|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 70
Enthusiast
|
OP
Enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 70 |
I have a sight reading question. Perhaps Mac will take a shot at it.
If I were to analyze myself I would say that in the past I have read music just well enough to learn where to put my fingers, then I have basically forgotten about the music on the page and memorized what I needed to do to make a little music. I think I did this because I knew if I did do it this way I could count on playing the music without many mistakes - which is pleasant - because music with mistakes isn't music.
However, I wonder if I should persevere and continue trying to learn the song with my eyes on the music and forget about memorization. True, when I do it this way, because I am unsure of myself when reading, I make more mistakes and it takes longer to learn the piece, but little by little the mistakes go away. Still, the other side of that coin is that I feel like I'm still probably memorizing. I think I may just be memorizing without looking at my fingers. Any counsel on this?
Would it be better to just move on to other things that are new and within my skill level? I ask this because I am told that you learn to read by doing just that. Or, is there some benefit to taking the time to learn something a little harder without looking down?
It is so frustrating to do it by reading because the whole point of sitting in front of a piano is to enjoy it and make a little music, and even when the mistakes aren't that frequent, it frustrates the whole experience to have them creep in.
Woody - Sacramento
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502 |
Take it light, my friend and don't rush it.
I don't know anyone who became a good sight reader at the piano overnight. Or overweek. Or overmonth or overyear. This is something that takes some time to master, well worth the time spent, mind you, but time that must be spent nevertheless.
When practicing *anything* there will be plateaus, there can even be things detrimental caused by overdoing it. So take a break from the Sight Reading and do other things, maybe come back to the Sight Reading again after a few days or more. I often find that I get there faster by doing that. Seems the subconscious mind will plug away at something that you've immersed in, but only if you stop the immersion periodically and do something else with the conscious mind. That is why Einstein played the violin. Seriously. By all accounts he was a terrible violin player, he wrote in his notes that playing the violin occupied his conscious mind, allowing his subconscious mind to work away at the real problem he was working out.
If what you are doing is not having fun, it won't improve anyway.
--Mac
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 288
Apprentice
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 288 |
I was told by a band leader that the best way to learn to sight read is to sit beside someone that sight reads well. I took this advise to heart. In a concert band this is easier to achieve than in some situations but I feel the principle is sound. Why it works is that you get to hear how the note groups sound. Then when you see that group you don't have to start sub dividing and figuring ***** out you just play it cause you know what it sounds like. The best sight reader in the flute section happened to be one of the better looking girls in the band. I think she got the wrong impression why I was always trying to sit beside her. She thought I was a dirty old man and really I was just a poor sight reader. I guess the laugh is on her.  G
Intel i5, 8 GIG, M-Audio NRV10, M-Audio BX8's, Cubase, BIAB, Win 7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502 |
Man, there's a BIG difference between sight reading a single note instrument as compared to sight reading for piano.
The LH may be dealing with a quite different "note group" than the RH must, simultaneously.
But the single note instrument player who already has that under their belt is likely to progress faster when confronted with piano sight reading, certainly.
Or as Ray Stevens used to sing about Freddie Feelgood, a Trumpet player who took up the piano, "He plays the piano in the TREBLE CLEF!" <g>
--Mac
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 392
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 392 |
IMHO, unless you're playing sessions where you HAVE to cold sight read to make a living and ASSUMING you have an excellent memory...I would learn to sight read well enough to figure out a new song and then play it from memory.
We've all seen world class pianists play long and complex piano concertos from memory so certainly, there is nothing "unprofessional" about doing so.
So, assuming your are basically an "average" player...I would personally advise focussing your time on the huge array of issues necessary to play very well before worrying too much about sight reading.
QUALIFYING NOTE: I can play any song on a piano as long it is one of the two that I know and as long as they are in the key of C. (-:
But I've been around brilliant pro musicians, including keyboard players... for a LONG time and many of them don't read AT ALL.
NO disrespect to great readers!!!! I'm just saying that you can PLAY fabulously if you don't read but cannot play fabulously because you CAN read.
Just my 2 cents.
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,259
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,259 |
Well, this really isn't a BIAB issue, but I like it anyway. If you sit next to somebody who plays better than you, there's no doubt that you'll learn to sight read better if the better player can do it well. You will also play better than you would if you were playing the same music by yourself even if you were not sight reading. That's just the way it is.
Sight reading is important in a couple of groups that I play in. When I started, my wife said am a cpa who can't count. She was right, too. However, I've improved over the past 7 years and my mistakes are a lot less now. I think that you will play better if you sight read well because you will have more confidence, Just my 4 cents worth.
Stan
Cornet Curmudgeon
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 70
Enthusiast
|
|
OP
Enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 70 |
Well, it's already been stated here somewhere, but I'll say it again; at one time someone asked Jerry Reed if he read music and his reply was, "not enough to hurt me." That's a funny reply but the people I respect most, like David Foster, do both. He probably is not a great reader, but I'll bet he doesn't waste time in a studio either. I don't consider myself a musician, but I do think of myself as a writer.
I don't need to be a GREAT reader, but I think it will help me enormously to be able to pick up a piece of relatively uncomplicated music and play it fairly well, quickly. In fact, I believe it is the single most important thing I can do right now to improve myself musically. I am denying myself exposure to a tremendous amount of talent and "how to" musical ideas, simply because I don't sight-read. Notice that I didn't say "I don't read." I do read. I know where the notes go and I understand my theory reasonably well. But there is a difference between someone who can read and someone who is a good sight-reader. Let me give you an example:
20 years ago I knew a young girl who started reading just so she could play the hymns and children's songs at church. I watched her grow up in the church. This last Christmas I saw here again, this time as the pianist for the Christmas musical with our local choir. I was part of the choir and was able to study her her - musically. She was able to play about anything that was thrown at her, quickly and with relatively few mistakes. Are there things that she doesn't know? Yes, all musicians have their strengths and weaknesses. I've played with the professionals in major studios. She might be a little lost in that world. But here to point:
I'm supposed to be a writer and I do pretty well. But I am denying myself a world of new and other ideas because I cannot sit down and easily play and comprehend what someone else has done. I'm forever re-inventing the wheel and improving on it. What it takes me days to do, this girl can do perhaps in a matter of minutes - all because she stuck with the basics over a prolonged period of time. Does she have more talent or natural ability than I do? I doubt it. I think it's just because she paid the price to be a good, not fantastic, but a good sight-reader. I can think of several other women in our congregation who are in the same category. In their own way, they make me look silly musically, and I frankly deserve it.
Can you see where I'm coming from?
Woody - Sacramento
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 70
Enthusiast
|
|
OP
Enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 70 |
@Shastastan
"a cpa who can't count."
That's a real paradox but life is full of anomalies and the concept rings true. I feel like I am in the same class. <grin>
Woody - Sacramento
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 392
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 392 |
Quote:
Well, it's already been stated here somewhere, but I'll say it again; at one time someone asked Jerry Reed if he read music and his reply was, "not enough to hurt me." That's a funny reply but the people I respect most, like David Foster, do both. He probably is not a great reader, but I'll bet he doesn't waste time in a studio either. I don't consider myself a musician, but I do think of myself as a writer.
I don't need to be a GREAT reader, but I think it will help me enormously to be able to pick up a piece of relatively uncomplicated music and play it fairly well, quickly. In fact, I believe it is the single most important thing I can do right now to improve myself musically. I am denying myself exposure to a tremendous amount of talent and "how to" musical ideas, simply because I don't sight-read. Notice that I didn't say "I don't read." I do read. I know where the notes go and I understand my theory reasonably well. But there is a difference between someone who can read and someone who is a good sight-reader. Let me give you an example:
20 years ago I knew a young girl who started reading just so she could play the hymns and children's songs at church. I watched her grow up in the church. This last Christmas I saw here again, this time as the pianist for the Christmas musical with our local choir. I was part of the choir and was able to study her her - musically. She was able to play about anything that was thrown at her, quickly and with relatively few mistakes. Are there things that she doesn't know? Yes, all musicians have their strengths and weaknesses. I've played with the professionals in major studios. She might be a little lost in that world. But here to point:
I'm supposed to be a writer and I do pretty well. But I am denying myself a world of new and other ideas because I cannot sit down and easily play and comprehend what someone else has done. I'm forever re-inventing the wheel and improving on it. What it takes me days to do, this girl can do perhaps in a matter of minutes - all because she stuck with the basics over a prolonged period of time. Does she have more talent or natural ability than I do? I doubt it. I think it's just because she paid the price to be a good, not fantastic, but a good sight-reader. I can think of several other women in our congregation who are in the same category. In their own way, they make me look silly musically, and I frankly deserve it.
Can you see where I'm coming from?
Yep...I surely see where you're coming from. But your post has sort of morphed from a question about whether you should become an excellent reader to a commentary that you should! (-:
I'm just sayin' that there is a MASSIVE amount of things to learn along the way to being an accomplished musician or writer...or both...which have nothing to do with being able to read or write music.
Irving Berlin could do neither. Nor could Paul McCartney and Stevie Wonder obviously coulnd't read!!
Django was a KILLER musician long before he ever learned to read music...if he ever did. In fact, he was functionally illiterate until well into his adult life.
Hey...I would DEARLY LOVE to be able to read music. I've just never had the time to focus on it as was true for a lot of legendary musicians.
IMHO...theory and technique are absolutely indespensible. Correction...that isn't an opinion...it is a FACT. On the other hand, history teaches that reading music is a WONDERFUL option...but still an option except for a limited fraction of the music community...like teachers...session musicians etc.
Remember that even those cats who say they can "read music" are often just reading chord names and have a huge inventory of chord changes and scales so that they can even play melodies without being able to read a single note on a chart. (either because they are familiar with the melody even if they've never played it...or listen to the song once or twice and can play the entire melody note for note.)
But if reading is becoming a passion/priority for you GO FOR IT. Personally, I wouldn't (and haven't) unti I could play the changes in every Fake Book on the planet AND be able to solo over those changes. THEN, I might try to figure out what the heck I was doing... but maybe not! (-:
Best,
Jim
(-:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502 |
One of the problems with being a good reader is that you find out just how many piano arrangements are just plain crap.
Many is the time I've been hired to accompany a singer, like for a wedding, she comes in the door to rehearse holding printed sheet music. And the stuff on the page is so simplified in nature that I typically end up not sight reading, but embellishing like crazy anyway.
--Mac
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 70
Enthusiast
|
|
OP
Enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 70 |
@av84fun
Well, I understand where you're coming from and recognize that the issue is subjective. I believe that in the end what's important is not how well you read, nor how much you know, but how much music you make; and there have been countless contemporary artists who have proven that point. You're right! What I'm talking about has to do with just me, and I do not mean to push off my philosophy on someone else.
I think there are basically two music schools of thought:
One tells you exactly where to put your fingers, using their method and your eyes.
The other tells you approximately where to put your fingers, using their method and your ears.
I have subscribed for years to the second way, though I am beginning to appreciate the idea that society has done things a certain way for centuries for reasons that go beyond being old and stodgy.
Thank you again to you and others who have given their opinion.
Woody - Sacramento
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 392
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 392 |
Quote:
One of the problems with being a good reader is that you find out just how many piano arrangements are just plain crap.
Many is the time I've been hired to accompany a singer, like for a wedding, she comes in the door to rehearse holding printed sheet music. And the stuff on the page is so simplified in nature that I typically end up not sight reading, but embellishing like crazy anyway.
--Mac
SO true! Regarding sheet music...I'm sure there are the good, the bad and the ugly versions but I agree with you that most of them fall between bad and ugly. Maybe the relatively simple pop and country stuff is OK but even there, I've seen some real stinkers!!!
So, back on topic...assuming jazz...pop...country at least, your theory and technique "saved the bacon" lots of times as you point out.
Classical music which I know sadly too little about may be a whole different ball of wax...but for the rest of the music genres (most of them anyway) give me a player who knows all the chords...and their inversions that compliment rather than "stepping on" the other instruments...who can solo over the changes in an interesting way.... and who has RHYTHM chops and I couldn't care less if he can read the title of the song!!!!
NO disrespect to advanced readers....TRUST ME....NONE!
What a GREAT skill to have in your bag of tricks.
I guess that how this relates to BIAB would be its great role of assisting the practice process...including sight reading if you wanted to use it for that.
(-:
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502 |
A good classical player knows the chords as well, Jim. If not all the crazy extensions, at least the basics. Practicing cadences in all keys is part of being able to sight read quickly, identifying a note stack as a chord is something that has to be almost a subconcious act in order to grab what's on that sheet in time. But as already pointed out, the goal is to internalize the music so that at performance one can hopefully just concentrate on all the other essentials, the notes being played now a given. That goes for a classical player who uses the music onstage as well, I think. But that's a completely different subject away from actual sightreading skills. I have never been as good at sightreading piano music as my father was. I credit the old school teaching methods as superior in many regards.
--Mac
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,449
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,449 |
A sax player I used to work with (Ben - rest his soul) was the best sight reader I've ever known. One night we were to accompany female vocalist whose attitude far outweighed her vocal ability. Before the show we were going over her charts in the dressing room. She says "Like this..1,2,1234 Da da da da etc" Without even looking up Ben said "Do you want it played like that, or the way it's written here?" 
Cheers,
Keith
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 392
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 392 |
Quote:
One night we were to accompany female vocalist whose attitude far outweighed her vocal ability.
Oh...THAT "chick singer?" I think I know her too!!!
(-:
NO offense ladies....I know PLENTY of "boys with attitudes" too!!!
(-:
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ask sales and support questions about Band-in-a-Box using natural language.
ChatPG's knowledge base includes the full Band-in-a-Box User Manual and sales information from the website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
XPro & Xtra Styles PAK Sets On Sale Now - Until May 15, 2026!
All of our XPro Styles PAKs and Xtra Styles PAKs are on sale until May 15th, 2026!
It's the perfect time to expand your Band-in-a-Box® style library with XPro and Xtra Styles PAKs. These additional styles for Band-in-a-Box® offer a wide range of genres designed to fit seamlessly into your projects. Each style is professionally arranged and mixed, helping enhance your songs while saving you time.
What are XPro Styles and Xtra Styles PAKs?
XPro Styles PAKs are styles that work with any version (Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition) of Band-in-a-Box® 2025 (or higher). XPro Styles PAKS 1-10 includes 1,000 styles!
Xtra Styles PAKs are styles that work with the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box® 2025 (or higher). Xtra Styles PAKs 1-21 includes 3,700 styles (and 35 MIDI styles)!
The XPro & Xtra Styles PAKs are not included in any Band-in-a-Box® package.
The XPro Styles PAKs 1-10 are available for only $29 ea (reg. $49 ea), or get them all in the XPro Styles PAK Bundle for only $149 (reg. $299)! Listen to demos and order now! For Mac or for Windows.
The Xtra Styles PAKs 1-21 are available for only $29 ea (reg. $49 ea), or get them all in the Xtra Styles PAK Bundle for only $199 (reg. $349)! Listen to demos and order now! For Mac or for Windows.
Note: XPro Styles PAKs require Band-in-a-Box® 2025 or higher and are compatible with ANY package, including the Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, and Audiophile Edition.
The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 19 requires the 2025 or higher UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version as they require the RealTracks included in the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
Supercharge your Band-in-a-Box today with XPro Styles PAKs and Xtra Styles PAK Sets!
Band-in-a-Box 2026 for Mac Videos
With the release of Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac, we’re rolling out a collection of brand-new videos on our YouTube channel. We’ll keep this forum post updated so you can easily find all the latest videos in one convenient spot.
Whether you're exploring new features, checking out the latest RealTracks or Style PAKs, this is your go-to guide for Band-in-a-Box® 2026.
Check out this forum post for "One Stop Shopping" of our Band-in-a-Box® 2026 Mac Videos!
Band-in-a-Box 2026 for Mac is Here!
Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac is here and it is packed with major new features! There’s a new modern look, a GUI redesign to all areas of the program including toolbars, windows, workflow and more. There’s a Multi-view layout for organizing multiple windows. A standout addition is the powerful AI-Notes feature, which uses AI neural-net technology to transcribe polyphonic audio into MIDI—entire mixes or individual instruments—making it easy to study, view, and play parts from any song. And that’s just the beginning—there are over 100 new features in this exciting release.
Along with version 2026, we've released an incredible lineup of new content! There's 202 new RealTracks, brand-new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 5, two new RealDrums Stems sets, XPro Styles PAK 10, Xtra Styles PAK 21, and much more!
Special Offers
Upgrade to Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac and save up to 50% on most upgrade packages during our special offer—available until May 15, 2026. Visit our Band-in-a-Box® packages page to explore all available upgrade options.
2026 Free Bonus PAK & 49-PAK Add-ons
Our Free Bonus PAK and 49-PAK are loaded with amazing add-ons! The Free Bonus PAK is included with most Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac packages, but you can unlock even more—including 20 unreleased RealTracks—by upgrading to the 2026 49-PAK for just $49.
Holiday Weekend Hours
As we hop into the Easter weekend, here are our holiday hours:
April 3 (Good Friday): 8:00 AM – 4:00 PM PDT
April 4 (Saturday): Closed
April 5 (Easter Sunday): Closed
April 6 (Easter Monday): Open regular hours
Wishing you an egg-cellent weekend!
— Team PG
Update to Build 10 of RealBand® 2026 for Windows®!
If you're already using RealBand 2026 for Windows, download build 10 to get all the latest additions and enhancements.
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac® users: Build 904 now available!
If you're already using Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®, make sure to grab the latest update! Build 904 is now available for download and includes the newest additions and enhancements from our team.
Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows® users: Build 1237 is now available!
Already a Band-in-a-Box 2026 for Windows user? Stay up to date and download the build 1237 to get all the latest additions and enhancements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums57
Topics86,220
Posts802,030
Members40,070
| |
Most Online64,515
Apr 8th, 2026
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean