Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Summer sight reading blitz - suggestions?

Now I've finished first year as a piano major, I'm drawing up practice plans for the summer. In addition to learning repertoire for next semester and some technical work, I really want to focus on sight reading. It's always been my biggest liability and something I've avoided working on methodically as I can learn & memorise music quite quickly (thank you Dr Suzuki), but it will hold me back next year as I get into accompanying and chamber music.

I have 4-5 hours daily of practice time for the next 3 months and want to devote at least an hour of it to sight reading, armed with the following:

Howard's Super Sight-Reading Secrets
Bach Chorales (complete 4-part keyboard reductions)
A big book of Schubert lieder
A bunch of "Adventures in Sight-Reading" books by Miriam Hyde that I found in the library

My strategy at the moment is to work methodically through Howard's book (which I find very interesting), and play as many of the rest each day as I can. Self-imposed rules are:
1) No stopping & no repeating
2) With metronome or counting out loud
3) No looking at hands, even for the first note (I think this may be my biggest dependency)

Can anybody offer any more suggestions or tips on how to make the most effective use of this time to improve my sight reading?

As we in the rest of the world are surrounded by the increasing darkness of shorter days at the approach of the Winter solstice, it's nice to be reminded of the larger cycle and that Summer is arriving "down under."

You seem to be on a good track. I would add that
- you should have at your sight-reading disposal a wide variety of materials.
- play whatever you sight read no faster than you think you can play it with a minimum of mistakes. I don't think - others may disagree - that trying to plow through a work at near-performance tempo refines the skills that you need to work on.

That said, I suppose there is some learning advantage to trying to sight-read the occasional piece at tempo. We are sometimes called on to accompany without much opportunity for pre-performance practice, although that is usually the fate of the accomplished accompanist rather than that of the novice sight-reader.

Whichever way you do it, however, it is of primary importance to keep the established tempo going. As you said : "no stopping or repeating" which means no "correcting" of errors or slips that are made.

As you head into the sunshine and many of us into the grey days of the year, let's remember : "This, too, will pass!"

Regards,

Mostly not what I would recommend doing.

1. The best way to motivate sight reading is to choose music that's worth sight reading. Except for the Schubert lieder(which seem much harder than the rest and maybe inapropriately hard) and Bach(seems very easy for a piano major), is any of the music you mentioned great enough to fall n this category? Sight reading should be enjoyable, and then it's not a chore and something you have to practice. There is a ton of music at suitable levels by the greatest composers that would make the sight reading far more enjoyable. IMO most of the best sight readers never "practiced sight reading". They just wanted to play music and did a lot of it.


2. Minimal looking at hands is far more appropriate than no looking at hands. I see no reason for not looking at you hands before starting. It's also important to practice looking a your hands and then being able to find your place back in the score, so I think avoiding looking at your hands completely is a mistake and not how even the best sight readers play.

3. Repeating a piece is also of value. The only situations where playing it reasonably well the first time is critical are if one has to accompany someone and there is no practice time beforehand.

4. If you are playing relatively easy music and are a piano major, why would you have to count out loud?

There are at least a million threads at PW on sight reading so you might want to do a search.

That's really splitting hairs to a degree that defies logic. If I have a skill that is lacking, then I practice to improve it. If good sight readers never "practice" sight reading but just do it, that's still a form of practicing sight-reading, isn't it?

Regards,

Well, I can play by ear, and I never practice it. My sight-reading sucks, so I practice that.

I think Pianoloverus's point, and the point that I would make, is that you don't just need to read through a piece once, and that learning easier pieces (say, something you can get down in 30 minutes or so) helps your reading.

To that end, there's a lot of great collections of easier pieces out there... There's the Classics to Modern in 6 volumes, The Denis Agay collections (The Baroque Period, The Classical Period...), tons of these books. You could also look at Burgmuller op 100, 109 and 105, Heller, Bach Inventions, Scytte op 68. There's just so much!

Not at all, but maybe I didn't make myself clear. I think the best sight readers never thought of it as practicing their sight reading as if it was a chore or an assignment or even thought of it as practicing sight reading. I think they did a lot of it because they wanted to play through music and that was basically 100% of the reason to do so. And I think that's the best approach to take for anyone wanting to improve their sight reading.

The whole idea of forcing oneself to sight read less than great music an hour a day while following a list of rules is not the best approach IMO.

Except I wouldn't spend time with composers like Burgmuller, Scytte, and probably not even Heller. Why play minor composers when there's an incredible amount of material at almost any level of difficulty by the greatest composers?

I am a very poor sight-reader and every so often I entertain the idea of a concerted effort to improve (not knowing how much improvement is possible at the age of 69).

I guess my question is: does one improve simply by reading lots of music or do you need to come to a better understanding of WHY one fails? If we can identify specific weaknesses, will we know how to overcome them? For example, I have tremendous difficulty in choosing the "optimal" fingering for a passage at first sight which usually leads to a breakdown. Assuming the music is neither simple chords, arpeggios, nor scales but something more complex, how does one do this?

Also, does anyone know how to acquire a voluminous source of sheet music at a very reasonable price?

Perhaps we can just agree to disagree on this point, and perhaps it is just a question of terminology.

I enjoy reading through works that I have not played before, and, in that sense, it seems obvious to me that I am working on (practicing?) my sight-reading skills even if this is not a period set aside for "practicing my sight-reading." I have never "forced" myself to sight-read for any given period of time, nor do I follow a "list of rules."

It still seems to me that I am working on my sight-reading skills - practicing them - as I go through this exercise because, at some point or another in the exercise, I may realize and/or solve a problem.

I also find it "fun" to read through works of lesser composers because quite often their works, less complex, help to more readily identify repetitive patterns and passages that may be present but less obvious in works by "great" composers.

Maybe for many of us - particularly those rather "long in the tooth," as they say, and who have spent a lifetime of listening to music - so many of the works of the greater composers are so familiar to us that it is difficult to find in their works, pieces we haven't heard or don't know to some extent even if we haven't studied them. The works of lesser composers, never having been part of our study, present myriad opportunities for true sight-reading of works we have never seen or ever heard before. One can even find some little "bonbons," inconsequential, perhaps, but useful in some lighter performance situations or for encores. I wouldn't dismiss all but the great composers as unworthy of reading and providing entertainment and (oh dear!) sight-reading practice.

Regards,

The simple answer is : Yes, one improves one's sight-reading ability through sight-reading.

That said, I think it should be a pedagogically accepted view that it helps you to know what problems you have in sight-reading to more focus on ways of resolving those problems. If you don't analyze your problems to understand what they are and what might be causing them, it could take much longer to solve them.

There is a wealth of free public domain music at the Petrucci Music Library at

IMSLP

that can provide an almost endless source of music for reading through at all levels.

Regards,

I think that one needs to understand WHY one fails at sight reading too after a certain point. It's no different than learning to play a piece. There's usually a point in learning a piece where I realize that a certain passage is not getting better the way it should, and I need to stop and figure out why it's not working in order to fix it. Same with sight reading - I've gotten pretty good at sight reading because I've always done a lot of it, but now it's stalled in its progress and I need to figure out why.

There are two parts to sight reading - seeing what to play, and playing what you see.
These are my recommendations to myself for how to improve:
- sight read at slow tempos (give myself time to see exactly what to play)
- sight read at faster tempos (to play what I see and get used to seeing larger patterns)
- recognize larger structures than just a series of notes or intervals - larger structures would be things like chords, scales, arpeggios, sequences, or other patterns. I should be able to see that the coming bunch of notes is a G major arpeggio in some form, and only worry about playing Gs, Bs, and Ds instead of the exact ones written in the score.
- expand my eye focus to a measure or two measures instead of the beat I am playing
- look ahead more to be able to navigate jumps and choose better fingerings
- read through a piece, and go back to sections that caused difficulty to see where I went wrong. Then I can learn from my mistake and hopefully do better next time.

I don't think that really answers the question on how to read things that aren't simple chords, but I still think there is some way to reduce the series of notes to some sort of a pattern. As for choosing the optimal fingering - this just isn't done. If it is a series of fast notes, know where you need to start, and where you need to end, and find any way, however inelegantly, to string them together. Another skill to add is being able to switch fingers on the same key without restriking the note.

I find a lot value in Burgmuller and Heller. All the difficulties that are found in larger pieces (legato vs staccato, bringing out voices, etc.) are present in this simpler music. It makes, at least for me, interesting and enjoyable reading... I can't think of any "great composer" that would be a good substitute for early Burgmuller, considering level and style. I could be wrong though, I'm no repertoire guru

Just to be clear, I think reading through the classics is great too.

Step 1, figure out which notes you're going to leave out

I don't know how easy the easiest pieces by Burgmuller or Heller are. But the OP is not a beginning student. I can think of only a few great composers who haven't written many works that would be suitable for someone who was already good enough to be in a piano performance program even if they were a poor sight reader.

Just to take a few composers as an example, I can't imagine a performance major(or even an average student after five years of study) who couldn't make a reasonable attempt at sight reading all the Chopin works that Baille lists as grades 4-5 and many of the one listed as grade 6. That list includes around 5 Preludes, 15 Mazurkas, 7 Waltzes, etc. There is no need to sight read these at performance tempo.

Schumann: Kinderscenen, Pieces for Children
Schubert: Hundreds of Waltzes
Bartok: the first book of Microcosmos
Brahms: Waltzes
Debussy: Arabesque No.1, Reverie
Bach: all the pieces in a typical collection with a title like First Book of Bach. This would be at least 30 pieces.
Scarlatti:most of the slow Sonatas

I think there are collections called something like First Book of ..... for many of the great composers. At least for me those would be much more satisfying to play and motivation is half the battle.

I realize that the OPer isn't a beginner. The easiest Burgmullers are far easier than most of the stuff you listed, for sure. All the stuff you listed is great, too. Lots of good stuff to be read.

____

Yes, Microcosmos! That's a great book for sightreading. You really can't rely on what you think you know when you're reading those.

That really can be the case when in a sight-reading situation with other people. I remember hearing an interview with a professional collaborative pianist (is that the correct term these days?) who said exactly that. He said the trick to successful sight-reading when working with others was in knowing how to simplify the music on the fly during the first read-through(s), and then filling in the stuff you left out when you got the chance for serious practice. You sort of approximate the music at first, and only later do you get specific about every single note.

I sometimes do that when sight-reading for my own use, too, especially if I'm just causally exploring some music to see if there might be something interesting I want to work on more carefully later.

Don't I know it!

Being able to improvise is a must for a busy accompanist. Having the time to fill in the missing notes later is a luxury that, depending on the type of work, sometimes never comes.

What's helped me the most is playing with ensembles where stopping to go back isn't an option. My biggest problem is getting caught up in mistakes and stopping! If I'm reading with someone else I can't do that. But, I plan to do some sight reading practice over my summer as well, mine just comes a few months after yours.

Today was encouraging however - I made it through a ten page piano acc. with a band & small orchestra without many mistakes...and the part had some sixteenth note runs and was NOT placed in a notebook for easy page turns, just individual sheets. I was happy! Not to long ago I would've flopped on that one.

So many suffer the delusion that blitzing a bout of sight-reading would improve the shortfall.

I’m with pianoloverus in recommending to work on
a piece of music that stirs you .

If Schumann’s Kinderscenen (as suggested by pianoloverus) doesn’t hit the mark, then ...
it might be better to think of taking up golf.