Trouble sight reading? I'll help you

[roseamelia]

Every now and then I'll post a new topic about do you need help with sight reading. it's good to have something like this around.so go ahead and ask I'll answer. Thanks.

Rose-

[indespair]

I define the term extreme amateur. So my question is, where even to begin? I know the notations but can't play looking at it and it takes time for me to learn using staff. What do i do to get started on sight-reading?
However, skill wise or knowledge wise i am not an absolute beginner(consider a beginner with a little bit of lightning, lol).
I have played parts of- fur elise, the entertainer, pathetique 2nd movement; the whole of Minuet in G by bach.
I am trying to learn Bartok's allegro barbaro (finding it difficult, but progress is not bad by my standards- through with 1st page/1st 33 or so bars).
Thanks in advance.

[roseamelia]

Go through your piece a few times to get the feel for it. OK you said where to begin sight reading? well start with a song that's kind of difficult but not to hard so that you can't even do it.;)like the song your doing now. just keep trying till you get and you'll eventually learn it.  your going to find it hard some times but you got to battle it. hope that answers your questions.

Rose-

[ajspiano]

Richman, Howard, "Super Sight-Reading Secrets", 1986.

Not something I've read yet but its come highly recommended

[keyboardclass]

According to a book published in the 1950's doing a lot of duet work is the best.  I agree.

[coffee_guy]

I practice short sight reading exercises from books that are geared to sight-reading.... They are usaully 4-8 measures long and progressive in nature.

If I go through an exercise and make mistakes that I realize when doing it cold (first time) can I redo the exercise with the intentions of fixing my mistakes? Is that still practicing sight reading and beneficial even though I have already read the piece already?

[roseamelia]

Yes it is. if you haven't got it down redo it till you do.

[keypeg]

Yes it is. if you haven't got it down redo it till you do.

I think that you are helping with reading rather than sight reading.  To "sight read" means to read something you have never seen before for the very first time.  When you redo it, then you are no longer sight reading.

[snafu]

Definitely thumbs up on the Richman book.  It's quite strange to the uninitiated - it contains virtually no material, but presents a set of exercises designed to develop certain skills in isolation.  The claim is that these skills are the 'core' of what is required to be a good sight-reader.  Once you can do them individually, the rest is just integration and practice.

If you can read music already, then don't be put off by the first few pages (they explain musical notation) - the meat of the material is towards the end.  Unless you're a rehearsal-level reader, I imagine it would teach you something.  If you're teaching students to sight-read, it almost certainly will provide food for thought.

You'll also need a copy of Bach's 371 Chorales (Riemenschneider ed) - must be on 2 staves.

My story for what it's worth:  I'm already substantially post-g8 violin, so no problems with the notation.  However, my "vertical" reading was appalling - ie exactly what's required for the piano.  I find it best to work on Richman and sight read something every single day.  Starting a year ago, I went through a hymn book, Clementi Sonatinas, a pop-song book, a book of anthems for choirs, Haydn's Creation.  I'm about to print off the vocal score for the Marriage of Figaro and start on that.  (Aside: thinking up ideas for enough material is part of the challenge.  You simply have to find new notes to play every day, or it isn't sight-reading).

Don't get me wrong: my reading is still pretty awful.  The orchestral reductions (eg Creation) sometimes lie very awkwardly under the fingers.  The fast movements I'm often taking at 1/3 performance speed or lower.  However, I get most of the notes, I don't collapse too often and I'm light years ahead of where I was 12 months ago.

Will I get to be decent at SR? - that is, one of these pianists able to sit down at a rehearsal and just let the notes flow out...I don't know.  My experience is that it's going to take many, many years.  Even if I never get there, I'll have seen a lot of notes along the way.

[larapool]

My sight reading is pretty bad.  It's getting better, but it's still abysmal.

My piano professor recommends that I sight read anything I can, ESPECIALLY in keys I'm not familiar playing in, and regardless of difficulty.  I can play up through Grade 5-6 pieces based on what I've accomplished so far and what I'm currently practicing.  Each day (at least, I try to do it each day) I'll run through a few quick sonatinas, but those are only in 'simple' keys (no more than 3 sharps or flats).

Every now and then I'll pick up my book of Chopin/Mozart/Beethoven/Bach and go through something in a very unfamiliar key (A flat for example, or C#, etc.) and sight read it at a slow speed.

Do you think that's an okay practice?  My piano teacher says it is, and I agree with him since I'm mixing up the difficulty of the pieces and the keys.  It seems like the logical way to get better.

[j_menz]

Funnily enough, the way to be a better sight reader is to practice sight reading. 

You should choose pieces you can read through at pretty close to actual speed without making too many errors and where you can impart some musical feel. That's unheard/unseen/unplayed pieces (imslp or the archive here are good places to get them).  Then get progressively harder pieces.

[roseamelia]

snafu: yes you will

larapool: yeah those will be some good practices.

[lostinidlewonder]

I'm sorry but I don't see how the OP is helping anyone. And I don't trust anyone who refers to piano pieces constantly as songs.

[keypeg]

I'm sorry but I don't see how the OP is helping anyone. And I don't trust anyone who refers to piano pieces constantly as songs.

It begins with the fact that she is referring to "sight reading", which is prima vista, and then talks about repeating it until you can play it, which is no longer sight reading.  I'm not even sure that it is reading because it could be memorization by then.  Calling pieces "songs" is minor compared to that.

[nyiregyhazi]

Go through your piece a few times to get the feel for it. OK you said where to begin sight reading? well start with a song that's kind of difficult but not to hard so that you can't even do it.;)like the song your doing now. just keep trying till you get and you'll eventually learn it.  your going to find it hard some times but you got to battle it. hope that answers your questions.

Rose-

Sorry if I'm being blunt, but this reads almost as if intended as a tongue-in-cheek answer. Even simply to say "practise" would be more revealing. The secret to sightreading is to go and learn some pieces- ie precisely what everyone already does? Was this even intended to be a serious post?

[nyiregyhazi]

It begins with the fact that she is referring to "sight reading", which is prima vista, and then talks about repeating it until you can play it, which is no longer sight reading.  I'm not even sure that it is reading because it could be memorization by then.

Although her answer doesn't even scratch the surface, to be honest, I think there is a very real truth in the idea that good sightreading has a lot do with learned pieces. When proper associations are drawn between notation and actions, even playing learned pieces is very good for the skills. If bad sightreaders start thinking properly about pieces that are already learned, there is much to be gained. Bad readers fall into the habit of memorising and then taking the notation for granted. A huge part of sightreading is the ability to draw association between actions and the notation. Changing how you work on learned pieces is a big part of forming such associations. It's important to be able to start anywhere in a piece. Playing a line slowly with one finger is also good- to check whether you are truly reading or simply repeating learned movements. Good practise approaches should automatically be aiding the basic set of skills that go into sightreading.

This last point may be controversial, but I'm starting to think that the using the soundest principles within general practise may do more for the core sightreading skills set than simply blasting through unfamiliar material every day.

[j_menz]

I think there is a very real truth in the idea that good sightreading has a lot do with learned pieces. When proper associations are drawn between notation and actions, even playing learned pieces is very good for the skills. If bad sightreaders start thinking properly about pieces that are already learned, there is much to be gained. Bad readers fall into the habit of memorising and then taking the notation for granted. A huge part of sightreading is the ability to draw association between actions and the notation.

Couldn't agree more.