Sight Reading

[PiccChick]

so sorry- I didn't read it through.ok what i did was for
an evaluation[cause it's required for our band sort of like chair auditions but
no one evr gets moved]and it was a prepared peice[sorry when i read your
response- it reminded me of the time when i did SOMETHING like that on a
prepared peice]anyway i had a problem w/ a rythem and since the music came w/ a
cd-i decided to follow along on the cd and listen to how they played it.i played
waht they had on the cd at my evaluations, that was the only part i messed up on
in my prepared peice.Im sorry-this has nothing to do w/ sight reading.[:halo:]

[Dixon]

Like anything else you can become better at sight
reading. By becoming a better player and better educated in music theory,
listening to more music and practice. I think sight reading is just an easy and
very ridiculous tool for judging playing ability. I would never think of a
performing a piece in front of an audience without a great deal of practice
time. How well I play it the first time I see it is irrelevant to how well I
play it when I am ready. In my view there is absolutely no correlation between
how well you can sight read a piece and how well you will play it when prepared.
Glad I no longer have to compete where sight reading is a factor. The judges are
really listening for how advanced you are as a player, not how well you sight
read. Or they should be if they know their stuff. You can sometimes hide lack of
knowledge or mimic another players performance on a piece you have time to
prepare, but on a piece you dont know your on your own.

[Cleartone]

Ok Piccchick I understand better somewhat. My method was
not meant for sight-reading exclusively. when you get to college and take music
theory, you will be analyzing a lot of music with scores. I just think that this
practice helps you read better in general, so you could become an even better
sight-reader. I still don't understand the part of your story of the evaluation
that came with a CD. If the rhythm you were having trouble with was played
correctly on the recording and you learned what the correct way to play it was
from the recording then you must have been able to play it right, unless the
recording was wrong, or it was another artists interpretation of the piece.
maybe you psyched yourself out about that particular part that you were having
trouble with. Any thanks for the explanation. Dixon I agree but disagree with
you. sight-reading is not an overall evaluation of a musicians skills. If you
are a native-american flutist, reading is probably a waste of time. However, if
you are in an orchestral setting or if you are in a studio setting, you may be
called upon to sight-read something that is brand spanking new. No one has ever
played the thing before. Some composers can write some difficult stuff, so being
a good sight-reader is a must in these situations. Since most competitions are
based upon the orchestral setting, sight-reading is a part of the testing.
Someone, who works hard enough on certain pieces may be able to play them at a
professional level, but may not be a good sight-reader. This could fool even the
people who know their "stuff". Especially some people who are lucky enough to
have a great ear.

[powayflute01]

Would the best way to learn to sightread be to just play
a diversity of pieces written in as many different styles as possible?

[Cleartone]

yes

[Dixon]

Clear my point was more about being a good sight reader
and great player can and ofter are mutually exclusive. If you become intimate
with principal flute players with orchestras across the country and around the
world you will find some are good sight readers others are not, relatively
speaking of course. If the piece is beyond your level, you will struggle, if it
is within your experience you should not have a problem showing your ability to
handle the piece in a sight reading competition level. I am concerned with
students asking the question here trying to shortcut themselves into being a
better sight reader. Learn the basics on playing and theory, play alot of music.
Those will help you more than trying to shortcut yourself into winning a
competition. but to each his or her own

[PiccChick]

you see i may sound nonexperienced cause im only in 7th
grade so im like uhhhh....i may take things the wrong way sometimes.dont mind
me. and your right cleartone-it was probably my mistake on the rythem who knows.
but yes, im definatly gonna take music theory in high school that'll help me
alot.sorry about that!!!!!!![::)] [:halo:]

[Dixon]

Good decision. Knowing music theory and even music
history and appreciation will make you a better player and also a better sight
reader.

[Cleartone]

dixon, again I agree and disagree, yes I agree that being
a good sight reader and a great musician can be exclusive from one another,
However most of these students are reading and doing just that. I don't believe
any student that ask questions on sight reading is looking for a short-cut. They
are basically looking for methods that work for them. My answer to the question
was an extra excersize in reading music and i do believe it helps in sight
reading, if that is what you are refering to as a shortcut. Really when you
think about it I am saying the same thing you are as far as spending time with
music theory. I am just suggesting people listen to recordings of professionals
with the sheet music in hand to get more involved with the music. The only part
I disagree with you on is that competitions should not judge on sight-reading
ability. I believe it should be an important part of these type of events and
that comes from a musician that thinks flutists should spend more time playing
by ear especially symphony players As far as being intimate with symphony
players, I can't get much more intimate. The person who first asked this
question is in the ninth grade. so if you are to use the word relative. Where do
you think her level is in sight reading compared to the symphony players who you
say aren't good sight readers? Relatively speaking.

[Dixon]

Clear, I agree that we probably are not that far apart on
sight reading. To me I judge a person's ability more on a piece they have taken
the time to work on. Not how quickly they play a piece acceptably poorly in a
sight reading. We rarely are called upon to perform a piece we haven't seen
before in an orchestra setting. Contrary to what some kids think we work long
and hard on a piece before they come to sit and listen or turn on their cd
players. When they start paying you to play pieces you have never seen before I
will weigh sight reading more heavily. I agree that much of your advice will
make a player a better musician and not just a better sight reader and that is
good advice.

[Cleartone]

Hey Picchik, no problem. I enjoyed your response. At
first I didn't understand it. That's why I asked you to explain. I wish I was
as aware as you when I was in the 7th grade. then again there was no internet.
Just keep on playing. by the way am looking at some vintage haynes and powell
piccs. I can't resist. The Powell has great response in the upper range, but
the the Haynes is smooth and cool. Dixon, I have been paid to sight read. In a
studio setting a composer was given an advance to record some original pieces
for a small record label. I was hired to play the flute parts. he also had
people he hired that did not read music at all, such as gospel singers. He had
what I called floating time signatures. These were measures that had no time
signatures or vague time signatures that were simply implied. It took some good
sight reading skills to pull it off. Then again he wasn't asking me to sight
read something like the Prokofiev sonata. so I hear Ya.

[Dixon]

I want to second what Clear said, as a 7th grader you
doing a great deal to improve yourself. Its a good sign for your future.
Confused one say: "Better to ask "stupid questions" and to get them answered and
no longer be stupid then to remain quiet and stupid forever."