Learning Chords,Inversions and the Art of piano sight readings where do i start?

[gerard007]

Hello Guys'
        I have been learning and playing piano for 3 years now without a teacher. even when I found one teacher he seems not to give me exactly what I needed. I play piano mostly by hearing but I still need to develop and equip my self by knowing the names of the chords I play(major, minor dominant....etc.), and learning how to sight read faster. my level of sight reading is very low I still don't know which book I can read to develop my sight reading or how I can do it. please I need tips on how to archive my goals urgently.
                                                                                                                             thanks.
                                                                                                                             Gerad

[bronnestam]

I recently went to a piano summer school here in Sweden and got some very valuable advice on the art of sight reading, something I knew very little about before. I must say that these short lessons made a BIG difference. Since then, I have practiced some sight reading with much more success than before ...

The main trick is to be at least "one bar ahead". You can start by trying to be a half bar ahead, or even less in the beginning. You start by playing just one hand at a time.
Before you start playing, you can spend a few minutes trying to find the patterns in the music. If you can identify, for example, a group of semiquavers as a broken chord, then try to see it and think of it as this whole chord. (This is also great for learning a piece in general - play the groups as whole chord blocks instead of moving your fingers one at a time. It speeds up learning a lot!)  It is like reading - after all, you don't read just one letter at a time, you take a quick look at a group of letters and identify them as a word, and sometimes as several words because they are so familiar to you. You should be able to read music notes in the same way.

So, what do I mean by "one bar ahead". For example, you play with your right hand. You read the bar, then you cover it with your left hand and play it from memory while you study next bar, and so on. When I did this, I found it was quite easy to form this as a habit. You start with very easy pieces, of course. Later on, as you get used to being one bar ahead in your reading, you can skip the "cover with your free hand" move and play with hands together.

Try not to stop and "repeat-correct" your mistakes. On your right hand, your thumb should always play the lowest note in the bar, and vice versa for your left hand.

One version we did as an exercise was that the teacher covered the hands of the student who was playing chords, and so she had to "feel" how to move her hands between the chords instead of looking at the keys.

So, sight-reading is in fact not that complicated, it is just a kind of mindset. The more you do it, the easier it will be. And the more you know about music theory, the easier you will see the patterns of course.

There are free resources on the Net for sight-reading and other stuff, but I don't have the links right now. But anyway, here is an excellent resource for chord playing:

https://www.pianochord.com/

[dcstudio]

the trick to sight reading is to read the entire phrase as one entity as well.

Also you just have to do it. 

let me tell you how to spell  every triad there is--suspensions notwithstanding...then add the lowercase letter to the right and you have the seventh chords.  (sharps or flats are added but the letters are always the same)  the names of the 7 th chords as they naturally occur on the white keys is in parenthesis

A C E  g    (a minor)
B D F  a    (b 1/2 dim)
C E G  b    ( C Maj 7)
D F A  c     ( d min 7)
E G B  d    (e min 7)
F A C  e    (F Maj 7)
G B D  f     (G 7)

step one is to memorize the above matrix...   you don't have to understand why---just do it.  Know it backwards and forwards--up and down...say it out loud-- it is a reference for your brain...and it will save your butt someday.   

let me know when you have it down pat

[gerard007]

 :)Thanks Guys, u guys are the rose of my piano studies...
can u direct me on which exercise or scores I should be playing
for me to master these chords well? Thanks again....

[theholygideons]

A C E  g    (a minor)
B D F  a    (b 1/2 dim)
C E G  b    ( C Maj 7)
D F A  c     ( d min 7)
E G B  d    (e min 7)
F A C  e    (F Maj 7)
G B D  f     (G 7)

step one is to memorize the above matrix...   you don't have to understand why---just do it.  Know it backwards and forwards--up and down...say it out loud-- it is a reference for your brain...and it will save your butt someday.   

Useless. You need to know which degree of the scale the chord comes from, which will help you figure out cadences.

[themeandvariation]

Hi Gerard.
Learning the chords -(theory) can be helpful in understanding the underpinnings of the composition, (and may indeed prove helpful in a jam, or a 'jam session'    ) .
But,  sight reading can be developed  by playing (much) easier pieces - (ones you have never heard) -  than your current ability, but playing it steadily, however slowly… Then, when ready, the Bach
2 and 3 part inventions are good for this… Then to read his chorals… (4 part writing )

Be patient, as sight reading can feel really difficult, and takes some time (with daily practice!) to develop… It is hard work, but the benefits are many… In fact, that skill is quite indispensable.. Cheers!

[themeandvariation]

ps.
(For myself, I had to develop this skill (in a serious way) earlier than I might have, as at 16 I had accepted a position to accompany singers (classical, and broadway… ) at a (modest) conservatory of music (where they throw stuff at you, and are expected to play..). Perhaps, there is no better impetus than the threat of embarrassment - to compel one to practice that skill like mad!

[dcstudio]

Perhaps, there is no better impetus than the threat of embarrassment - to compel one to practice that skill like mad!

agreed!  

and when the threat of humiliation walks hand in hand with the threat of unemployment

wow... that's when it becomes an obsession... and you find out just what you are capable of.

themeandvariation is right-- putting yourself in a situation where you have to play...especially accompanying vocalists as he does--- you learn very quickly...  and you get much more confident.

the downside is...he has to deal with vocalists of course......lol. it takes a special kind of understanding and patience to play for singers... even good ones      an instrumentalist has some understanding of what you do... but most singers are clueless... and they have very little ability to convey what it is they want...  and they are divas... who throw diva fits.. 

not all of them are like this,  of course...lol... but they tend to live up to the stereotype.

 

[themeandvariation]

@dcstudio.. "the downside is...he has to deal with vocalists of course"..  No, not for many years....I had that gig for a couple of years… and doing similar such work… Not any more..   It pays ok, but.. not really into it…  I just mention it because the 'takeaway' predominantly was the ability to sightread…

[dcstudio]

Useless. You need to know which degree of the scale the chord comes from, which will help you figure out cadences.

lol...  oh I don't know the matrix of chords I shared was written on the board by my jazz studies teacher at UNT--Dan Haerle.  knowing it sure saved me a time or  two.


your statement doesn't make sense.  holygideons  please expound-- don't worry--I studied theory at music school and I taught piano for 20 years I think I can keep up.

[theholygideons]

lol...  oh I don't know the matrix of chords I shared was written on the board by my jazz studies teacher at UNT--Dan Haerle.  knowing it sure saved me a time or  two.


your statement doesn't make sense.  holygideons  please expound-- don't worry--I studied theory at music school and I taught piano for 20 years I think I can keep up.

What is the point of memorising that the C major triad is CGEb, when the name itself spells it out??

[keypeg]

What is the point of memorising that the C major triad is CGEb, when the name itself spells it out??

That's the problem that I have with memorizing.  Personally I prefer working with understanding, with support with concrete things.  The C major triad is CEG (no Eb).

A major triad has a major third (4 semitones) between the root and middle note, and a minor third between the middle note and top note (3 semitones), and a perfect fifth from root to top note.  It also has a particular quality of sound that one can learn to recognize.  If you have that kind of understanding, then even if you forget a memorized thing, you can always reconstruct it.  But if it's merely memorized, then memory can fail you.

[keypeg]

I was looking at this last week.

let me tell you how to spell  every triad there is--suspensions notwithstanding...then add the lowercase letter to the right and you have the seventh chords.  (sharps or flats are added but the letters are always the same)  the names of the 7 th chords as they naturally occur on the white keys is in parenthesis

A C E  g    (a minor)
B D F  a    (b 1/2 dim)
C E G  b    ( C Maj 7)
D F A  c     ( d min 7)
E G B  d    (e min 7)
F A C  e    (F Maj 7)
G B D  f     (G 7)

What I think I am seeing are the chords you get when you use only the diatonic notes of the A natural minor scale, or of the C major scale but starting at the 6th degree.  Or you're naming the 7th chords that we get using only the white piano keys of the piano, and it's outside of key signatures entirely.  I can't quite get where this goes.

Supposing that I'm brand new to chords, and I manage to memorize this list.  The first thing that bothers me is that the names are relatively meaningless (personally without meaning I don't function well).  Personally I already know my chords, so I know that EGB is a minor chord, that the D is a minor 7th above the root which makes it Em7 - and I know that E7 is EG#BD. I know it because I understand it.  I understand it two ways: by knowing what a major triad is by sound and grouping, and by knowing that the I chord in E major has a G#.

But if I just memorize that list, I won't know what a B half diminished chord is, the F(maj7) (the major describes the type of 7) as opposed to F7 - none of these will have meaning.  They are just names of things.  Something is missing.

What do you do with this?  Why are they memorized?  What happens for different keys and different kinds of chords.  Ok, I've memorized B half diminished - how do I get to a fully diminished?  If I have memorized the Dm7, is there room for D7?

Is there a point where these things aren't just memorized but they also make sense?

I'm a global thinker, and when I'm presented with a first step of many still unknown steps without any big picture, that has always made me uncomfortable.  And the way I function, I am very poor at memorizing things, especially without any kind of meaning attached.

[themeandvariation]

I think 'holy G ' meant it not as an E flat… but as a B…  (a major 7th chord).. (i thought he meant e flat at first as well.. dcstudio wrote that chord where the B was the only lower case letter- in order to highlight the triad…
I think it is better to learn/memorize  the chords by doing the scales… and playing a chord for each of the tones of the scale, and saying the name as you play it.. Do the inversions as well..up and down.. Improvise with the rh (on the scale) while you play a few chords rhythmically  (and add  more chords as you get used to it) from the scale..  The pattern is the same for all major scales.. Major, minor, minor, Major, Major, minor, diminished…
 (this way is much better then leaving yourself to always be counting the half steps between intervals...

[keypeg]

 The pattern is the same for all scales.. Major, minor, minor, Major, Major, minor, diminished…
 (this way is much better then leaving yourself to always be counting the half steps between intervals...

Yes, it's the first thing I learned ages ago.  That is for major scales, of course.  It gets a bit trickier for minor scales.  But all of this is in formal classical theory and rooted in a diatonic world.  It may be that dcstudio's professor was thinking in a different direction, which is why I was asking my questions.

[themeandvariation]

all major scales Are (natural )minor scales… (not referring to the melodic or harmonic minor scale).  Just starting on the sixth note.. They (minor scales)  employ the same chords as the relative major..
(sometimes the 5th chord of the minor scale uses a sharp (on the third; the middle tone… but no need to get into accidentals at this point.. )

[keypeg]

all major scales Are (natural )minor scales… (not referring to the melodic or harmonic minor scale).  Just starting on the sixth note.. They (minor scales)  employ the same chords as the relative major..
(sometimes the 5th chord of the minor scale uses a sharp (on the third; the middle tone… but no need to get into accidentals at this point.. )

What you are trying to say is that major scales and the relative natural minor scale use the same notes, and therefore have the same chords.  In other words:
A,B,C,D,E,F,G,A (A natural minor - the notes in the key of A minor)
----C,D,E,F,G,A,B,C (C major)
It would be confusing to say that they "are" the same scales.

In music we will frequently have the harmonic minor because of the way harmony works, and then the melodic minor, and a lot of music will also have the Dorian mode, etc.  That gives us all kinds of chords that will be different.

I'm still interested in how dcstudio's system works, because I have a feeling that it's going in a different direction - maybe a more flexible one.

[themeandvariation]

"What you are trying to say is that major scales and the relative natural minor scale use the same notes, and therefore have the same chords.  In other words:
A,B,C,D,E,F,G,A (A natural minor - the notes in the key of A minor)
----C,D,E,F,G,A,B,C (C major)
It would be confusing to say that they "are" the same scales."
Yes. That is what i am saying..  The only difference is the tonal center…

First learn all the major scales and their chords.. (Have you already done this?)
Then you can move to other types of scales..  Harmonic, Melodic..  All the modes… the first set of which just starts on another note of the scale..as it's center point..For example, D dorian scale, is the c major scale starting on D… (others, accordingly:  phrgian, lydian, mixolydian.. etc.. ) Then there are other more exotic scales as well.. Whole tone scale, (6 whole steps) ..Diminished scale: whole step, half step, whole step,  half step, continuing the same way.. Pentatonic.. (1,2,3,5,.and 6th note of the major scale)..There is the Melodic Minor scale harmony, and the 7 modes associated with it..
It is too complicated to explain here …

Here's a good book on that stuff.. "The Jazz Piano book"…by M. Levine.. It starts at a basic level, but goes quickly into more complicated stuff..

[keypeg]

First learn all the major scales and their chords.. (Have you already done this?)

Yes, years ago.

Then you can move to other types of scales..  

The melodic minor modes are new to me.  All the others are familiar.  The cool thing about the whole tone and octatonic / diminished is that they form the augmented and diminished chords respectively, and only that quality.

I've heard of Levine's book a few times now and have thought of getting it.  My theory studies were along the RCM years ago and then went on some tangents.

I'm still curious about where dcstudio's approach goes.  It can't just be about memorizing white key chords - there has to be more to it.

[outin]

I'm a global thinker, and when I'm presented with a first step of many still unknown steps without any big picture, that has always made me uncomfortable.  And the way I function, I am very poor at memorizing things, especially without any kind of meaning attached.

Me too, but from research it seems we belong to a minority
Which means we often have to decide to deviate from the methods that have been shown to work by common experience.

[keypeg]

Me too, but from research it seems we belong to a minority
Which means we often have to decide to deviate from the methods that have been shown to work by common experience.

I wonder if that is true.  When I taught, most of the kids seemed to do best with context and when they could relate what they were learning to something real.  In fact, the pedagogy we learned went that direction.  Later in one-on-one teaching where I got direct feedback, I think everyone preferred it.  That's what seemed to work.  I'm not up on the research, though.

[themeandvariation]

@keypeg..
'It can't just be about memorizing white key chords - there has to be more to it.''

Yes.  That is just the template - using C major scale as the example - all white keys..  Then the other scales have black notes too, and so accordingly, their chords follow…  You understand that all chords can be described from this perspective… (regardless of the scale employed, whether it be a melodic, or half diminished, or phrgian...etc...).  But, one needs to understand the 'extended' chords based on the various (4) forms of the '7'.  Major 7 chord, minor 7, dominant 7 , diminished 7.. on which the 9's, 11, 13's all hang… that covers all 12 notes… with the caveat that there can be specified sharps or flats to alter  extended notes as well…
Unless, you are actively using these ideas in analyzing scores, writing your own music, or improvising  on chords and scales, then i don't think it will stay in the memory.. One has to Use it.

[outin]

I wonder if that is true.  When I taught, most of the kids seemed to do best with context and when they could relate what they were learning to something real.  In fact, the pedagogy we learned went that direction.  Later in one-on-one teaching where I got direct feedback, I think everyone preferred it.  That's what seemed to work.  I'm not up on the research, though.

Of course it's not a clear dichotomy. Most people are in between,
and when exposed to one teaching style from the early age, it strengthens one learning style as well. But later as adults it's musch more difficult to change.

What I should have said is that extreme holistic learners who seem to be completely unable to learn at all the other way are a minority. Most people are able to memorize and reproduce at least to some level without having any vision of the whole system in mind. Whether that is real learning is another matter...

[dcstudio]

when I was at music school my jazz studies teacher Dan Haerle--of Aebersold fame--wrote the matrix on the board..

he told us to memorize it--not to ask why just to do it.

the first place I found that it helped me was in theory class in harmonic analysis and part writing

if per say I was part-writing in the key of E flat   by simply thinking of that matrix as beginning at EGBD and continuing on from there--well I had the letters for each chord in the key--by thinking of the key signature and adding flats to the E the A and the B--well then I could spell every chord and I knew which scale degree they were and their function.  Of course, I had already been taught the major and minor chord scales and the function of each chord...

Eb G Bg D  I maj7
F Ab C Eg  ii7
G Bb D F   iii7  etc...

next when I went to improv class and I was given a chord  chart to read... well I could look it over and spell each chord and visualize where it was on the piano before I sat down to play it.


 sorry if I sounded a little offended--that was rather childish of me--maybe it required a bit more explanation...

it worked for me... if it doesn't for you -- don't use it.

[keypeg]

@dctstudio - Some explanations

(This goes to where I was at in terms of what I understood and didn't from the original post)

When I first tried to teach theory off the cuff in forums some years ago I noticed some problems.  One is that anything you teach invariably hinges on other basic things which the learner may not have, or have wrongly, or understand differently than you intended it.  For that reason eventually I switched to the occasional private pro bono teaching of such things, where two of us could have a back and forth and develop a thing gradually. -- Another is that in forums you have to give a snapshot; in lessons you develop a concept in stages; the snapshot is easily misunderstood. -- Which brings me to a third thing: What we're trying to bring across, and what is actually understood, can have a big gap, esp. because of the snapshot nature.  When you teach in person, you'll see whether your student "got it" in studio, and institute course corrections along the way so he doesn't drive off the cliff.  But here, a student can think he's got it - work with what he's understood - and you'll never know.  Here I have also changed hats, because there were times years ago when I did act as student, and drive off a few cliffs via Net information.

So-o-o-o ...... When I read something on the Net, I want to check about what I understand about it.  I won't bother if I sense that the writer is some hobbyist playing teacher who doesn't understand music well enough yourself.  If I'm asking questions that's a sign that I think you have something to say.  Knowing now what I see about the whole Net learning as per above.

I see this: Adim7 Bhalf dim etc. in the way you wrote them out.  It reminds me of the standard patterns we learn for triads (before sevenths) which I usually see starting on C rather than A: C Dm Em F G Am Bdim = major minor minor major major minor dim = I ii iii IV V vi viio (also written as I IIm IIIm IV V VIm VIIdim).  Starting on A gives us the same thing -it's just a modal different starting point.  When we get this white key pattern for the triads, that is something we can transfer to any other key.  Rather than C Dm Em F.. it would be E F#m G#m A... Bb Cm Dm Eb.... etc.  This is a pattern to get in the fingers and ears.  That's what I think you are doing, but adding sevenths.  Is this on track?

Now starting with the triads, when I learned "major minor minor major... etc.", or C Dm Em F... etc.     I knew what major and minor triads were.  And also secondary - diminished triads.

When I looked at your list, that is the first place where I had questions and wasn't sure.  When you are asking the OP to memorize Am7 - B half dim - C(maj7) etc.  My first impression was that you were teaching the qualities themselves through this task.  In other words, memorize "B half diminished (BDFA)" and through this, know what half diminished chords are.  My second thought was that you expect the OP to already be familiar with chord qualities, so he'll know what a half dim; a major seventh etc. are; have them in his fingers or something like that.  In this case it would be like my old major-minor-minor-major etc. for triads.  My third thought was that it doesn't matter whether the OP knows what a half dim; a major 7th; a seventh; etc. are -- just memorize it.  That last would in fact have bothered me.  The QUESTION in here is which of these three you envisioned, because that goes to my incomplete understanding of what you were saying.

I'm thinking that when your professor gave this to the class, that those students will already have a given background; that all of you might already have been familiar with chord qualities.

[keypeg]

Now going to what you wrote:  

Of course, I had already been taught the major and minor chord scales and the function of each chord...  

That goes to what I wrote in my previous post.  So when you were given the matrix, there was context for you.  It was not just a bunch of memorized names.  For example, even if I have the letters "EGBD" written out, and beside it "Em7", it will be a meaningless memorized thing unless I know that EGB is minor - what minor is - and in some way I have some kind of sense of these "sevenths" which are in fact minor sevenths.  It was not a way to get at chord qualities themselves for the first time, or get at patterns without being aware of these.  The difficulty when anyone writes in is that we don't have their background, what they do and don't know, and I always assume less until I know of more - simply to make sure there are no invisible holes.

So this bit of information is important.

if per say I was part-writing in the key of E flat   by simply thinking of that matrix as beginning at EGBD and continuing on from there--well I had the letters for each chord in the key--by thinking of the key signature and adding flats to the E the A and the B--well then I could spell every chord and I knew which scale degree they were and their function.  

Eb G Bg D  I maj7
F Ab C Eg  ii7
G Bb D F   iii7  etc...

Yes, that makes total sense.

next when I went to improv class and I was given a chord  chart to read... well I could look it over and spell each chord and visualize where it was on the piano before I sat down to play it.

This also makes total sense.  I will point out that you are a pianist, and that is important here.  For people who play keyboard especially, chords are in your fingers.  There is a disconnect between dry formal theory the way it is taught, and the actual playing.  You also have the jazz, by-ear, and similar players who are very connected to chords, having them in their ears, their hands, and their intellect, and tending toward letter name chords; and on the other hand classically trained, where it's on paper, and the theory part tends toward Roman numerals which tie themselves into knots as music itself expands way beyond what is a simplified explanation of Baroque or "common practice" music.  And there ought to be a link between these two worlds.  Which is what your professor provided.

the first place I found that it helped me was in theory class in harmonic analysis and part writing

next when I went to improv class and I was given a chord  chart to read... well I could look it over and spell each chord and visualize where it was on the piano before I sat down to play it.

Yes - makes total sense.  And these are in fact two important opposite worlds.

I may also have been thinking beyond all that.  For example, in the classical theory where everything is locked into functions - well in real music composers don't look themselves in like that.  You may have a major D triad in the key of C major, not because it has a function of "secondary dominant" or any other function - there is no pigeon hole - simply at this point the composer thought it sounded cool.  So while in Roman numerals you're twisting it into knots trying to give it a functional name, calling it "D (major)" tells us what it is.  Period.

[keypeg]

@themeandvariation, I think we were talking past each other at some point.

@keypeg..
'It can't just be about memorizing white key chords - there has to be more to it.''

Yes.  That is just the template - using C major scale as the example - all white keys..  

When I wrote that, I was trying to get at what dcstudio had written, because I felt I was only getting part of the picture.  For example, as I wrote, simply memorizing B half dim in that way, I felt something else was missing and she has filled in the blanks and the context today.

I was not wondering about anything you had written.

Then the other scales have black notes too, and so accordingly, their chords follow…  You understand that all chords can be described from this perspective… (regardless of the scale employed, whether it be a melodic, or half diminished, or phrygian...etc...).  

Yes.  The unstated thing being that here we are looking at the chords formed only from the notes that exist in these scales.

But, one needs to understand the 'extended' chords based on the various (4) forms of the '7'.  Major 7 chord, minor 7, dominant 7 , diminished 7.. on which the 9's, 11, 13's all hang… that covers all 12 notes… with the caveat that there can be specified sharps or flats to alter  extended notes as well…

I think that we have two aspects to this: where they occur (as above), and what the thing actually is.  For the "what it is" in regards to the 7's:
"major 7 chord" - i.e. CEGB, GBDF# etc. = major triad with a major 7th, this being a semitone away from the octave of the root.   Here we have to be careful that the word "major" refers to the 7 and not the triad beneath it.  I.e. C maj 7 is probably better written as C(maj7) unless you can stick in a superscript. C^maj7
"dominant 7" - i.e. CEGBb, GBDF etc. = major triad with a minor 7th; most common in the V7 (dominant) but it is not always used as a dominant in that function.  And then we have the augmented 6th which to the ear sounds like a dom7 but moves differently, in which case our CEGBb would be spelled CEGA#
- minor triads with each of the above 7ths.  The dim7 vs. the half diminished, both having a diminished triad, with the dim7 wearing many hats as you indicated in your warning about spelling.

Unless, you are actively using these ideas in analyzing scores, writing your own music, or improvising  on chords and scales, then i don't think it will stay in the memory.. One has to Use it.

Absolutely!

[dcstudio]

What is the point of memorising that the C major triad is CGEb, when the name itself spells it out??

again you are confusing me... Cmaj7   is spelled C E G B--how does the name spell it out exactly.

it really helps to know how to spell the chords... makes analysis very easy.

I play a lot of jazz... I write a lot of chord charts---this matrix really turned on the light for me.  If it doesn't for you than try something else...

[keypeg]

.

[dcstudio]

there is no pigeon hole - simply at this point the composer thought it sounded cool.  So while in Roman numerals you're twisting it into knots trying to give it a functional name, calling it "D (major)" tells us what it is.  Period.

yes please...lol..

just tell me what it is.

I took jazz theory and classical theory concurrently at school... the jazz class taught in 2 semesters what the classical theory program taught in 4.  It also gave practical ear training exercises that made all the difference when I got to 3rd semester sight-singing and ear training.  I understand that what worked for me may not work others...I started at 4--my first lessons were from a jazz pianist..  I started classical lessons at 5.

[anamnesis]

For what it's worth, the matrix dcstudio uses is similar to training used in fixed-do as a note-reading/concentration system (and purely just an audiation tool). 

Obviously the main difference is that use of the solfege syllables is much easily fluently said/sung.  They even work better as mnemonic system because they just flow together better. 

Page 93 and 119 in this pdf (in French) shows how it can be used to memorize triads and intervals:

https://www.narcisbonet.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/leem.pdf

This video and pdf explains it as well:

https://media.wix.com/ugd/97cd70_967682d05fff44a2a98fe1820c920a26.pdf

I've always been a decent sight-reader but using fixed solfege instead of letters has increased my concentration abilities even further. 

The traditional fixed-do system retains the use of the diatonic syllables even for chromaticism with just mentally thinking the inflection; however, I personally prefer the chromatic system as it is much more compatible for those moving from a movable-do system when you want to use it to audiate as well. 

[dcstudio]

as a note-reading/concentration system (and purely just an audiation tool).  

that's all it's meant to be...at first.  

  but if I had to pick one single thing that was most important to me---that helped me to understand... that turned on the light...

it would be that matrix.  

I can't really begin to tell you how many ways I have applied it.   I had solfege as well--so I utilize both systems together..

I don't mean it should replace solfege----no, no, no

because that would come in  right behind the matrix as 2nd most important

actually it's really pretty much a tie between the two...