Skropi I started studying George Dandelot's Etude de Clefs, and then I added Super Sighting Secrets. Now I just read through 2 Chorales a day, and as many new, pieces as I can, giving priority to reading and not to new repertoire. I can say this, I am completely satisfied with my progress. I can only sight read very easy pieces, and not very well, but I can read through anything, reasonably quickly. Keep in mind that 2 months ago I didn't even know the note names on the staff, let alone associating note on the staff with key.
Holy cow!!!!!!!!!!
Two months and you're already at the Chorales step!!? Starting from zero!!!??
Double holy cow!!!! Congratulations!
I'm trying to read since practically forever (decades), and using SSRS since at least early 2018 and I am still at level 3 (in the "reading" VP part, I'm at 6 in the "keyboard orientation" one, since I can play all scales in all keys -- and in parallel, contrary thirds or sixths). How did you get there?
arc So, ask yourself if you really need apps or if you can reuse what is already available. And then practice, practice, practice and try learning some basic theory as you go to support the process.
Thanks for chiming in with your reasonable reply @arc . Sadly, for me, it's not like that. I am not seeking an easy solution. I am looking for ANY solution. I've already done "practice, practice, practice" for decades without any guidance, and now for years with some guidance. I've become only marginally better in that now I can somewhat read slowly single line in the bass clef which before I couldn't. Hands separate only.
Your suggestion to me (no offense intended, just explaining where I am to help you to put yourself in my shoes and perhaps give me a better suggestion) sounds like this (I'm repeating something I already said in more details): I want to get to the top of a mountain. There is a road, very steep and very long. I hike it and everything is ok. Hard but ok. At a certain point the road ENDS. There is only a totally vertical, super-slick cliff, hundreds of feet tall. I see on top people, so there must be a way to get there. I try to climb it and I always fall back. I ask those people "Did you use rope?". And they say "no". I ask "did you use helicopter?" And they sound offended. I continue "Is there another, longer road?" and they reply "Nope, dude". I ask "How in the world did you go there, my friends?" and they simply say "just do it, you simply have to put the time and the effort to hike the cliff". Yes, they say that I have to "hike" the cliff. Do you see my frustration with that answer?
Don't get me wrong, I greatly appreciate you taking the time and effort to tell myself how you did it, I'm just trying to explain my insistence and my helplessness (before and after reading your answer).
arc And using a real score for this purpose instead of random notes is in my opinion the way to go.
Just to make sure, the notes in the app can be generated randomly for not being always identical, but following some musical patterns. And plus it would use also provided scores (if I get to implement that). Using regular (paper) scores would be great indeed. And I have done it, but probably not in the correct way.
arc Music sight reading is the same as reading a text.
I totally agree, but there are important differences:
- timing: reading text you can change the time almost as you see fit
- coordination: the motor skill required for reading text out loud are mastered since infancy. You don't even know if and how you are moving your throat, vocal chords, cheeks, tongue and lips to utter sounds. You just do it (as you say). Perhaps a kid who has learned to play the piano could do the same with fingers, but for an adult the coordination effort is much, much greater
- multitasking: the single line in single hand I can somewhat manage. Once you have two hands at the same time (or worse, more than one line in each hand, like in the Bach Chorales), everything fells apart. To me it feels like you are trying to talk to two separate people at the same time (not just listening, which is ok, but speaking to both in exactly in the same instant)
- let me just mention technique and rhythm obfuscation, since those could be sidestepped by careful choice of well written and easy enough piece
This is just to reiterate that "just do it" does not work. Now admittedly you did not say simply "just do it", but you added some suggestions which may be the key, so let me dive deep into this rather than overlooking them.
arc However, in music, a common approach is to learn individual pitches and values and then use brute force to speed the notes up until they reach the target tempo. This is the same as reading a text by spelling out each individual letter or syllable at high speed
Agreed (for the languages that do have letters, but I digress 😀). However in text in some way you "jump" from letter to word "automatically", whereas in music how does this happen? It's not clear to me. I mean, I can see super-simple patterns if they are grouped well in the notation (e.g. parts of scales) but of course there is more.
arc You should understand if you played a wrong note because of how it sounds and not because the app tells you. This is where you start linking music theory with hearing and playing.
Not really. Just to quote my most recent mistake (in Mozart's K1): I had a quick A-G-F-E-D followed by an higher D -- instead I happily played the B just below that D and it works (melodically and harmonically) fine -- and it's easier because it's a shorter jump! Moreover, many "transition notes" sound fine as such (e.g. 1/16 or shorter), but would find horrible when held e.g. as quarter notes when doing the "just read pitch, not time" part.
Most importantly:
arc You can grab any piano score and slowly practice pitch reading while ignoring everything else. You can even raise the challenge and play each note pitch with exactly the same duration. For this you only need a score and a metronome.
Single line, single hand fine. How about two hands and (later) two lines per hand? And I mean, I am not looking at sophisticated things: easy Mozart, easy Bach all have (perhaps occasionally, but still) two lines per hand. Chords are often three lines per hand. That is really hard (and the root of the problem) for me.
Even if you don't say, I assume you also mean to do the same with time: read the rhythm without the pitches. I've done that. The SSRS book suggests to do this (rhythm and pitches separately), and then to get to the hands together by doing them sequentially (one note in the left hand, one in the right, one in the left, etc) slowly overall, but fast (i.e. shorter time in between hands). But that requires carefully chosen music in which basically left and right hands play both notes of the same duration almost always. One thing that has slowed me down in doing this is the switch between bass and treble clef: what happens is that I read something on the bass clef and then I read the next thing on the treble clef as if it is also on the bass. And often not realize because they are just a third apart and often it works fine in the harmonic and melodic structure….
Perhaps this painful description will now help you see how lost I am on this craft.
