# sight reading



## pcnog11

I admire those musicians that are effective in sight reading. I have seen musicians reading a new piece of music as if they have played and practiced that piece for a long time. As a musician, how do you develop your sight reading techniques? What is your secret? Could you share?


----------



## Bettina

Pattern recognition is the key to sight-reading. A good sight-reader can look at a page of music and notice things like "oh, that's a C Major chord" or "hey, that's a G Major arpeggio."  In other words, good sight-readers see groups of notes, not individual notes. 

To develop this skill, you should practice scales, chord progressions, and arpeggios. This type of practice will help your brain (and fingers!) to become familiar with the common patterns in tonal music.


----------



## david johnson

I never had trouble with, so I can't tell you how I do it  I think I see the rhythms first.


----------



## Heck148

Bettina said:


> Pattern recognition is the key to sight-reading. A good sight-reader can look at a page of music and notice things like "oh, that's a C Major chord" or "hey, that's a G Major arpeggio."  In other words, good sight-readers see groups of notes, not individual notes.
> 
> To develop this skill, you should practice scales, chord progressions, and arpeggios. This type of practice will help your brain (and fingers!) to become familiar with the common patterns in tonal music.


Absolutely!! good advice, for sure....good sight-readers read groups of notes - scales, chords, arpeggios. you practice these basics until they are automatic under your fingers....


----------



## Animal the Drummer

I've played the piano since the age of 5 but I'm still a slow reader of music over half a century later (though this actually has its advantages, in that working slowly through a new piece helps me memorise it as I go along). I find that singing in a choir helps, because as a choir member you're often sight-reading. As with most everything, practice is the key. No pun intended.


----------



## jurianbai

I wonder if one already used to play music by ear, can he/she properly learn sight read? I found myself very slow in sight read after a year learning it. The thing that I couldn't figured out is constructing the tempo, especially if the score is having unusual rhythm. The notes itself is pretty easy to learn.


----------



## Bettina

jurianbai said:


> I wonder if one already used to play music by ear, can he/she properly learn sight read? I found myself very slow in sight read after a year learning it. The thing that I couldn't figured out is constructing the tempo, especially if the score is having unusual rhythm. The notes itself is pretty easy to learn.


Yes, it definitely is possible to learn rhythmic notation! Before you actually play through a piece, you might find it helpful to write in the counting under the notes. That way, when you play the piece, you'll be able to see exactly where the beats are.

Also, you could try clapping or tapping the rhythms before playing. I find that this is a very useful way to approach a challenging rhythmic pattern. After you've clapped it a few times (maybe while counting out loud), then you can try playing it slowly.


----------



## Heck148

jurianbai said:


> The thing that I couldn't figured out is constructing the tempo, especially if the score is having unusual rhythm. The notes itself is pretty easy to learn.


That is an essential key to good sight-reading - analyze the rhythm - the meter, the unit of beat, the subdivision, and then the tempo.To attempt to sight-read a work without understanding the basic rhythm is rather fruitless.


----------



## Dan Ante

Bettina said:


> Pattern recognition is the key to sight-reading. A good sight-reader can look at a page of music and notice things like "oh, that's a C Major chord" or "hey, that's a G Major arpeggio."  In other words, good sight-readers see groups of notes, not individual notes.
> 
> To develop this skill, you should practice scales, chord progressions, and arpeggios. This type of practice will help your brain (and fingers!) to become familiar with the common patterns in tonal music.


On average how far ahead would you be reading?


----------



## DavidA

My father was a good sight reader as people would often plonk a piece of music in front of him and ask him to play it while they sang. He tried to teach me how to look ahead in music but I'm afraid it was a bit beyond me. I have never been a good sight reader.
However such ability pales into insignificance besides the likes of John Ogden. When the score of Opus clavicembalisticum by Sorabji, a piece lasting four hours, was placed before him he sight read the lot!


----------



## Bettina

Dan Ante said:


> On average how far ahead would you be reading?


It depends on the complexity of the music. I'm able to read several measures ahead when sight-reading easy/intermediate music. What I mean by this is music with basic rhythms, standard chord progressions (lots of IV-V-I stuff), and not too many key changes.

When it comes to a more advanced piece, it's much harder to read ahead. For a challenging piece with many accidentals and unusual chords, I might only read a few notes ahead. Maybe just one or two notes ahead in a Liszt or Scriabin etude. :lol:


----------



## Dan Ante

Bettina said:


> It depends on the complexity of the music. I'm able to read several measures ahead when sight-reading easy/intermediate music. What I mean by this is music with basic rhythms, standard chord progressions (lots of IV-V-I stuff), and not too many key changes.
> 
> When it comes to a more advanced piece, it's much harder to read ahead. For a challenging piece with many accidentals and unusual chords, I might only read a few notes ahead. Maybe just one or two notes ahead in a Liszt or Scriabin etude. :lol:


You make me feel so inadequate.


----------



## Bettina

Dan Ante said:


> You make me feel so inadequate.


Thanks for the compliment, but please don't feel inadequate! I'm a professional pianist--I work as a piano teacher and accompanist. Because my income depends on my piano skills, I practice several hours a day..I'm sure that you could reach the same level if you obsessed on it like I do!


----------



## hpowders

Dan Ante said:


> You make me feel so inadequate.


I thought you were in complete a-chord with Bettina.


----------



## Dan Ante

hpowders said:


> I thought you were in complete a-chord with Bettina.


You are too #


----------



## Dan Ante

Bettina said:


> Thanks for the compliment, but please don't feel inadequate! I'm a professional pianist--I work as a piano teacher and accompanist. Because my income depends on my piano skills, I practice several hours a day..I'm sure that you could reach the same level if you obsessed on it like I do!


 If only Sighhhhh strictly little johnny one note me.


----------



## hpowders

Dan Ante said:


> You are too #


I'm sure compared to YOU, I would feel inadequate. I'm not too swift on the music theory. 
Evidence of a wasted life.


----------



## jurianbai

The irony is, I can play drum. I know how to do 1/8, 1/16, trio, but just couldn't instantly execute it as the score tell. I will need time to rehearse it. I have many young friends (=kids) that can instantly do it, even the score have complicated beat.


----------



## Bettina

jurianbai said:


> The irony is, I can play drum. I know how to do 1/8, 1/16, trio, but just couldn't instantly execute it as the score tell. I will need time to rehearse it. I have many young friends (=kids) that can instantly do it, even the score have complicated beat.


Don't get discouraged...it takes time and practice to learn to read rhythmic notation. Here's another suggestion: when you listen to music, you could try following along with the score sometimes. After you've done this for a while, it'll be easier for you to look at an unfamiliar score and figure out how the rhythm should sound.


----------



## Dan Ante

I do recall an article in the Gramophone magazine years ago that said the British Orchestras were better sight readers than the American Orchestras, it was out of necessity as they (British) were drastically under funded and could not afford the amount of practices that the Americans enjoyed. Whether this was right at the time or perhaps an appeal for more funding I just don’t know.


----------



## Heck148

I don't know if they are better sight-readers than American orchestras, but the British, esp London SO, does [still??] lots of studio, sound track recording. often, these sessions will occur after a full-length symphony program, at 12 midnight, or very early morning. 
Studio musicians are great sight-readers, they have to be. When the red light goes on, [which is always] in the studio, everything is being recorded. If you can't cut it at sight, they'll call someone else next time. 
The French, esp the Paris Conservatory trained musicians, were always known for great sight-reading ability and technical skill. It's almost as if they learn a whole set of "fast-fingerings" - quick easy fingerings which might not sound that great, but will pop out the notes very quickly...
I've done a fair amount of studio work over the years.. alot of it was quite easy [dreadful stuff, by and large - muzak, elevator music, industrial sound tracks, etc] but occasionally there were some really tricky ones. I was always able to get thru it ok. one thing with studio work - you didn't need to worry about projecting a big sound into a huge concert hall. everything is close miked - just use a very easy to control reed that is responsive in all registers.


----------



## Dan Ante

They can cut and splice as well  Do they still record onto a master tape "analogue" or has it gone digital?
OK I must be going senile, I remember when CDs first came out they were marked aad then a bit later add and then moved on to ddd. I really really wish I could regain my lost youth and mind....


----------



## Heck148

Dan Ante said:


> They can cut and splice as well


To a point....there is not enough time to keep doing retakes. Time is $$, and it's at a premium in the recording studio...


----------



## JeffD

I have a lot of trouble "getting" the rhythm. So I figure that out first, mumbling in "yum di dum di diddle di dum" language. I don't even consider the melody till I have the rhythm down.

Given a lot of music with the same rhythm, I find sight reading fairly straight forward. So like I know a hornpipe, or a slip jig, and sight reading yet another one is not usually a problem.

Classical music I am not familiar with I have a lot of trouble sight reading. The music never fits nicely and I have to figure out all kinds of alternate fingerings, as well as my problems intuiting the rhythm. Ahhhh.

I try and find a recording or youtube of it first and just listen.


----------



## Krummhorn

I was taught about sight reading early on during my private piano, and later organ, lessons. Part of most auditions for keyboard players is sight reading skill. I had to do just that for my most recent organist position at the church where I am now employed. 

I give much thanks and praise for my piano and organ teachers for helping me learn sight reading - Invaluable experience that has helped me all through my musical career. 

I still have a little problem with syncopated rhythms in some of the contemporary literature used in churches today; but I am able to iron out those difficulties by practicing on a regular basis.


----------



## Manxfeeder

I became a good sight-reader out of necessity when I joined a big band in high school. There was this big book, and I never knew which one was going to be played next, so it was sink or swim. 

As they said, one key is reading ahead. Once you see a pattern or can figure out what's in front of you, look ahead. And understanding rhythm is also important. I break it down to its most common note length. So if there are a lot of eighth notes, I think of the notes like Mexican jumping beans, and where there may be a dotted half note, inside it there are three eighth notes pulsing. I don't know if that makes sense, but I can read complicated rhythms that way.


----------



## Dan Ante

There are degrees of difficulty for sight reading, in my youth I played in dance bands at the Saturday hop kind of thing and the music for bass was 2 in the bar sort of thing occasionally some 4 in the bar etc but pretty basic and sight reading was a piece of cake, compared to what you get in orchestral music which could be very testing, so I have nothing but admiration for classical players that can sight read.


----------



## brianvds

Bettina said:


> Pattern recognition is the key to sight-reading. A good sight-reader can look at a page of music and notice things like "oh, that's a C Major chord" or "hey, that's a G Major arpeggio."  In other words, good sight-readers see groups of notes, not individual notes.


This is very sound advice, I would think, but it simply leads to the next problem, namely how on earth to instantly recognize chords and progressions. There doesn't seem to be any pattern to them at all. It's one thing when they are neatly in root position like they have them in music theory books (in which everything tends to be in C major too!). But in actual music, the chords are virtually never that neat. Throw in some key signatures and accidentals, and chord recognition becomes pretty much impossible (at least to me).



Animal the Drummer said:


> I've played the piano since the age of 5 but I'm still a slow reader of music over half a century later (though this actually has its advantages, in that working slowly through a new piece helps me memorise it as I go along).


It was the same thing with me when I still played piano: by the time I could finally play a piece with no more than a few missed notes, I had a complete muscle memory of it, at which time I no longer looked at the sheet music. perhaps not the best way to practice sight reading!



> I find that singing in a choir helps, because as a choir member you're often sight-reading. As with most everything, practice is the key. No pun intended.


Ah well, sight singing is another thing altogether, and for reasons set out above, I cannot work out how anyone can ever learn to do it. I cannot manage with even the simplest of tunes, because I cannot for the life of me work out how one learns to instantly recognize intervals in sheet music (there doesn't seem to be any consistent pattern!), let alone sight read through actual pieces of choral music.


----------



## Heck148

brianvds said:


> This is very sound advice, I would think, but it simply leads to the next problem, namely how on earth to instantly recognize chords and progressions. There doesn't seem to be any pattern to them at all.


actually, the scales and chords have very definite patterns and intervals to them...constant, diligent practice will develop the musician's ability to play these automatically and to recognize them on sight.

for example - there is only ONE CHROMATIC scale - in which each pitch is separated by a semi-tone....now, this scale pattern may start and end on any note, but it's all part of one chromatic scale
there are only 2 WHOLE TONE scales - each pitch separated by a whole step....again,you can start on any particular pitch....but the pattern remains the same
There are THREE FULLY DIMINISHED arpeggios...each tone separated by a minor third
there are FOUR AUGMENTED arpeggios - each pitch separated by a major third...again, with each group - you can begin and end on any note - but the same pitches are included.

once you learn these scales and arpeggios, all you have to do is recognize them on the music you are reading, and your ear, mind, fingers, etc will automatically produce these pre-programmed patterns...you are not going note by note, as a rule - you are going by note groups, note patterns



> Ah well, sight singing is another thing altogether, and for reasons set out above, I cannot work out how anyone can ever learn to do it. I cannot manage with even the simplest of tunes, because I cannot for the life of me work out how one learns to instantly recognize intervals in sheet music (there doesn't seem to be any consistent pattern!), let alone sight read through actual pieces of choral music.


it's all intervals, and patterns of notes...again, there are consistent patterns, and once you become familiar with the pitch relations, it's not that hard to find your way thru...
the people who really impressed my were those who could rapidly, accurately, sight-sing thru atonal works - where there are not recognizable scale and chord patterns, but rather each successive interval is taken by itself...


----------



## Bettina

brianvds said:


> This is very sound advice, I would think, but it simply leads to the next problem, namely how on earth to instantly recognize chords and progressions. There doesn't seem to be any pattern to them at all. *It's one thing when they are neatly in root position like they have them in music theory books (in which everything tends to be in C major too!).* But in actual music, the chords are virtually never that neat. Throw in some key signatures and accidentals, and chord recognition becomes pretty much impossible (at least to me).


Yeah, theory books do tend to overuse the basic keys - which is good for illustrating musical principles, but not so good if you're trying to learn finger patterns for each key! If you're interested in working through the scales and arpeggios in every key, I recommend The Complete Book of Scales, Chords, Arpeggios & Cadences, published by Alfred. Here it is on Amazon: 
https://www.amazon.com/Scales-Chords-Arpeggios-Cadences-Complete/dp/0739003682


----------



## brianvds

Heck148 said:


> actually, the scales and chords have very definite patterns and intervals to them..


That could be, but I have never managed to work out what those patterns are.



> There are THREE FULLY DIMINISHED arpeggios...each tone separated by a minor third
> there are FOUR AUGMENTED arpeggios - each pitch separated by a major third...again, with each group - you can begin and end on any note - but the same pitches are included.


Could be, but I cannot work out how to instantly recognize a major third (or any other interval) on sheet music. What it looks like depends on where on the staff it is, what key you are in, what accidentals are thrown in, etc., with the result that there simply isn't any consistent pattern (at least none that I can discern).

To me, it looks pretty much like you have to memorize every conceivable interval and chord in every key, i.e. a feat pretty much equivalent to memorizing the thousands of characters used in Chinese writing. Not impossible, but a skill that would take years and years of full time study. Of course, professional musicians put in exactly that much study, but I am amazed even at amateur singers in church choirs who can apparently fluently sing at sight, or choir boys who can do it even better and are too young to have had that much time to learn the skill.

It took me no more than a few hours to learn to instantly recognize any interval when I _hear_ it. I battled for days and weeks to do the same on sheet music, and never got to the point where I could read and audiate even simple tunes, let alone more tricky ones or chords. With any given interval, the only way I can work out what it is is to visualize a keyboard and painstakingly count the steps!



Bettina said:


> Yeah, theory books do tend to overuse the basic keys - which is good for illustrating musical principles, but not so good if you're trying to learn finger patterns for each key! If you're interested in working through the scales and arpeggios in every key, I recommend The Complete Book of Scales, Chords, Arpeggios & Cadences, published by Alfred. Here it is on Amazon:
> https://www.amazon.com/Scales-Chords-Arpeggios-Cadences-Complete/dp/0739003682


Not to worry: for the moment my piano playing days are over. I currently have neither time nor energy. If I ever do take it up again, I want to do it the way they did it in Beethoven's day: whatever instrument I learn I will want to combine with a very thorough study of theory and ear training. In those days a musician was someone who could improvise, and read through a score while audiating, not just a mechanical reader of notes as if a piano is a kind of typewriter.


----------



## Bettina

brianvds said:


> Could be, but I cannot work out how to instantly recognize a major third (or any other interval) on sheet music. What it looks like depends on where on the staff it is, what key you are in, what accidentals are thrown in, etc., with the result that there simply isn't any consistent pattern (at least none that I can discern).


In order to recognize intervals, you might find it helpful to memorize how many semitones are in each interval. That's how I teach my students to do it. It's much faster than thinking about the key/scale of each interval. For example, the interval that you mentioned - a major third - spans four semitones. Using this method, even the craziest intervals can be identified (relatively) quickly.

I like your idea of learning a comprehensive approach to music-making - I hope that you follow through with it, when you have time in your schedule for such a project. Musicianship skills are so important...they help people play better and they make the process more meaningful and enjoyable. I try to teach these skills to my students whenever I can squeeze it into the lesson (unfortunately, many of the parents just want their kids to memorize pieces for competitions, and they want me to neglect everything else!!)


----------



## brianvds

Bettina said:


> In order to recognize intervals, you might find it helpful to memorize how many semitones are in each interval. That's how I teach my students to do it. It's much faster than thinking about the key/scale of each interval. For example, the interval that you mentioned - a major third - spans four semitones. Using this method, even the craziest intervals can be identified (relatively) quickly.


Hmm, that might be a workable approach, though one would also have to remember that moving from one line or space on the staff to the next does not always span the same number of semitones. I am not too sure what happens when you throw key signatures into the mix, but if I remember correctly, every key signature creates a new pattern. That is really what threw me off. For the purposes of sight reading one should perhaps forget about key signatures as such and instead treat all the sharps/flats in them as accidentals.

Don't really know: that is precisely why I could never manage.

Now perhaps professionals do it differently. E.g. I get the impression that they always know what degree of the scale they are on, but doing this is not so simple because in common practice period music the key you are in is not necessarily the one in the key signature, and I have great difficulty working out what the key is once the composer starts to pour accidentals all over the place. And doesn't using such a method lead to great difficulty when reading atonal music?

Or perhaps every musician works out his own way to do it? I wouldn't know. That's one of the problems you run into when you can't afford lessons: you never know whether you are stumbling up a blind alley and actually acquiring bad habits. 

Trying to read chords hugely complicates the issue, because here too there doesn't seem to be any consistent pattern, and chords and their inversions can be written in a bazillion different ways, and on more than one staff simultaneously, etc. etc. Hence my analogy with Chinese writing!

This was incidentally also where my ear training ran into trouble. I can distinguish between major, minor and seventh chords with no trouble at all, but I found it almost impossible to work out whether a chord is in root position or in one of its inversions (or which one). And when it comes to chords progressions I am apparently completely and utterly useless: with no amount of practice could I learn to distinguish, say, I-IV-V from I-V-IV, or for that matter, II-VII-III.

I'm not too sure why, but then, my ear training consisted of using software that generates chords and progressions, not systematic study under a teacher. Perhaps I just missed out on being taught a few basic tricks of the trade, or perhaps there are simply inherent limits to what my ear can do: part of the frustration is never knowing which it is. If a properly qualified teacher could tell me definitively that I simply have no talent, then I would at least know it. Instead I constantly felt like someone stumbling blindfolded up an incline without knowing whether he is climbing Everest or just a speed bump in the road.



> I like your idea of learning a comprehensive approach to music-making - I hope that you follow through with it, when you have time in your schedule for such a project. Musicianship skills are so important...they help people play better and they make the process more meaningful and enjoyable. I try to teach these skills to my students whenever I can squeeze it into the lesson (unfortunately, many of the parents just want their kids to memorize pieces for competitions, and they want me to neglect everything else!!)


I am kind of tempted to take up recorder again, and then make a point of not overextending myself with too difficult pieces. What I have in mind is to simply learn to blow simple tunes, but to achieve proper mastery up to that humble level, e.g. being able to also audiate anything I can play, and being able to write down such tunes of my own composition without an instrument and being able to improvise at that level.

Very humble, but in some ways perhaps more satisfactory than being able to play a Haydn piano sonata from sheet music in a mechanical, typewriter sort of way without really understanding it. Only problem is, I have neighbours and even on the mellow alto the high notes are on the shrill side... ;-)

Anyway, I have noticed over the years that when it comes to music making and composition as opposed to listening, I tend to prefer New Agey stuff, where the technical challenges are not so extreme, and it is easier to do a proper job of it.


----------



## Larkenfield

pcnog11 said:


> I admire those musicians that are effective in sight reading. I have seen musicians reading a new piece of music as if they have played and practiced that piece for a long time. As a musician, how do you develop your sight reading techniques? What is your secret? Could you share?


Practice, practice, practice. Start by knowing your instrument and knowing musical notation in general. There have been amazing feats of sight reading, such as the legendary Franz Liszt reputedly sight reading the brand new Grieg Piano Concerto perfectly in front of the composer. He was perhaps the greatest to ever live but had plenty of opportunities to develop his skills... It also helps to cultivate a serene and relaxed state of mind, because acute anxiety can be blinding... It also helps to be fluent in the knowledge of certain patterns and scales, articulation markings, that can be instantly recognized quick as a flash without thinking. Perhaps the idea is to transcend the mental noise, because it may slow you down when it comes to sight reading something new and complex. Good luck!


----------



## Dan Ante

brianvds said:


> I am kind of tempted to take up recorder again, and then make a point of not overextending myself with too difficult pieces. What I have in mind is to simply learn to blow simple tunes, but to achieve proper mastery up to that humble level, e.g. being able to also audiate anything I can play, and being able to write down such tunes of my own composition without an instrument and being able to improvise at that level.
> 
> Very humble, but in some ways perhaps more satisfactory than being able to play a Haydn piano sonata from sheet music in a mechanical, typewriter sort of way without really understanding it. Only problem is, I have neighbours and even on the mellow alto the high notes are on the shrill side... ;-)
> 
> .


That takes me back quite a few years, as you can guess by my Avatar I used to play the double bass and I used to muck around with the Clarinet at a purely amateure level and eventually sold it, my Wife and Sister in law brought me a descant recorder as a birthday present joke but I got hold of a beginners book and started to learn it eventually this led to a treble recorder then a Baroque flute and finished up with a Boheme Flute and lessons, going through the grades but only playing in amateur ens. All I can say to any one with an inkling to start is its never too late go for it.


----------



## Guest

pcnog11 said:


> I admire those musicians that are effective in sight reading. I have seen musicians reading a new piece of music as if they have played and practiced that piece for a long time. As a musician, how do you develop your sight reading techniques? What is your secret? Could you share?


A lot of good responses to this. I'll chime in that with constant practice you will recognize chord shapes and notation patterns. In other words, you're not playing empirically but you simply know what that chord is or how that pattern of notes is played. For example, a tied note or a dotted note. If you have to time them out as you play, you'll never get better. Rather, you have to intuitively know what that will sound like and just play it. That only comes with practice--you've encountered it so many times that you don't have to count it out. Same with chords. You don't sit there going, "This finger goes here and this one goes here..." but rather you see it is an F7 or an A minor or whatever and you just play it. That is how music should be taught but, surprisingly, it very often is not and students lose interest because they keep doing it empirically every time instead of using recognition. That's how I would teach students. Look for those patterns.

The other thing is knowing your instrument. You have to know where EVERY note is. Drill yourself by naming notes at random: C, A flat, G, E, D sharp, etc. and then play that note in every octave your instrument is capable of, ascending and descending. Even name notes as E sharp, F flat and play them. It should come automatically and instantly. It doesn't matter how well you can read the notes off the page if you can't immediately translate that into producing those notes on your instrument as you read them. That implies, of course, that you have to play without looking at your instrument. You MUST play by touch because you can't take your eyes off that sheet music or you'll lose your place. So learn where every note is with your eyes closed.

Finally, on the road to being a good sight reader, take it in steps. Start off with simpler pieces and work your way to harder ones and play them at a pace that you can handle no matter how slow it is. Get a metronome and pace yourself. After you master something at a certain pace, speed it up a little and so on until you can whip through it. That makes every subsequent piece you learn easier.

Most importantly--NEVER stop doing this. Stop and you'll lose your edge. Keep going forever and ever.


----------



## Crystal

david johnson said:


> I never had trouble with, so I can't tell you how I do it  I think I see the rhythms first.


Agree, I have played the piano for five years and to me it's so easy. I always sight-reading and I usually don't slow down.


----------

