Hi,
I know there is a lot of contention around reading music (don’t need to, doesn’t convey the IrTrad way of playing, etc.) but I have recently come across a way of reading that reall suits the whistle.
Forgive me if this is common knowledge already (though it doesn’t seem to be with music teachers in the UK.
The theory is that decoding each symbol into a note name, then finding that on the instrument is a very slow process for begnners and they give up way before they become fluent. Intervallic reading is simple learning the difference between the last note and the next one. For example if the note you start on is on a line, the note in the space above it will be the next note up in the scale (musically a second). the next line up will be a 3rd higher (2 steps up the scale). The same applies going downwards. It is particularly suitable for the whistle (and other diatonic instruments) because it relies on the player knowing his/her scales well. I find it helps with fast passages a lot, and is therefore a brilliant technique for sight reading. I still had to learn the note names on the staff, but I find that I use the longer notes to find my place and the faster passages I play by reading the intervals. As many tunes are made up of scalar passages (up and down one hole at a time) and arpeggios (2 holes at a time) they are quite easy to read in this way. Also, you do not waste time decoding the key signature, and remembering to apply sharps and flats as you are reading in steps up and down the scale.
It’s a subtle difference to reading each note individually, but it certainly helped me and now I find I can sight read most simple tunes.
I probably haven’t described it clearly enough, so google ‘intervallic reading’ if you’re interested and you’ll find there are several sites detailing it.
Cheers,
Phil
www.phildoleman.co.uk
Naw, I think it’s an interesting topic…
It took me about 3 years to be able to reliably read the most difficult of (symphonic/corps style) drum music – which is great… Even if the page is a complete black glob of notes, I can decipher it fairly quick – my most favorite time signature: 2 1/2 / 8 (That’s 2 and one-half/eight).
The downside of that being, once the notes start moving off of a single line, I become utterly lost. So, to this day, when I have to learn a tune, I’ll break out the Fiddler’s Fakebook, scan and print out the tune and write in the notes – after that, I can generally memorize the tune within about an hour or so, because the rythm isn’t an issue.
I’ll have to try to apply this to see if it makes a different – having playing Timpani in the past, I’ve used relative pitch for tuning, but never thought about twisting the concept a bit to help with reading.
This is a very useful technique, in my opinion, and it’s something that happens mostly subconsciously as one gains more and more skill at reading music the more traditional way. In the classical music world, anyone who sight-reads well is reading in the way. I’d never heard a name for it before now.
I have been reading that way for so long that I don’t even think of the letter names for the notes anymore. To add to the learn by ear or by sheet music discussion, I have been reading whole sections at a time. I listen to someone play a passage and look at the notes. Later, I see the notes and play the passage without reading note by note. It’s like reading a word instead of letter by letter. The music is a visual cue to remember the sounds. Oftentimes someone will look over my shoulder when I’m practicing and say that I’m not playing what is written.
I wind up playing what I remember, but I still need help for my bad memory. The sheet music does that as long as I don’t worry about what is written, just what comes next.
Angelo
I read both ways, so I tend to teach both methods. Everyone’s brains attack notation a bit differently, but in the end I believe readers use both in varying proportions.
That’s the beauty of modern notation: it’s a good visual interface that allows one to take what information one needs (as long as one is good at ignoring the rest).
I never translate the dot to a “letter”. I translate the dot to a finger position on the whistle. So the dot on the third line is for the top hole of the whistle. I don’t look at the sheet and say “B” then go to B on the whistle. Maybe everyone does this, I dunno.
Nah, people do it starting out, but eventually that middle-man of a note-name is eliminated. And I’ve even gone so far as to eliminate thinking about where it is on the whistle–I just associate the dot to the sound, most of the time, and my hands go there. Something I learned from saxophone (which has similar fingerings to whistle, btw).
I agree. I thnk most people very quickly just associate the dots with finger positions on the whistle. There really aren’t that many to choose from on a whistle anyway compared to other instruments. 
I very quickly just see finger patterns when I’m reading a tune, and that helps to memorize it.
Bob
I still have to translate the note to a letter and then to a fingering – that’s one of the things I’ve always been spoiled with playing symphonic/marching percussion; you just have to worry about stickings which, after a short while, become reflex more than a mental transition.
One of these days I’ll get past that block and be able to scream through a new tune by sight.
Another benefit of this is that it will give you a jump start on transposing. If you look at a tune written in F, and just start it one note higher and play by interval, you’ll have transposed it to G. Same thing with a C tune that you simply ‘play up’ one note.
I found myself ‘interval’ playing when someone had one piece of sheet music for a bunch of us to try to play off, and we all ended up so far away that we were just seeing the notes going up or down, not the actual staff.
If you get used to note patterns, you’ll also have an easier time of it. Don’t look at single notes, but the whole sweep of them through at least one, but better two measures.