Playing and sightreading

[stormx]

Hi,

i am a little confused about what do you usually call sightreading.

I can see 3 basic types of piano playing:

1) from memory, without the score in front of you.

2) playing with the score and actually READING all the notes. You can recreate this situation taking an score YOU HAVE NEVER SEEN NOR NEVER LISTENED BEFORE.

3) playing with the score in front of you, but using it AS A GUIDE, WITHOUT ACTUALLY READING EVERY NOTE. In this case, muscle memory is somewhat mixed with note reading. The pianist is unable to play the piece without the score, tough.

I beleive 3) is very usual, as well as 1).
However, TRUE sightreading should be number 2) Right?


On the other hand, i was up to now usually a type 1) player.
However, my new teacher insists on playing with the score, in order to avoid memory lapses and to improve sightreading (and to get used to not look so much at my hands). What do you think? I like the idea of avoiding those horrible memory lapses, so he must be right 


Thanks in advance for your opinions.

[shasta]

However, my new teacher insists on playing with the score, in order to avoid memory lapses and to improve sightreading (and to get used to not look so much at my hands). What do you think? I like the idea of avoiding those horrible memory lapses, so he must be right 

I disagree completely with your teacher.  COMPLETELY.

Keeping the music in front of you for the purpose of avoiding memory lapses is akin to a CRUTCH.  How do you learn and make progress if you do not make mistakes along the way?!  Memory lapses are not evil - - - they are indicators that perhaps you either didn't know the music well enough to begin with, and/or your mind wandered a little too far away while you were playing.  Plus, memory laspes and mistakes occur just as easily with the music in front of you.  I've performed lots of chamber music: trust me, the score open in front of you means nothing.

Always looking at the music in front of you limits your eyes, ears, concentration...etc from actually performing the music and feeling the music and crafting sounds and lines from the music.  How can you truly lose yourself in the music you are creating when you are looking up and down from the score to the keys, and back again??  Uggh.

I am a firm believer in memorizing as quickly as possible to get away from the score and focus on mastering the movements, the choreography, the sounds and emotions.

[allthumbs]

Greetings

I agree with shasta concerning having the sheet music in front of you all the time. I think that once you have learned the music reasonable well, test yourself by playing the piece without the music and noting the spots where your memory falters and/or wrong notes are played, Then get the music out and work on those sticking points until you can play through these spots without problems. Put the music away and go through the piece again.

As for true sight reading, I would say it would fall under situation 2 and would be akin to picking up a book, reading it and understanding the story as you go along.

Cheers

allthumbs

[stormx]

Thanks for your answers. 

They raise the following question (not related with the original, tough).

Do you respect more a pianist that play from memory than one who plays with the score?

From my point of view, it doesnt matter. I enjoy the music, and dont worry about the issue (but i have to admit that someone sitting next to the pianist and turning pages is not very aesthetic).

Yesterday, i attended a piano recital, where Argerich played 2 pieces:
1) A Shubert's march, 4 hands
2) Prokofiev's symphony n°1, transcripted for 2 pianos

She played with the music in both cases. And the performance was awesome !!! 
 

[piazzo23]

Thanks for your answers. 

They raise the following question (not related with the original, tough).

Do you respect more a pianist that play from memory than one who plays with the score?

From my point of view, it doesnt matter. I enjoy the music, and dont worry about the issue (but i have to admit that someone sitting next to the pianist and turning pages is not very aesthetic).

Yesterday, i attended a piano recital, where Argerich played 2 pieces:
1) A Shubert's march, 4 hands
2) Prokofiev's symphony n°1, transcripted for 2 pianos

She played with the music in both cases. And the performance was awesome !!! 
 

Are you argentine?

[nicko124]

Do you respect more a pianist that play from memory than one who plays with the score?

From my point of view, it doesnt matter. I enjoy the music, and dont worry about the issue (but i have to admit that someone sitting next to the pianist and turning pages is not very aesthetic).

This really depends on what you are playing and in what circumstances. Sight-Reading is no doubt a valuable skill for the obvious reasons - if somebody asks you to play something such as their favourite pop song than you can play it straight away fluently. This is dependent on the score being easy enough for your ability though.

Also a lot of piano exams require you to carry out some sight-reading in order for you to pass.
It can also be very useful just before you begin learning a new piece (by memory), some people tend to sight-read through the music first  to detect tricky sections early on.

However I have always beleived that memorisising is very important in terms of being a perfectionist, while sight reading is a method for a non perectionist style. If you play from memory for a concert than it seems much better than playing with the score, you can focus fully on the music if it is in your head.

In conclusion I prefer to learn a piece properly by memorising it and getting every detail into my head for performing. I therefore won't need to look at the score, it would be pointless to view it.
Sight-reading for me is when I don't have time to learn a piece and it needs to be played right there.

Hope that helps

[alzado]

I really am not sure I can confute the opinions presented here.

However, I generally don't memorize anything.  I guess I am Stormx's "#3."

I never stay on anything very long or I get bored.  I went through several books of Edward MacDowell's piano music recently --  not every piece, mind you.  But learning several pieces each week, then moving on.

Now I am going through Erik Satie.  I have purchased three books of his work.

No one listens to me play but my wife and the cats.  I also have a stuffed bear on the piano lid.

For me, there's just no justification -- in my case --  for the time required to memorize.

I suspect that some of these posters memorize very rapidly, almost like professional actors who have trained themselves to memorize the script in a surprisingly short time.

I like my sheet music because I can mark on it with a light pencil.  So I can annotate occasionally to facilitate my playing more accurately.  And bear in mind that I do sight read very well.  Most of what I have been playing the last couple of months I never heard before I picked up the music.

I do admire those who have a great gift to memorize, but, to me, it is simply not a central question for the amateur who is playing for his own enjoyment.  And for his stuffed bear's enjoyment.

[nicko124]

I really am not sure I can confute the opinions presented here.

However, I generally don't memorize anything.  I guess I am Stormx's "#3."

I never stay on anything very long or I get bored.  I went through several books of Edward MacDowell's piano music recently --  not every piece, mind you.  But learning several pieces each week, then moving on.

Now I am going through Erik Satie.  I have purchased three books of his work.

No one listens to me play but my wife and the cats.  I also have a stuffed bear on the piano lid.

For me, there's just no justification -- in my case --  for the time required to memorize.

I suspect that some of these posters memorize very rapidly, almost like professional actors who have trained themselves to memorize the script in a surprisingly short time.

I like my sheet music because I can mark on it with a light pencil.  So I can annotate occasionally to facilitate my playing more accurately.  And bear in mind that I do sight read very well.  Most of what I have been playing the last couple of months I never heard before I picked up the music.

I do admire those who have a great gift to memorize, but, to me, it is simply not a central question for the amateur who is playing for his own enjoyment.  And for his stuffed bear's enjoyment.

I only memorize pieces that are difficult enough to qualify. I do this because I can do more justice to the piece if it is completely in my head, this means that I know it really well. However I wouldn't 'intentionally' memorize a piece that is simple enough to
 
- a) Sight-read first time through it.
- b) Learn it fairly quickly (without memorizing) so the score is needed.

I am also an amateur like you alzado. Memorizing is useful for me to learn difficult pieces that I care about. That way the I can really do justice to them even if I have to approach them in a more pain-staking way.

As far as proper sight reading is concerned I think it is a very useful skill to practice/develop. As I mentioned it is required for some exams and it also means that you can play pieces for other people on demand.

In conclusion it is very good if you can do both memorizing (to some degree anyway) and sight-reading.

It's quite confusing to explain but that is how I see it (at the moment).

[iphis]

I am a firm believer in memorizing as quickly as possible to get away from the score and focus on mastering the movements, the choreography, the sounds and emotions.

I agree with you
we've to memorize the notes as soon as we can so that we manage to concerntrate on other more important tasks.
although I've found this way better, but I still think that mastering the sight-reading skill is good.
I'm now grade 1, my sight-reading is worst. I just can't play even an easy piece immediately. 
is there any way to improve my skill?

[piazzo23]

I´m having the same problem. I don´t have much trouble with technical aspects of piano playing others than reading.

And the thing is that I can´t play from the score without looking at the keyboard many times in two bars.

If I play without looking, I play the wrong notes, because I´m trying too hard in making a mental image of the keyboard when I can´t find a note, and with both hands you can´t do it.

I guess you have to get a fairly good keyboard distances memory. But I can´t develop it by practicing hands together. When you don´t know where does each hand go in a passage, playing hands together is much time consuming.

So I don´t know how to do.

[whynot]

I'm going to argue both sides here.  Because we find uses for the skills we HAVE.  If you're a great memorizer, you are probably going to memorize your pieces whether or not it's required.  If you're a great sightreader, you will find many uses for that skill every day (and not just to play pop pieces at parties).  I do think, speaking very generally, that it's wise to observe our weak areas and try to shore them up--almost everyone could probably stand to read better (and enjoy it more), and non-memorizers can always learn a few memorizing tricks (and enjoy it more).  I realize these are not profound thoughts! and the only reason I'm posting at all is to suggest that, while it's interesting to debate which skills matter the most--this is all good stuff to keep thinking through--I don't see any side "winning" because we're all going to keep doing mostly what we do best.  And whynot, as I love to say.

[mrchops10]

Thanks for your answers. 

They raise the following question (not related with the original, tough).

Do you respect more a pianist that play from memory than one who plays with the score?

From my point of view, it doesnt matter. I enjoy the music, and dont worry about the issue (but i have to admit that someone sitting next to the pianist and turning pages is not very aesthetic).

Yesterday, i attended a piano recital, where Argerich played 2 pieces:
1) A Shubert's march, 4 hands
2) Prokofiev's symphony n°1, transcripted for 2 pianos

She played with the music in both cases. And the performance was awesome !!! 
 

I don't know who she played with, but the traditional rule is that when playing chamber music or orchestral piano parts, use the score; if playing a concerto or solo piece, then no. I would try to err or the side of memorizing too much (e.g. I have experimented with friends memorizing piano trios), because when you play chamber music, the music should only be used in cases of emergencies. My page-turners often get frustrated because I never look at the music, so they feel useless. If you are playing a difficult passage, you really should have it memorized by performance time from practice; during accompaniment you ideally would look at your partner, and during solos, not have to worry about reading.

There is something terribly exciting about watching a solo performing play from memory. YES, it is a little bit dangerous but that danger adds to the thrill. I love that feeling I always get right before I start playing a concert when I look at the keys and think to myself, "How in the world do I make sense of this," and then somehow I do. Sheet music destroys the poetry, always reminding the performer isn't just making this up as they go along. This is even more true with singers, try watching someone perform lieder with music. Half the point is gone, they are just saying someone else's words. In addition, memorizing music will teach you so much, it improves your mind and your ability to retain other unrelated information.

To memorize the most easily, and most valuably, thoroughly analyze the structure of each piece, and understand fully how the themes interact. It is so much easier to remember, say, a fugue, if you think, "Oh, this is where he inverts the theme in the alto voice," rather than, "Okay, now, G#, A, D..." And start early. The younger you learn how to memorize, the easier it will become as you age. I've been memorizing since I was 5. I just finished memorizing a Mozart sonata I started on Thursday, and tomorrow it's off for some Scarlatti. Have fun!