2017 was our 20th year online!

Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments.
Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers (it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

Shop our online store for music lovers
SEARCH
Piano Forums & Piano World
(ad) Piano Sight Reading
train piano sight reading with your iPhone or iPad
(ad)
Best of Piano Buyer
 Best of Piano Buyer
(ad)
Pianoteq
Steinway Spiro Layering
(ad)
Wessell Nickel & Gross
PianoForAll
Who's Online Now
41 members (emnayisay, emenelton, accordeur, Archipelago, BlakeOR, Dore, 1957, Charles Cohen, 10 invisible), 412 guests, and 580 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
(ad)
Estonia Pianos
Estonia Pianos
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 256
M
Full Member
OP Offline
Full Member
M
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 256
Originally Posted by Mark_C
Anyway, since a question here still seems to be why you're looking for something other than what everyone else thinks would be better -- why you're looking for shortcuts -- let me guess this....

Math, I think, is very much about looking for shortcuts. If someone gets an answer to a math issue or proves a concept in a longer way than is possible, that's considered not too good, even though the person solved the problem; it's considered inelegant, and if others find a more direct way, that counts a lot.

I'm wondering if maybe that's where you're coming from: the principles and habits of your field.

If so, I'm sure you know that this doesn't necessarily transfer to other areas. It's always worthy of an attempt, but sometimes it just doesn't apply. We're saying that we don't think it applies to this, or that if it does, you haven't found a solution yet. We're also skeptical that there is one, but if we see it, I would think we'd recognize it.


I never realized that I was approaching piano mathematically, but you might be right. For example, it is not good enough for a mathematician to know that there is plenty of something (like prime numbers), he wants to prove that there are an infinite supply of them. Do I need an infinite supply of sight-reading material? No, but knowing that I will never run out of Bach chorales or Chopin waltzes does remove all anxiety when I sightread so much. Yes, I do sightread a lot of actual music scores too, but I feel much better when I sightread something like this:

[Linked Image]

Yes, same computer program that monitors my sightreading accuracy. But this is real music here, with real chord progressions and melodies, because it was generated by Band-In-A-Box. It just feels good to know that after I finish sightreading this, I will have an infinite supply of these coming my way.

Any criticms about sightreading these music scores (albeit computer generated again)?

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,194
K
2000 Post Club Member
Offline
2000 Post Club Member
K
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,194
If you're so satisfied why post all of these threads asking if what you're doing is worthwhile? You've received the same answers and criticisms each time.


Working on:
Chopin - Nocturne op. 48 no.1
Debussy - Images Book II

Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 413
L
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
L
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 413
Sorry. You are just plain wrong. How can you claim that this program has any validity at all if it can't even properly notate a minor second? Why would anyone settle for something that is simply wrong? You will never see that notation anywhere, in any context. Therefore, it is wrong! There is no way, no how this could ever represent a minor second, my friend. Now I seriously doubt that you are a student of music. This square is not going to fit in a circle no matter how hard you try to force it. Please get some books on basic theory and notation.


Working on: Reworking Bartok's Suite Opus 14, Chopin's Polonaise Op.40, The Military (so much fun!)
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,169
4000 Post Club Member
Offline
4000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,169
Originally Posted by Mark_C
Math, I think, is very much about looking for shortcuts. If someone gets an answer to a math issue or proves a concept in a longer way than is possible, that's considered not too good, even though the person solved the problem; it's considered inelegant, and if others find a more direct way, that counts a lot.

No, no, no, no... smile

Math is not about looking for shortcuts; it's about understanding the reasons why things work. Yes, often elegant ideas are the best ones, because they best explain what's going on. But elegant, insightful solutions can be short or long. Shortcuts are something quite different; they are sometimes useful, and a good tool to have, but they're importance is secondary or tertiary. Math is certainly not about looking for them, let alone "very much about" looking for them.

I don't think MathTeacher's unusual methodologies are unrelated to his profession. But the connection is not via shortcuts, which have little to do with math, or, it seems to me, with the point of these sight-reading exercises.

***

On the other hand, I will suggest that this:

Originally Posted by MathTeacher
For example, it is not good enough for a mathematician to know that there is plenty of something (like prime numbers), he wants to prove that there are an infinite supply of them....

really has nothing to do with this:

Originally Posted by MathTeacher
Do I need an infinite supply of sight-reading material? No, but knowing that I will never run out of Bach chorales or Chopin waltzes does remove all anxiety when I sightread so much


The first is mathematicians trying to answer a fundamental question about numbers; they would have been just as content to prove that there are only a finite number of primes. The second is... I don't know quite what it is. Some kind of personal fear of running out, of scarcity of resource? But now I'm psychoanalyzing, and, Mark, I would never be so bold as to tread upon your profession... smile smile

-Jason

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,237
4000 Post Club Member
Offline
4000 Post Club Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,237
Math, if you were to take the time and energy you have spent on this endeavor, including explaining/defending it here, and used that time and energy to learning how to play the piano using conventional (read: proven) methods, you would be quite a bit further ahead of the game by now, IMHO.


Piano teacher.
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 413
L
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
L
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 413
It seems, Math Teacher, that you have answered your own question. You insist that this type of score helps you to read better.

However, I am not convinced that you are advanced enough to be departing from convention. When Stockhausen, or Schonberg created new systems, they did so after complete mastery of conventional composition. I've had adult students who think too much and get themselves out on a tangent. They don't have the knowledge to see that what they are proposing will never work. I see what you are doing here as purely tangential and of no practical value. I can't stop you from thinking like this, but you are well advised by everyone here, and it is for your own sake, not anyone elses. Have you looked into computer generated music in the 20th century? Truly fascinating.

If you want some sound reading sheets that are teacher-approved and created, try www.practicespot.com. There are some very good sheets you can print off for free. This is about as far as it goes with random note identification. Good luck.

p.s. You are not being blasted here, trust me!


Working on: Reworking Bartok's Suite Opus 14, Chopin's Polonaise Op.40, The Military (so much fun!)
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,319
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,319
Originally Posted by beet31425
Originally Posted by Mark_C
Math, I think, is very much about looking for shortcuts. If someone gets an answer to a math issue or proves a concept in a longer way than is possible, that's considered not too good, even though the person solved the problem; it's considered inelegant, and if others find a more direct way, that counts a lot.

No, no, no, no... smile....

At least to some extent it is, and we can prove this very 'elegantly': grin ....the mere fact that in mathematics "elegant" is the word for doing something as briefly as possible, replete with the implied positive value judgment, and "inelegant" is the opposite (as per how I used the word up there).

I didn't mean that this is everything in math, just that it's something -- and that perhaps it's importantly behind our guy's thinking on this.

Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 13,837
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 13,837
I think one difference is that mathematicians are interested in finding algorithms for things that are elegant or efficient. The focus is on finding the "best" algorithm.

In music, the potency of any given algorithm is highly dependent upon how it's carried out. It's difficult to say whether or not an algorithm itself is elegant or efficient because it depends more on the person practicing than on the algorithm itself.

Hanon is a great example. Some people think doing Hanon is incredibly useful. They know how to practice it, they believe in it's effectiveness, and it works wonders.

Others think doing Hanon is a total waste of time. They either don't want or don't know how to practice them, and their lack of belief renders the exercises pointless.

I think the same is true for the chord exercises here. I can see how they might be effective for certain things if you practice them a certain way. I can also see how they could be completely pointless - either practiced incorrectly or used to make one better at reading Mozart (since they don't contain scale patterns or common classical accompaniment styles.)

If you want to read things like the Berio sequenza, then they might help a lot.


"If we continually try to force a child to do what he is afraid to do, he will become more timid, and will use his brains and energy, not to explore the unknown, but to find ways to avoid the pressures we put on him." (John Holt)

www.pianoped.com
www.youtube.com/user/UIPianoPed
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 413
L
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
L
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 413
His second example is far superior to the first!


Working on: Reworking Bartok's Suite Opus 14, Chopin's Polonaise Op.40, The Military (so much fun!)
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 833
L
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
L
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 833
everybody, MathTeacher is always right, we're always wrong, haven't we figured that out by now?

truth is, it comes down to perseverance. if you enjoy doing this, do this an hour a day you'll be better at sightreading. how much i don't know--you're the experimentalist here. i can feel how some people would enjoy playing these kind of passages.

a word though: as you know, as adults, these skills don't really stick nearly as well as we're kids. so you really need to keep up--otherwise, if you put them aside for a while, your sightreading skills will decay at whatever rate.

but above all, just barge ahead. don't bother asking us. you should have noticed by now that it is kind of annoying to others replying to your posts. so, what you should do, is establish some kind of control--first, let us give you some pieces to sightread. you play them and put your recordings up. then, a few months or a year from now, we give you different pieces and you do the same. that way, we can gauge your progress every so often. otherwise, you just won't really get much out of your posts.


Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,319
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,319
Originally Posted by Lingyis
....don't bother asking us. you should have noticed by now that it is kind of annoying to others replying to your posts....

I don't think so -- not mainly. It seems most of us find it kind of interesting, albeit a little frustrating. smile

Page 2 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  Brendan, Kreisler 

Link Copied to Clipboard
(ad)
Faust Harrison Pianos
Faust Harrison 100+ Steinway pianos
(ad)
Couch to Concert Hall
Couch to Concert Hall
(ad)
PianoDisc

PianoDisc
(ad)
Piano Life Saver - Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
(ad)
Mason & Hamlin Pianos
New Topics - Multiple Forums
The real pop book v3?
by Sebs - 05/05/21 10:35 PM
1997 Young Chang G Model
by texasheat - 05/05/21 10:10 PM
An embarassing first piano lesson
by total_beginner - 05/05/21 05:56 PM
Grand piano geometry question
by TTWK - 05/05/21 05:48 PM
Queen Elisabeth Piano Competition 2021
by AndresVel - 05/05/21 04:44 PM
Download Sheet Music
Virtual Sheet Music - Classical Sheet Music Downloads
Forum Statistics
Forums42
Topics206,738
Posts3,090,194
Members101,421
Most Online15,252
Mar 21st, 2010
Please Support Our Advertisers

Faust Harrison 100+ Steinways

Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver

 Best of Piano Buyer

PianoTeq Bechstein
Visit our online store for gifts for music lovers

Virtual Sheet Music - Classical Sheet Music Downloads



 
Help keep the forums up and running with a donation, any amount is appreciated!
Or by becoming a Subscribing member! Thank-you.
Donate   Subscribe
 
Our Piano Related Classified Ads
| Dealers | Tuners | Lessons | Movers | Restorations | Pianos For Sale | Sell Your Piano |

Advertise on Piano World
| Subscribe | Piano World | PianoSupplies.com | Advertise on Piano World |
| |Contact | Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter | MapleStreetMusicShop.com - Our store in Cornish Maine


© copyright 1997 - 2021 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5