help teaching bass clef

[dgk88]

i'm trying to teach my first student the bass cleff and she just isn't getting it, she's  very smart and very talented but it's been so long since I've had to teach or learn the bass clef that I've forgotten how I did it can anyone give me suggestions

[bernhard]

Do not teach the clefs separately. It will create a major mental block.

Here is what you do:

1.      Make her memorise the following sequence: EGBDFAC.
You can use a mnemonic like Every Good Boy Deserves Fudge And Cream, but I am actually against this, since it creates an extra step (now you have to remember the sentence and extract the letters form the sentence). It is only seven letters, so it should be a piece of cake to repeat it a few times. If she has her phone number memorised, she can easily memorise this sequence (no one uses mnemonics for phone numbers, we just memorise it).

2.      Once she has memorised this sequence, point out to her that it makes an infinite loop: EGBDFAC EGBDFAC EGBDFAC… etc. Teach her to say the sequence starting in any letter: GBDFACE – BDFACEG – DFACEGB – FACEGBD – ACEGBDF – CEGBFDFA – EGBDFACE.

3.      Now comes the beautiful step. Instead of looking at the score and seeing two staves (the treble stave and the bass stave), draw in red a line in between both staves. This, you will explain to her, is an imaginary line that only appears when a note is located in it. It is if course the middle C line. So instead of two staves with five lines each, you now have a single staff with 11 lines (the eleventh being the imaginary line in between both staves):


F -------------------------
D------------------------
B-----------------------
G-----------------------
E-----------------------

C----------------------- (imaginary line)

A---------------------
F---------------------
D--------------------
B--------------------
G--------------------

As you can see, if you start naming the lines from the bottom it follows the EGBDFACE… sequence starting on the letter G. If you want the spaces, start with the letter A at the bottom:

------------------
E
---------------------
C
-------------------
A
-------------------
F
-------------------

D
------------------- (imaginary line)
B

-------------------
G
------------------
E
------------------
C
-----------------
A
------------------

4.      This will work for ledger lines as well, just continue the EGBDFACE cycle.

5.      The clefs now become simple reminders of where the F line is in the grand staff (that is, the eleven lines staff – one imaginary line) and where the G line is. Instead of two clefs and two staves you have one single staff and no clefs to worry about.

6.      Finally, turn the score 90 degrees to the right and point out to her that each line and each space correspond to a white key in the piano (better still, draw 11 lines with the appropriate size so that she can see it for herself). So a piano score is actually very easy to read because it represents a diagram of the keyboard, telling you exactly which key to press.

7. From the very beginnning use scores (pieces) that cover both clefs. To start with pieces that only use the trebel clef - as mnay methods do - is a big, big mistake. Everyone who does that lives to regret it.

I hope this helps.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[dgk88]

thank you so much bernhard i will try that and see if it works, I'm not teaching her the clefs separately, she knows the treble cleff her last teacher (who I wish would die and stop teaching cause she's awful) taught her the clefs separately. so I'm trying to fix every mistake the other teacher made.  Thanks again for your advice I'll try that at her lesson tonight.

Dan

[bernhard]

You are welcome.

[rlefebvr]

I also am teaching an 8 year old. Only in her 4 the week, but already I see signs of trouble reading.

Problem here is we have been using Do re mi fa sol la ti do and not CDEFGAB, being part French and being as that is how most people I know have been taught, including me.

I really like your  GBDFACE technique, but I am afraid this will just confuse her more at this point.

Question is:

Do you think it is to late to change?

Do you think the change should be cold turkey or progressive?

Do you think I should completely drop teaching DO RE MI?

I give thks in advance to any positive response.

Ron

[bernhard]

I also am teaching an 8 year old. Only in her 4 the week, but already I see signs of trouble reading.

Problem here is we have been using Do re mi fa sol la ti do and not CDEFGAB, being part French and being as that is how most people I know have been taught, including me.

I really like your  GBDFACE technique, but I am afraid this will just confuse her more at this point.

Question is:

Do you think it is to late to change?

Do you think the change should be cold turkey or progressive?

Do you think I should completely drop teaching DO RE MI?

I give thks in advance to any positive response.

Ron

1.      It is not too late to change.

2.      Start again from scratch.

3.      Cold turkey.

4.      It is completely all right to use Do re mi (it will go: mi – sol – ti – re – fa – la  - do). The only reason I use letters is because this is the prevalent mode in the UK. However, once you decide which system to use, stick to it until it is mastered – otherwise confusion will ensue. Once on system is mastered you can then – if you wish – add the other (I am fluent in both). One advantage of using letters is that chord notation in fake books uses letters.

5.      Avoid using alphabetical order. It is a very inefficient way to read music. All competent sight readers read lines or spaces, not line-space-line-space-etc, even if they are not aware of it.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[pianoannie]

Do not teach the clefs separately. It will create a major mental block.

From the very beginnning use scores (pieces) that cover both clefs. To start with pieces that only use the trebel clef - as mnay methods do - is a big, big mistake. Everyone who does that lives to regret it.

I hope this helps.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

Bernhard, I truly did find your thoughts very interesting (in fact I copied your post into my Word files of piano teaching tips).  But you seem to be over-stating your point a bit.  I have never, until reading your post, even thought of or heard of teaching both clefs together.  I have taught clefs separately for years, and did not "live to regret it."  I do plan to use some of your ideas, in showing how the 2 clefs relate to each other (I already do try to show this, but not in the ways you mentioned).  But it seems that many young students would do better with small bits of information at a time, rather than the whole big picture.  Apparently many experts in piano pedagogy agree with that.  
It is wonderful that you have a system that works great for your students, and it's fine that you have your opinion on this, but you came across with a bit of "my way or the highway" attitude.  I like to read ideas here without getting the implication that I and anyone else with different ideas are "wrong". (a la lallasvensson)

[bernhard]

Bernhard, I truly did find your thoughts very interesting (in fact I copied your post into my Word files of piano teaching tips).  

Thank you, I am happy you enjoy them.

But you seem to be over-stating your point a bit.  

My sole purpose is to make what I am saying as clear as possible. I find very difficult to express some of these ideas in writing and very easy for the person reading it to get the wrong idea.

In no way do I propose that these ideas are the ultimate truth. Quite the opposite, I myself frequently change my ideas (I will let you know next time )

I have never, until reading your post, even thought of or heard of teaching both clefs together.  I have taught clefs separately for years, and did not "live to regret it."

No problem. Mankind lived for 2 million years thinking the earth was flat and they actually did fine. The question is: Now that this possibility has been raised what are you going to do with it?

I suggest that a most profitable approach is to suspend judgement and discussion for a while and try it out. Maybe it will work. Maybe it won't. Maybe it is not working because you have not understood the idea properly or because the idea was badly written. Maybe it will not work because it is a terrible idea.

I firmly believe in the scientific method: faced with a new idea I take two students. I apply the new idea in one of them, and the other I keep teaching the way I always did. Then I check the results. whatever ideas I suggest in this forum have been through this procedure.

It is only after one has tried out an idea that discussion that is truly useful can be undertaken.

I do plan to use some of your ideas, in showing how the 2 clefs relate to each other (I already do try to show this, but not in the ways you mentioned).  But it seems that many young students would do better with small bits of information at a time, rather than the whole big picture.  Apparently many experts in piano pedagogy agree with that.  

Of course, one should proceed in small bits. That is why, for instance I spend a long time on the staff and only add ledger lines later, much later. It is also why I first teach the score without the piano and only later I will introduce the keys that relate to the notes on the score. At this initial stage is no big deal to introduce both staffs simultaneously: it is still a small and manageable bit. Teaching the grand staff is far, very very far from being the big picture.

However, if one follows certain methods - and I am not saying you do, I am just pointing out that they exist -  that start by having only the G clef on both hands and proceed for several months wiht only the G-clef, that is, teaching everything with only the G clef, this will cause a mental block. There is no discussion here, just facts. Try it with two pupils and compare the results.

As for pedagogues, I must say that history does not show them in a good light. Whatever piano pedagogues have said in the past 280 years has been rejected by the next generation of pedagogues. Meanwhile a minority of pianists kept playing superlatively well disregarding whatever was the pedagogical dogma of the day.

And by the way:

Apparently many pedagogues agree with that

Are you saying that 100 000 lemings cannot be wrong?

It is wonderful that you have a system that works great for your students, and it's fine that you have your opinion on this, but you came across with a bit of "my way or the highway" attitude.  I like to read ideas here without getting the implication that I and anyone else with different ideas are "wrong". (a la lallasvensson)

I don't quite know what to make of this paragraph. I certainly cannot control the way I come across. This is printed words. The model of the model. As such words can be interpreted in any way by anyone. I cannot control what implications you may choose to make from my posts. Nor can I write in a way/style that will guarantee that someone will not derive some negative implication from it and get upset.

Besides it is not "my way". It is one out of many ways.

When people ask the way to somewhere I try to give directions if I have been there before. You may notice that there are many threads where I will not contribute at all because I feel that I cannot say any thing useful, and instead I will read that thread with great interest.

When I do contribute by suggesting a way to somewhere that is all that it is: a suggestion. There may be other ways, both longer and shorter, easier and harder. There will be also wrong ways that lead nowhere. And it is well possible that you have invested many years pursuing a completely wrong way (I certainly have).

So why do you resent the implication that you may be wrong? Is yours the only or the best way? If you are wrong you are wrong. It is not a big deal, and nothing to get upset about. I should know, I am constantly wrong and I don't get all uptight about it.

The question is, if you are faced with a way that implies that the way you have been following all your life is wrong what are you going to do about it? Are you going to get upset, or are you going to try it out and check if indeed it is a better way?

Please, do not misunderstand me: I offer these thoughts in a friendly way, and I would like to remind you that no one is forced to do anything that I suggest here. That is all they are: suggestions.

If you think of a better way, post it, the person who originally posted the question may benefit from having a variety of strategies to choose from. And I may have something new to experiment with.

If you only have one strategy you are stuck, if you have two strategies you are confused. But if you have three strategies, you have choice.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[pianoannie]

I certainly cannot control the way I come across. This is printed words. The model of the model. As such words can be interpreted in any way by anyone. I cannot control what implications you may choose to make from my posts. Nor can I write in a way/style that will guarantee that someone will not derive some negative implication from it and get upset.  

You left little room for interpretation in the quote posted below.  There was no mere "implication" of something negative.  To say that teaching clefs separately is a "big mistake" and that any teacher who does so "lives to regret it" makes it pretty clear that you believe I am wrong for doing so.  Now, if you simply prefaced your suggestions with "I have found that...." or "I have had best success with...." or "It is my opinion that....." then teachers who use a different approach can accept your statements as true without offense.  You are surely bright enough to know the difference between sharing an opinion as *opinion* (and how to word it as such) versus sharing your opinion in conjunction with stating that those who differ are making a "big mistake."

To start with pieces that only use the trebel clef - as mnay methods do - is a big, big mistake. Everyone who does that lives to regret it.

Bernhard.

And to the original poster, I just wanted to be sure you understood that many many pianists have successfully learned to read music by learning one clef before the other.  Berhard's way may indeed work quite well, but there's always "more than one way to cook a potato."
As you continue teaching, you will most likely try, discard, refine, recycle, and fine-tune many many ideas.  I definitely think Bernhard's suggestions are worth trying.

[m1469]

Do not teach the clefs separately. It will create a major mental block.

Here is what you do:

1.      Make her memorise the following sequence: EGBDFAC.
You can use a mnemonic like Every Good Boy Deserves Fudge And Cream, but I am actually against this, since it creates an extra step (now you have to remember the sentence and extract the letters form the sentence). It is only seven letters, so it should be a piece of cake to repeat it a few times. If she has her phone number memorised, she can easily memorise this sequence (no one uses mnemonics for phone numbers, we just memorise it).

2.      Once she has memorised this sequence, point out to her that it makes an infinite loop:

3.      Now comes the beautiful step. Instead of looking at the score and seeing two staves (the treble stave and the bass stave), draw in red a line in between both staves. This, you will explain to her, is an imaginary line that only appears when a note is located in it. It is if course the middle C line. So instead of two staves with five lines each, you now have a single staff with 11 lines (the eleventh being the imaginary line in between both staves):


F -------------------------
D------------------------
B-----------------------
G-----------------------
E-----------------------

C----------------------- (imaginary line)

A---------------------
F---------------------
D--------------------
B--------------------
G--------------------

As you can see, if you start naming the lines from the bottom it follows the EGBDFACE… sequence starting on the letter G. If you want the spaces, start with the letter A at the bottom:

------------------
E
---------------------
C
-------------------
A
-------------------
F
-------------------

D
------------------- (imaginary line)
B

-------------------
G
------------------
E
------------------
C
-----------------
A
------------------

4.      This will work for ledger lines as well, just continue the EGBDFACE cycle.

5.      The clefs now become simple reminders of where the F line is in the grand staff (that is, the eleven lines staff – one imaginary line) and where the G line is. Instead of two clefs and two staves you have one single staff and no clefs to worry about.

6.      Finally, turn the score 90 degrees to the right and point out to her that each line and each space correspond to a white key in the piano (better still, draw 11 lines with the appropriate size so that she can see it for herself). So a piano score is actually very easy to read because it represents a diagram of the keyboard, telling you exactly which key to press.

7. From the very beginnning use scores (pieces) that cover both clefs. To start with pieces that only use the trebel clef - as mnay methods do - is a big, big mistake. Everyone who does that lives to regret it.

I hope this helps.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

Okay, I have a question.  I have purchased Richman's book and I use snippets to aid in my teaching, and I have taken in how you describe teaching note-reading here.  But I wonder, is there any reason as to why one teaches the sequence of notes in the musical phone number as starting with "E" rather than "G" ? 

If we are teaching the entire grand staff and having them start from the bottom line (which I do), it is more confusing to the students, I have found, to have ever started with "E".  I realize that a student should be able to start anywhere in the sequence of letters, but I have found it makes more sense to them to learn it as starting with "G" as they can immediately apply it and see it unfolding in the staff.  Maybe this matters more with lessons only once or twice a week vs lessons everyday ?  Perhaps I should be more strict about them being able to start from anywhere within the sequence before they begin reading.

I realize this is just a detail, but I have found it to make quite a difference, so I just became curious.


m1469

[orlandopiano]

6.      Finally, turn the score 90 degrees to the right and point out to her that each line and each space correspond to a white key in the piano (better still, draw 11 lines with the appropriate size so that she can see it for herself). So a piano score is actually very easy to read because it represents a diagram of the keyboard, telling you exactly which key to press.

Hey bernhard, are you familiar with the Soft Mozart method? It is from a small company called Do Re Mi Fa Soft, and it uses a computer program that rotates the music 90 degrees like you mentioned, and it scrolls up automatically when it recognizes (through MIDI) that you're ready for the next measure. Any thoughts on that?

[whynot]

I have always taught reading from middle C on out, using the whole staff at once.  I've been very happy with the results.  I see that the original poster has a transfer student-- always a difficulty!  But perhaps you could do as Bernhard advised the do-re-mi teacher and just start from scratch with this child.  I have done that when transfer students had a lot of trouble with their original methods.  I explain that we're not going backwards or starting from the beginning, we're just going to try looking at it in a new way, and then practice the new way with easier music for a short while.  They've always been fine with it, because they know they're frustrated and they hope the teacher will have the solution.  I'm pretty anti-fingering already, but when I have this situation of re-learning to read, I'm even more so.  I really make sure they don't have fingerings in the music, that they only have notes for information until they get comfortable with reading.  Anyway, best of luck.