musicians. He isn't so good at composition.

I am terrible at sight reading, probably in the lowest 10% percent of amateur musicians with at least two years on their instrument. I like to try new things, such as learning new instruments or composing new music, so I question that conclusion. I also question the correlation between raw intelligence and sight reading. I am very bright, very book smart, very high IQ.

I have spent some time on the sight reading project (I have over 10 years on another instrument). It gives me a headache. It is painful. It is extremely frustrating. The blogger account shows me what might be needed on my part, four years of one or two hours a day, focused just on sight reading. Again, the average student will do the task better and faster. The gifted, might get as far in a few months.

On the blog, one of the comments is about having an ear for music as being a talent and sight reading as a skill. I strongly disagree with that. There are naturals in both areas, ear and sight reading. Like I said, some students take to the dots and lines like ducks to water. Same with ear training, there is talent, inclination, and training. Anyone that does training in either area will get better, but those with natural ability have a huge head start over those that are average or below average. I believe that goes both for ear training and sight reading. Those that are below average will have a difficult road if their goal is to become a music teacher. They might become professional musicians because of blinding unbelievable talent in other musical areas.
_________________________
my piano uploads

Top
#1887851 - 04/28/12 04:40 AM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Maechre]
nocturne152 Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/21/12
Posts: 447
Franz Liszt apparently cracked open Chopin's op.10 right in front of him and sight read through the whole thing perfectly. Chopin later wrote, "I wish I could steal his way of playing my studies."


Edited by lostaccato (04/28/12 04:40 AM)
_________________________
"The instrument should be your needle, and the music should be your addiction."

- Oscar Peterson

Top
#1887872 - 04/28/12 05:57 AM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Sand Tiger]
wr Offline
7000 Post Club Member

Registered: 11/23/07
Posts: 7891
Originally Posted By: Sand Tiger

On the blog, one of the comments is about having an ear for music as being a talent and sight reading as a skill. I strongly disagree with that. There are naturals in both areas, ear and sight reading. Like I said, some students take to the dots and lines like ducks to water. Same with ear training, there is talent, inclination, and training. Anyone that does training in either area will get better, but those with natural ability have a huge head start over those that are average or below average. I believe that goes both for ear training and sight reading. Those that are below average will have a difficult road if their goal is to become a music teacher. They might become professional musicians because of blinding unbelievable talent in other musical areas.


What I think is the one over-arching defining characteristic of good sight-readers is an insatiable curiosity about what those dots and lines sound like, and an insatiable curiosity about what composers have thought was worth putting into dots and lines. There is a kind of wonder involved - it is truly astonishing that someone in the distant past could have put instructions on paper that tell me, a person residing in their distant future, to do certain things with a keyboard, and living music will be the result.

Of course, the music could have been written just yesterday and still be just as amazing - but big temporal differences emphasize how amazing it is. At any rate, the point I am trying to make is that it's as much about really deep-seated interest and attitude that are driving the skill as anything else. And where that stuff comes from...who knows?

Top
#1887889 - 04/28/12 07:43 AM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: BDB]
pianoloverus Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/29/01
Posts: 19450
Loc: New York City
Originally Posted By: BDB
Originally Posted By: pianoloverus
Originally Posted By: Batuhan
Quote:
The better one can sight read, usually the faster one can learn a piece.


No if he or she is a good sight reader but technically weak cant learn faster.
Technical ability is directly linked to sight reading ability. One can't be a good sight reader if one has poor technique.


Josef Hofmann was a poor sight-reader. In his heyday, nobody ever questioned his technique. There are great pianists who can play better by ear, and he was one of them.
I think examples like these are the exceptions to a rule that is generally true. Also, "poor" is a relative term. Perhaps Hofmann was poor compared to other great pianists, but I doubt he was poor by more ordinary standards.


Edited by pianoloverus (04/28/12 07:47 AM)

Top
#1887891 - 04/28/12 07:49 AM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Maechre]
Maechre Offline
Full Member

Registered: 01/01/12
Posts: 254
Loc: Melbourne, Australia
Sight-reading/reading is linked to technique in that you need good enough technique to be able to play what you see. It's not that having good technique will make you a good reader. And your reading skill can be way beyond your technical skill. smile
_________________________
I love sight-reading! One day I will master it.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Acrozius?feature=mhee

Top
#1887913 - 04/28/12 09:25 AM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: keystring]
RonaldSteinway Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/11/08
Posts: 1492
Originally Posted By: keystring
I have seen several ways of teaching reading. None of them resembled what you just described. You have described one single way. If not all students can learn from this way, it does not mean that the students are "stupid" - it means that this way of teaching is not effective for those students. In good teaching, we look at teaching strategies and methods. We don't try to figure out who is stupid and who is smart.


The process that I described is the normal way how we approach sight playing. We must know how to read the rhythm, notes, and the location of the notes on a keyboard.

We cannot expect a beginner to put together three components at once. You train them one component at the time. Once they know each component well, you can combine two components and then three components. It is the most granular and practical approach.

How other methods that you have learned? Care to share?

Top
#1887917 - 04/28/12 09:32 AM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Maechre]
RonaldSteinway Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/11/08
Posts: 1492
Originally Posted By: Maechre
Sight-reading/reading is linked to technique in that you need good enough technique to be able to play what you see. It's not that having good technique will make you a good reader. And your reading skill can be way beyond your technical skill. smile


Good technique is the third components of what I was talking about. Once you know the rhythm and the note, your fingers should be able to execute the rhythmical info and note info on the keyboard. If you have good technique, you will be able to convey the two info flawlessly so that you will be considered as a good sight playing.

Having good technique alone without the ability to read the rhythm and notes well will be fruitless.

The technique can be trained without too much brain power. You keep practicing the technique, and you will improve. However, the rhythm and notes reading ability is limited by your brain speed. If one's brain is fast, one can process the information faster. That is why intelligent people are usually a better sight player (assuming he has the technique). Again the three components determine how good your sight playing ability.

Top
#1887919 - 04/28/12 09:44 AM Re: "Not a natural sight-reader, you'll never be good." Discuss [Re: Kimsie]
Copake Offline
Full Member

Registered: 01/27/08
Posts: 256
Loc: Columbia/Westchester Counties ...
I have been playing the piano for six decades and I am still terrible at sightreading. While it's true that I have never made a deliberate effort to improve I sometimes wonder if there is some fundamental lack of ability involved.

What leads to me to believe this is that even when learning a new piece I make lots of mistakes. A week into the piece and I am still making the same mistakes over and over again (as well some others). Could it be a basic lack of eye-hand coordination? I was always terrible at sports and, when you think about it, being good at sports really involves responding instantly to visual cues with the appropriate physical response.

I found Kimsie's remarks interesting:

Originally Posted By: Kimsie
My son's former teacher . . . says that there are 3 reasons why you make mistakes while you are doing this. 1. You are trying to play too fast. 2. You are not looking ahead while you play. 3. You are letting your mind wander instead of concentrating on what you are doing. So if you make mistakes, ask yourself which of these three is the reason and make adjustments accordingly.


Yes, I probably try to sightread at a tempo that is too fast. Yes, I know I am not looking ahead but who has time to do that when you are struggling with the notes at hand? Yes, I probably do not force myself to concentrate as much as I need to.

Top
Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >

Moderator:  Brendan, Kreisler 
What's Hot!!
8 Live Ragtime Piano Players on the Cape!
-------------------
HOW TO POST PICTURES on the Piano Forums
-------------------
Sharing is Caring!
About the Buttons
-------------------
(125ad) Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
Ad (Seiler/Knabe)
Knabe Pianos
Sheet Music
(PW is an affiliate)
Sheet Music Plus Featured Sale
(ad) HAILUN Pianos
Hailun Pianos - Click for More
(ad) Lindeblad Piano
Lindeblad Piano Restoration
New Topics - Multiple Forums
How to Regulate a Studio Upright for Greatest Sensitivity?
by Paul678
10/20/14 11:05 PM
How do I tackle my goal.
by imustlearn
10/20/14 10:29 PM
Advice? First digital piano for family--already own a GP
by SCD
10/20/14 07:58 PM
Help with my DGX-650 and Synthesia!
by Jtreimer
10/20/14 07:21 PM
Piano tuning career prospects 2014
by Morrisos
10/20/14 06:56 PM
Who's Online
109 registered (angga888, Alan F, ando, anamnesis, accordeur, 26 invisible), 1333 Guests and 8 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
76599 Members
42 Forums
158393 Topics
2325890 Posts

Max Online: 15252 @ 03/21/10 11:39 PM
(ads by Google)

Visit our online store for gifts for music lovers

 
Help keep the forums up and running with a donation, any amount is appreciated!
Or by becoming a Subscribing member! Thank-you.
Donate   Subscribe
 
Our Piano Related Classified Ads
|
Dealers | Tuners | Lessons | Movers | Restorations | Pianos For Sale | Sell Your Piano |

Advertise on Piano World
| Subscribe | Piano World | PianoSupplies.com | Advertise on Piano World | Donate | Link to Us | Classifieds |
| |Contact | Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter | Press Room |


copyright 1997 - 2014 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission