The Steel Guitar Forum

Ok then, how about the $40,000 that is the opening bid for the Bigsby guitar that Bobbe Seymour has for sale on his web site?

How often does that happen? Do you know how often a Cello goes for more than $40k? Average it out, there is no comparison.

Paul Fendemmia has an Emmons D-10 p/p for sale right now on the Forum that he is asking $40,000 for.

I just read that a 1955 Gibson Les Paul brought $435,000.
That would buy a lot of cellos!

Ok, now compare the average pro-quality guitar or pro pedal steel cost (new, not collectors items) to the average pro-quality classical cello.

I do think it's far better to learn to read AFTER you learn to play and express yourself.

That works for SOME people, not for everyone. People learn in different ways. No one method will fit every person.

Paul Fendemmia has an Emmons D-10 p/p for sale right now on the Forum that he is asking $40,000 for.

Asking is one thing... getting is another.

James,
I thought the subject of this post was about sheet music.
What do I know about cellos?

Erv Niehaus wrote:James,
I thought the subject of this post was about sheet music.
What do I know about cellos?

Agreed, I hijacked my own thread.

James I respect your opinions. I am not a Reader. I can follow a simple melodey line slowley in the key of C. If I was a sight reader I could play any written tune I wanted and play it the way the writer intended it to be played. After that I can improvise to the best of my ability. Being a sight reader would open a vast new world to ME. Thanks Fred

James Mayer wrote:

Donny Hinson wrote:

James Mayer wrote: The amount of music in the world that is written can't begin to compare to what is recorded.

And where, pray tell, did you come up with that bit of information?

Ok, look up all the bands on myspace.

James, again I agree with you. If your idea of educating yourself is to copy a band from MySpace, then reading music will not aid you in your quest for self-improvement.

Hi James ,

I have to say I agree with you on two issues. #1 you wanted a debate, looks like you got one! #2 It is like discussing Religion everyone has an opinion.

You stated you learned 7 chords some scale patterns & how to read a chord chart. I am not sure , but the majority of people would not consider that reading music.

I would think some one who wanted to be a well rounded musician would use any tool they could. Notation, Tab and Ear training included.

If nothing else you have presented some ideas and evoked some responses that are revealing about all who posted. For instance I sided with Barry on a thread about teaching technique not too long ago.
Due to this thread I am now reconsidering my position on that thread. So I guess you live & learn!

But all of this is taking away from my primary goal. And that is to better myself as a PSG player using any and all methods I can.

Thanks for the different viewpoint!! And good luck with your musical journey in the future.

James Mayer wrote: The amount of music in the world that is written can't begin to compare to what is recorded...look up all the bands on myspace. Most of that is original music (myspace tries to enforce copyright laws). Have you checked out internet radio and it's vast diversity?

There have been way way more recorded songwriters in the last 40 years than published works in all of the centuries before recorded music. We are in the age of communication and proliferation. Home studios are commonplace. It's only natural that art is growing exponentially.

You're forgetting one thing, James...one very important thing. Until quite recently, the only way to get a song copyrighted was to have a lead-sheet in musical notation. Every song that was played on the radio, professionally recorded, and many that weren't, had sheet music created for it. Even today, in our "digital age", all popular songs are still having sheet music created for teaching purposes and orchestral arrangements. So unless you hear a song on the radio that was recorded in someone's basement or bedroom, one that had no chance of being handled by a professional publisher, chances are that there's a copy of the sheet music for it somewhere.

I'll concede that stuff you hear is eminently more obvious than stuff that's printed, but that doesn't mean that the printed stuff is in the minority - only that you're listening far more than you're looking!

Wow, one hardly knows where to start. To begin with, I agree it is a shame that so many classically trained musicians completely neglect playing by ear and improv. Likewise, it is a shame so many guitar and steel players can’t read music. Both methods of making music have their value.

The basis for most ear music are folk derived styles using relatively short verses and choruses that are repeated. The progressions are short enough to be easily learned by ear. Improv is done based on the repeating patterns. Improv that departs from the repeating patterns for longer durations, such as free jazz or new age music, is more or less created on the spot, and is difficult or impossible to duplicate in subsequent performances, even by the same musicians.

But suppose you want to create long works that do not depend on short repeats, and that other musicians can recreate in far flung times and places. Symphonies can last 45 minutes or more. There may be some repeated themes, but they are rarely repeated with the exact same instrumentation and harmony and percussion. Some operas are five hours long, with only occasionally repeated themes. And orchestras typically have repertoires of dozens of symphonies and operas – hundreds of hours of nonrepeating music. Memorizing all of that by ear would take much longer than reading the music, if it were even possible at all. So there will always be a place for written music.

The idea that there is no artistry in reading music is wrong. There is expression and phrasing that brings the music to life; and different players and conductors do this in distinctively different ways. Conductors and orchestras and soloists rehearse for many hours to get the expression and phrasing they want before actually performing before an audience. The great art in that is well understood and appreciated by the musicians and audiences.

Standard written notation was invented for instruments with a one-to-one correspondence between the written notes and the notes the instruments can play. String instruments have multiple places to play the same note. Somehow the violin family, with only four strings deal with that. It’s more of a problem with 6-string guitars, and is a huge problem for 10-14 string steel guitars, and the pedals and levers compound the problem. Standard notation is incomplete and inadequate for these instruments. Tab handles this problem well, but is also incomplete, because it does not convey timing. The solution is to write the standard notation above the tab. This complete notation is common in guitar magazines, and there is some steel tab written that way.

Most music readers learn from childhood over many years of study. It is very difficult to learn to read well as an adult. In the old days, many steelers started as children, but learned only by ear. Most steelers today take up steel as adults. If we trained steelers from childhood the way other instruments are learned, they could be trained to read tab and standard notation.

Learning to play by ear and improv can be taught and learned alongside learning to read. Many jazz musicians are very proficient at both. Neither precludes the other. Learning either method without the other is simply a limitation of our teaching and learning practices; and deficiency with one method is not an inherent aspect of the other method.

Agreed! There are people out there who actually believe the joke that learning to read music will 'hurt' their playing...my response would be, "only if you let it." Notation is a tool just like any other. It works for some jobs and not others. But wouldn't it be nice to know it so that you can use it when appropriate?

As for the original idea that classical or other musicians who rely too heavily on notation do so at the expense of improvisation/spontaneity, I think this can be true. But do these players aspire to be great improvisers? Or are they content with the musical skills they have developed in other areas (accuracy, ensemble playing, phrasing and articulation of written music)?

I think it boils down to what the player wants to do musically. Sometimes, notation will help his quest...in other cases, it may only distract.

When I write tab, I always include the musical notation along with the tab. As noted in previous postings, the problem with tab is the inability to show timing. Also, on some tab that includes fills and so on, you don't know where the melody stops and the fills begin.
On properly written tab, you should not only be able to play the song but it should also be a lesson in "music". After a while you should be able to recognize how the strings, frets, pedals and levers correlate with the notes, chords and so on.

There is no real need for tab for a proficient reader. If you simply put the fret number on the written music, the correct string will be apparent 90% of the time. In cases where a note is available on two strings, the string number can be indicated.

Tab is huge and it's mostly wasted space. Most steel guitar parts can be written on a single staff of music.

Well, I've probably said this 4 times before in this post. "I use notation as a tool". Yet, the response, "a musician should use every tool available". What's the deal? Are people just reading the initial post before replying?


What's funny about this whole thing is that I'm considering going back to school to get a degree in some area of music. Reading will be essential. I've never felt great about it and I wanted to start a debate to get as many opinions as possible. I actually don't feel that strongly either way about sheet music as a tool. I think you should use every tool you can. I DO feel strongly about teaching beginners to depend on it. I already know how to write a song and to internalize the music, so I'm not worried about the terrible habit of relying on notation. You will never see me perform with a music stand in front of me unless I have to do it to pass a course. I'll make the extra effort to internalize the music. That doesn't mean I don't want to learn to improve my reading skills. It just means that I'm not so lazy that I would use a teleprompter.

If that still doesn't sink in, I'll explain it with a different tool. I frequently practice with a metronome, but I don't perform with one.

Everything I just wrote is a repeat of everything I've already said in this thread. Yet, "I would think a musician would use every tool available" is just one more post away.

One thing I will have to get past is my attitude about original music. I don't want my band to play covers unless we morph the music into our own sound. I have the bad attitude that playing other peoples' music is time that could be spent creating something. If I go the academic route, I'm going to have a few extra obstacles to overcome.

I would like to learn how to arrange and better communicate with other musicians. Jazz theory skills would also be nice to have.

Honestly though, how many of you wouldn't be disappointed if you were to go to a concert and your favorite musician pulls out the music and is obviously reading while playing? I'd be demanding a ticket refund.

There is no real need for tab for a proficient reader.

True. Playing steel guitar directly from sheet music opens up a whole new world. It will change your life! It takes a lot of practice and time, but it's worth it. One of my lap steel students is now reading from sheet music, and he's doing very well at it. He prefers that to tab. He does pencil in the fret numbers above the notes. I find that the older students want the notes, usually along with the tab. All students/players should at least know the TIMING of the notes in order to play the proper phrasing. And, of course, every player should know the notes ON HIS INSTRUMENT. Once you can translate from the page to your steel guitar you will make many new discoveries. Reading music will improve your playing.

BTW, I do agree that most of today's pop/rock/country/alternative musicians do not read music and probably don't need to for the stuff they're playing. As others have said, it's mostly folk-based music, and it's not rocket science, in my opinion. I play with three county bands now, and none of that requires any note reading, although I often include notes on my charts. Notation is a valuable tool for communicating music and learning music. Remember, just because a player reads music does not mean he can't play by EAR as well. One metheod does not preclude the other.

Last time I went to the symphony everybody, including the conductor, was reading, except the soloists for concertos. I enjoyed it along with everyone else. Likewise, I went to a solo organ concert, and the organist played a couple of hours of classical organ music. She read all of it, and had a page turner by her side. No one was dissappointed.

James. you seem to be changing your tune as this post goes along. In your TITLE you said that sheet music is nearly OBSOLETE. Now you say it one of the TOOLS you use. So which is it? As far as musicians reading music on stage... no, I have never done that, and I don't think that's a good idea for most pop/rock/country bands.

Well, what if they all had headphones on so they could all be patched in to a metronome? It just seems so lame to me.

Really, if I was in an orchestra and i had practiced for weeks or even months, I would know my part and where to play it. Saying you enjoyed the performance does not mean they weren't using a crutch. How about connecting with the audience? It is a performance, not a practice.

I'm still of the opinion that notation is a learning tool, not a performance tool.

Doug Beaumier wrote:James. you seem to be changing your tune as this post goes along. In your TITLE you said that sheet music is nearly OBSOLETE. Now you say it one of the TOOLS you use. So which is it? As far as musicians reading music on stage... no, I have never done that, and I don't think that's a good idea for most pop/rock/country bands.

You're right. "Obsolete" was too strong of a word. It is a useful learning tool.

However, lets look at my process for learning something. I'd bet it isn't too much different than the average musician's process.

I'm learning Pachelbel's Canon in D for a wedding. I have to rearrange it for lap steel, guitar and bass.

The first thing I did was go to Youtube and find as many different arrangements as I could. There are plenty. I could have used myspace or facebook. There are way more free versions on the net, performed by the greats, than are available in any music store.

Next, I start looking for tab, notation, guitar-pro files and any other form of writing that I can find to learn the song. All the while, I'm listening to it continually to internalize it in my mind. You know what the most useful tool that I found for Canon in D is? Guitar-pro. The program plays it in notation or tab. You can loop certain bars and change the speed. You hear the timing because it plays it as a midi file. You can even change the tuning of the instrument and the whole score will reflect the changes. Or, you can rearrange note by note as you go. If all else fails, I have a program that slows down an audio file and allows me to loop sections at any speed I want until I learn it by ear. At any rate, I hardly ever need to rely on notation. It just isn't as easily available because it's a copyright infringement to scan a photo of sheet music published by a publishing house, even if the music itself falls under public domain.

My point about "near obsolescence" is that it's no longer the most useful tool for a musician. At one time it was, but with the advent of the internet there are far more tools available that are readily available for less money than a book of notation.
Each of us now have a more extensive music collection at our fingertips than has ever been available to any previous human being. That, in itself, changes the landscape. Notation is still a valid learning tool and will continue to be as long as we consider it a tradition. Again, obsolescence was a strong word to use, but the point is still valid. I learned the basics of reading because I thought it would be more useful. It seems to be that it is slowly going the way of Latin.
As a performance tool.........I think I've said enough.

First let me remind everybody that I’ve written an article on how to read music on the E9 neck, and I will send a PDF file (for free of course) to anybody who writes to me requesting it.

As the only person here who actually plays classical music and works with classically trained musicians on a daily basis, I feel obligated to step in here, although much of what I have to say has already been said by others.

It is true that many classically trained musicians have not learned how to play by ear, (which is not necessary for them to play the type of music they play.) I view this as a gap in their education.

It is also true that many country, rock, blues and jazz musicians have never learned to read. Also a skill that is not necessary for them to play the type of music they play. However I also view this as a gap in their education.

It is also true that the very best musicians, people like Benny Goodman, Mikes Davis, Igor Stravinsky, Bach and Mozart, Leonard Bernstein, and our fellow forumite Doug (Ernest Bovine) Livingstone can do both.

The 2 skills are not mutually exclusive. In fact I will state categorically with all the authority I can muster that reading music (and knowing some theory) helps me play by ear better, and being able to play by ear helps me to be a better reader.

Check out this MP3
http://www.perlowinmusic.com/Track6.mp3

This is the ritual fire dance from my “Spanish Steel” CD.

This is one of the 22 pages of sheet music I had to read in order to record this piece.


Clearly there is no possible way I (or anybody else) could have figured this out by ear from listening to a recording of the piece by a symphony orchestra. Now would there be any way for the members of that orchestra to be able to play the piece without being highly skilled sight readers.

If I can make an analogy, the music we play by ear, is elementary arithmetic, and this music is calculus. We can all spontaneously do simple arithmetic in our heads, but if we attempt to do the more complex forms of math, we need to sit down with a pencil and paper and take the time to figure out what we’re doing.

Recently a major league player and icon of our community told me that people who can only play by reading music and not play by ear aren’t real musicians. Rather than argue with the man, I chalked it up to a gap in his education, but I thought it was one of the most uninformed remarks I’ve ever heard.

The leader of my classical music trio is a violist named Carole Mukogawa. Look her if and you’ll see why I’m so stoked that she asked me to play with her. This lady is better at what she does than I am at what I do. It is a real challenge for me to keep up with her.

(Carole actually can play by ear a little, but she’s not really comfortable doing it, and it’s definitely not her strong suite. She’s getting better at it because after we rehearse for real, we sometimes fool around with a country or rock tune.)

To suggest that she, and people like her, are somehow less talented or skilled than people like most of us here (as well as most rock and bless musicians) is both ignorant and arrogant.

Before I close, I’d like to mention that, as I’ve said before, my personal goal is not to introduce classical music to the steel guitar community, but rather to introduce the steel guitar to the classical music community. Working with Carole gives me the opportunity to do that, but prior to hooking up with her, when I approached people in that community on my own, I ran into a great deal of resistance, and part of that was from people who claimed that THE STEEL GUITAR ISN’T A REAL INSTRUMENT, BUT MORE OF A MUSICAL TOY, ONLY ONE OR TWO STEPS ABOVE A COMB AND TISSUE PAPER.

I have been told by 2 different college music professors that they refused to even listen to me recordings because they already “knew” that they whey were some sort of dumbed-down hillbilly rendition of the music. After all, it’s steel guitar, how could it possible have any value.

That was an incredibly ignorant and arrogant position, but no more so that the idea that people who only play by ear are superior to those who can only play by reading music. And I believe that the latter attitude has contributed greatly to this unfortunate misunderstanding on the part of some trained musicians.

David Doggett wrote: She read all of it, and had a page turner by her side.

Now you can by a program that puts all the sheet music in a PDF file, and a foot switch that goes to the next page when you hit it.

Mike, did you read the part where I explained my definition of a musician? I said I equate the term with "artist". Other people may not define musicians the same way. An artist creates. A machine is programmed to perform that creation. When the line is drawn so firmly between reader and writer, then I feel the distinction must be made. This does not make me ignorant or arrogant. If you knew me well, you'd know that I do what I wish to do. If I wished to read music well, I would be able to. I just can't imagine the scenario that you just reaffirmed with your violist story. She plays by ear when she has to. I read notation when I have to. We are completely looking at music from a different standpoint. I can't imagine her feeling free. What if she wants to play something she heard and can't find the sheet music? I feel no hindrances whatsoever as I can eventually work through a complex piece using notation.

Very rarely would an artist ever do anything exactly the same way repeatedly. It's just not in the nature of art. I guess no matter how many times I hear the argument for this sort of "programming", I'm never going to understand why someone would want to play that way.

What if the violist was rendered deaf (it's hypothetical, I know there are deaf musicians who work from vibrations) and she was able to play just as well. You might see that as an advantage of her training. I would see it as proving my point about machinery.

How do you pro-reading-while-performing people feel about electronic equation-based music? What about drum machines? Isn't predictability anti-art to a certain degree?