Reading standard notation

Sporky

One of the Trinity grade 2 pieces for cello is incorrectly notated as being in 4/4.

It's actually alternating bars of 5/4 and 3/4.

I know it sounds silly, but it'd be much easier if they'd actually notated it in 5/4 and 3/4 because the phrasing would be more obvious.

paul_c2

viz

^ http://i865.photobucket.com/albums/ab217/Vizzage/Mobile Uploads/image_zpszz0ybyd6.jpeg

bingefeller

How do you guys decide where to put your fingerings?  

paul_c2

bingefeller said:

How do you guys decide where to put your fingerings?  

I can't properly describe the process for electric guitar but I have done a lot of sight-reading on bass guitar, which of course is the same for the first 4 strings. Also I'd say its a bit more important to get the hand position right on the bass, 1) a 4 fret 'stretch' is harder to physically do, especially at the low end, 2) shifting position can produce quite an annoying scratchy sound, as you scrape along the strings. I know its similar for guitar but not as intrusive.

Basically, it depends on 1) if there's accidentals or not and 2) the lowest and highest notes in a particular phrase or section. Obviously its nice to fit it all into one hand position which doesn't require a change in position. There's a further consideration on the bass, that going too high on the E string makes the notes sound a bit stuffy, compare Bb on fret 6, E string with fret 1, A string.

If there's a change in position necessary (due to it simply being too great a range to fit) then I'd look to minimise the changes in position, even if that means the 2nd half might be the same notes as the first half, but played differently (ie keep playing in the position you've moved to if possible, rather than going back needlessly).

If there's accidentals, then 1) try to indentify/recognise it quickly, eg it might simply be a temporary change to a different key, or a run up the harmonic minor/melodic minor, or a chromatic run, or 2) simply come out of position to reach/play that particular accidental, if it doesn't fall underneath the hand 3) work it out beforehand. It might be a case that 1st time played through, it becomes obvious which position its best played in. Often, accidentals --> impossible to stay in one position, especially chromatic runs.

I personally prefer to not rely/use open strings too much. There is a school of thought that open strings sound a bit different to fretted notes, so will stick out. And there's also a school of thought that you should not "fear" open strings so you should work on getting them, and be able to make them sound the same as all the other notes in a phrase etc.

I dare say there's a formal approach to naming and learning how/when to use different positions, because its the same tuning as double bass (and they like to formalise things like positions, because violinists and cellists do too).

paul_c2

Forgot to mention, if there's a choice of position, I'd normally go for "root is under 1st finger on E or A string" - ie E and A positions on the guitar.

bingefeller

paul_c2 said:

bingefeller said:

How do you guys decide where to put your fingerings?  

I can't properly describe the process for electric guitar but I have done a lot of sight-reading on bass guitar, which of course is the same for the first 4 strings. Also I'd say its a bit more important to get the hand position right on the bass, 1) a 4 fret 'stretch' is harder to physically do, especially at the low end, 2) shifting position can produce quite an annoying scratchy sound, as you scrape along the strings. I know its similar for guitar but not as intrusive.

Basically, it depends on 1) if there's accidentals or not and 2) the lowest and highest notes in a particular phrase or section. Obviously its nice to fit it all into one hand position which doesn't require a change in position. There's a further consideration on the bass, that going too high on the E string makes the notes sound a bit stuffy, compare Bb on fret 6, E string with fret 1, A string.

If there's a change in position necessary (due to it simply being too great a range to fit) then I'd look to minimise the changes in position, even if that means the 2nd half might be the same notes as the first half, but played differently (ie keep playing in the position you've moved to if possible, rather than going back needlessly).

If there's accidentals, then 1) try to indentify/recognise it quickly, eg it might simply be a temporary change to a different key, or a run up the harmonic minor/melodic minor, or a chromatic run, or 2) simply come out of position to reach/play that particular accidental, if it doesn't fall underneath the hand 3) work it out beforehand. It might be a case that 1st time played through, it becomes obvious which position its best played in. Often, accidentals --> impossible to stay in one position, especially chromatic runs.

I personally prefer to not rely/use open strings too much. There is a school of thought that open strings sound a bit different to fretted notes, so will stick out. And there's also a school of thought that you should not "fear" open strings so you should work on getting them, and be able to make them sound the same as all the other notes in a phrase etc.

I dare say there's a formal approach to naming and learning how/when to use different positions, because its the same tuning as double bass (and they like to formalise things like positions, because violinists and cellists do too).

I never use open strings either. I just don't like how they sound when I'm playing them along with fretted notes in single note lines.  

So, look for the lowest note and highest note in a phrase and go from there?  

Can you play something through the first time you see it?

octatonic

bingefeller said:

How do you guys decide where to put your fingerings?  

First is tone appropriate to the genre.
I wouldn't read a rockabilly thing at the 8th fret, or a jazz thing at the 1st fret.
They wouldn't sound right,. This is flexibile of course, just a general idea of what I'm thinking about rather than a fixed idea.

Then is ease.
I want to minimise the work as much as I can.

It takes quite a bit of practice and most of it is pretty dull.

paul_c2

bingefeller said:

I never use open strings either. I just don't like how they sound when I'm playing them along with fretted notes in single note lines.  

So, look for the lowest note and highest note in a phrase and go from there?  

Can you play something through the first time you see it?

I definitely think its worth putting some effort into "don't fear open strings, work on technique to make them fit smoothly" because they can be an advantage.

Looking for lowest  & highest note is certainly a good start (for bass) since it will determine the approx. position.

If the piece isn't too complicated, yes you'd aim for getting all the notes right, the dynamics right, and the phrasing more or less right first time. Basically that's what sight reading is. Obviously some pieces are too hard or too fast and need prior working out or a good few runs through.

paul_c2

Here's an example:



Bars 85-90 (top line): 2 choices, either put finger1 at fret 1 (Bb under your 1st finger on the A string) and accept the D is an open string; OR finger1 on 3rd fret and accept the Bb will be a bit stuffy. Also in the latter, the Cb will need a shift of position.

90-94: no real issues

101-104: This is an Ab power chord, effectively, so makes sense finger1 on fret4

105-111: finger1 fret4 makes sense, its basically Db. There's a rest before the B natural and A natural, so no real worries moving position for these.

112:      It effectively modulates into Db mixolydian, which is a posh way to say they flattened the 7th; so finger1 fret4 makes sense here because Cb is easy enough to play as fret4 on the G string.

paul_c2

I guess with no replies in a couple of days, there just aren't that many people who read standard notation on guitar. It echoes what I've found elsewhere too. I have played (and still can, some...) a number of other instruments so reading standard notation makes sense - its a common "standard" shared by all, after all. But looking around, there just isn't that much written in it for guitar. I know there's a world of classical guitar playing but don't know much more than that. Trinity now offer "plectrum" as well as "classical" guitar grades, in addition to their "rock" grades. On the "rock" side, they don't even need bass guitar to sight read for the exams - they go off "song chart" instead. (Guitar is the same). On the "plectrum" side, they do have sight reading; and all the pieces are in standard notation. BUT if you look a little more closely, there's hardly anything out there, the main thrust of the pieces is in books Trinity themselves have compiled and published.

I guess its just jazz (in addition to classical) which use standard notation for guitar, and that not many people play it compared to rock/pop/metal etc.

bingefeller

@paul_c2 do you use intervallic reading or are you thinking about the name of each note?

paul_c2

bingefeller said:

@paul_c2 do you use intervallic reading or are you thinking about the name of each note?

Mostly the notes themselves, but occasionally "fall back" to intervals. Also a lot of the stuff tends to be quite simple, so you can get lazy and know the position the notes of a scale occur in. The example above is on the harder end of what you'd normally get (and isn't that hard once you've gotten used to the amount of flats, and know your Cb and Fb is enharmonically equivalent to B and E). I'd say its not a rigid "I am reading/playing the notes", after a while you do - and are aware you're doing - all three. For example above in bar 105, you know its Db and also know its finger1 on fret4 position; and that the next note is a fourth below, is Ab, and the position remains the same (fret4) both because its a fourth and because Ab is there and because the position includes it.

bingefeller

I just started working on intervallic reading this week and I can read licks so much fast now instead of thinking about each individual note.

Of course, it is absolutely essential to know the note names, where the notes are on your guitar, and where the intervals are on your guitar (which I do know).  It seems that, for me, intervallic reading is the breakthrough.  

paul_c2

I'm not sure you could get away with JUST using intervals, unless you instantly knew if the interval was a major/minor; or perfect/augmented/diminished one. And of course, you'd only know that if you had a reasonable knowledge of the underlying scales and all combinations of notes eg is the interval between the 2nd and 5th note of the scale a perfect 4th? Is the interval between the 4th and 7th note of a scale a perfect 4th? What about the 7th and 4th note? What about the 2nd and 6th? etc

bingefeller

paul_c2 said:

I'm not sure you could get away with JUST using intervals, unless you instantly knew if the interval was a major/minor; or perfect/augmented/diminished one. And of course, you'd only know that if you had a reasonable knowledge of the underlying scales and all combinations of notes eg is the interval between the 2nd and 5th note of the scale a perfect 4th? Is the interval between the 4th and 7th note of a scale a perfect 4th? What about the 7th and 4th note? What about the 2nd and 6th? etc

You'd know by the key signature and any b or # symbols. 

paul_c2

bingefeller said:

paul_c2 said:

I'm not sure you could get away with JUST using intervals, unless you instantly knew if the interval was a major/minor; or perfect/augmented/diminished one. And of course, you'd only know that if you had a reasonable knowledge of the underlying scales and all combinations of notes eg is the interval between the 2nd and 5th note of the scale a perfect 4th? Is the interval between the 4th and 7th note of a scale a perfect 4th? What about the 7th and 4th note? What about the 2nd and 6th? etc

You'd know by the key signature and any b or # symbols. 

I guess it depends what you mean by "intervallic reading". I don't do it (well don't JUST do it) so I'm not 100% sure what it means, but I assumed it meant you'd see (for example) a blob on the 1st space, then the next note is a blob on the (eg) 2nd space, so you know that's a third. However unless you know where its positioned in the scale, you don't know if its a major third or a minor third. Yes, you could learn every interval between every note in the scale, but there's 28 of them, in just one octave (1st to 2nd; 1st to 3rd, 1st to octave;....2nd to 3rd etc) AND you'd still need to know whereabouts within the scale the first note is - so you may as well use notes rather than intervals.

I guess the other way of interpreting "intervallic reading" is to read the notes off the music, but then "convert" it to an interval. For example as above you might read its A, then C, know this is a minor third, then know its 3 frets up on the same string; or 2 frets down on the next string. This makes more sense, since instead of needing to know where the C is on the fretboard, know what "shape" the intervals are. In fact this makes sense when transposing too.

octatonic

Intervallic reading is very slow compared to reading in key.

Sporky

octatonic said:

Intervallic reading is very slow compared to reading in key.

From the explanations of how it works, I'd also suggest that it's batshit-crazy-over-complicated.

viz

^ it does sound long-winded but it's not so far away from what I do - I sight-read like a singer - I read the line, I know the sound of each note and I reproduce the melody. I know where those notes are on the fretboard, not in an absolute way but from the reference point of the note I'm already on. So if it's going from the 5th degree to the 4th degree an octave up (eg if we're in A minor and the note goes up a m7 from E to D, them I know that's skip a string, same fret. Obviously if we're down at the nut, I read the actual notes, but if it's top widdle that's what I do.