To help explain what I mean by this question I will start by describing how I read music when playing my instruments.
When reading music when playing violin my mind immediately translates the printed note to a location on the violin (latitude & longitude) up to 5th position (i.e., less than 4 ledger lines). For higher notes and "8va" I have to mentally translate the note to its location. I have known the treble clef note names at sight as far back as I can remember and the names may pass through my mind when playing them - if there is time.
I do the same thing when playing cello and viola. However, for cello when I first started in 1949 (10 years after my first violin lesson with music in front of me) I had no cello music so I read some of my violin music an octave down. The next day my Dad brought me some cello music and I was reading up through 4th position the next day and ever since (my cello lessons started a month later). I never really thought about the bass or tenor clef note names (cello music also includes treble clef - so those I knew). It was not until I had been playing cello for 50 years that I started to play a bit of 2-hand piano that got me to a closer at-sight acquaintance with bass clef note names and that has had a slight effect on what my mind does when playing cello.
I was almost 39 when I bought my first viola in 1973 and every time I played it (for at least the next 30 years) I had to think about fingering the alto-clef notes in relation to how I would finger them on a violin in a different position. I probably played viola a total of 100 hours in my first 40 viola years (including about 10 public performances). Then I bought the Suzuki viola books (#4 - #7, as far as the series went at the time) and working through those in one week seems to have given me the same sort of viola brain that I had earlier as a cello brain location but no instantaneous note-name recognition.
So, in summary, I read music by directly relating the notes on a page to what finger will go where (when and for how long). The actual interval relationship to surrounding notes seems to come automatically.
Do other people do it that way, or do they think the note name first? Or some other way?
Tweet
I also had to spend more time than I thought would be necessary to build the kind of "viola brain" needed to sight-read decently on the viola. I attributed the difficulty to age alone (I was 50 when I started playing the viola). Eventually I did learn to read, but not completely. And especially, what I find hard to sight-read on the viola are higher notes with ledger lines. Maybe that's just because I have less experience with those. But I noticed something: When I see a "G" in Alto Clef -- the G that is close to half-way up the fingerboard on the A string -- that note sits on top of a ledger line. But the violin "G" that's just a little beyond the middle of the fingerboard on the E string -- that note is cut through by a ledger line. Now, I realize these notes are not in the same octave. But they're roughly in the same location, and that's what you have to do when you sight-read. You have to locate your finger to the right place. I can't prove that this is the issue that is troubling me, but my gut tells me that it contributes. I could just be making excuses for myself -- heaven knows I do that often enough.
After thinking about it for a while, I'm pretty convinced that note-names are part of the mental process for me. It would be interesting (albeit sad and disturbing) to find a violinist whose language center (and therefore the ability to translate a dot to a note-name) was switched off by disease or injury (hopefully only temporarily), and see if they could read music just as well as before. That's the kind of thing that would have interested a neurologist like Oliver Sacks. A common thread that runs through his writings is that there are significant advances to be made in understanding mental function by closely analyzing cases of truly regrettable pathology.
Or something.
I think working at etudes and harder repertoire asks me to think more in terms of finger patterns, so that if I'm sight-reading, I can group ahead so that I can use 2nd and 4th position more readily without it feeling really unnatural.
It all kind of takes itself apart, and when I'm on my game, I'm probably seeing intervals, regardless of the string or position I'm in. I almost never think in note names, although for the sake of really matching my intonation with open strings, perhaps I sometimes should a bit more.
Lot's of sight-reading is good practice!
Of course I don't know for sure that it's one hemisphere or the other that's active but I do think there's some validity in using these terms to refer to functional separation. Paul seems to be talking about very much the same phenomenon but clearly our brains don't all work in the same way.
In positions higher than 4th or 5th, I need to think it out a bit. Those positions aren't nearly as instinctive. But it works, because I always have the option of practicing the music to remember it.
----------
When it comes to reading piano music, I have a terrible time. There can be so many notes above or below the staff, and I haven't a clue where they are on the keyboard.
Let's see, the note that I want to play is three notes below two octaves down from A above middle C. Hmm. I think that it's this key right here. Plink.
Definitely not the stuff of which sight readers are made. Consequently, it takes me a long time to learn a piece on the piano, and to play it through requires memorizing the piece.
But memorizing a piece has its advantages. In memorizing a piano piece, I take it from the laborious, "now where is that note," to being completely mechanical, similar to what I experience when playing the violin.
Then I developed quickly a direct link between finger/string and placement on the staff. Then arrived the third position and I was in trouble. It took me weeks to read and play comfortably in in third position. My teacher made me read whole etudes aloud: "A, 2nd finger, C# 4th finger" etc. until I was fluent. The same happened all over again when second position was added to the repertoire.
Starting with fourth position all of a sudden it became easier. I seemed to have acquired a flexibility I had not had before.
Nowadays--as best as I can tell--I seem to associate note positions in the staff directly with places on the string and derive fingerings from there. In other words I think directly that I am playing the note with finger X, the position follows from there. Maybe the is not true but it is the best I can do in self observation.
For the past few years, I have noticed I can usually take in an entire measure in one glance and play it while I scan ahead to the next measure.
I think most people can, more or less, process different sensory perceptions independent of each other with a little practice.
I cannot say the same when viewing viola music written on an alto clef. If I transcribe it to the mezzo-soprano clef, then my violin brain can easily kick in and hit the proper notes when playing viola.
Perhaps if I were 60 years younger, I might attempt to learn sight reading for the alto-clef.
Absolute fingerings only work in 1st position, then they become a hindrance.
Ledger lines aren't too difficult after a while - flute music uses them exclusively, never 8ve. You can hear the intervals and the melody after a while and don't need to do much thinking. That's what practice is for.
How do you transpose, is the next interesting question. We were once asked that at school. Only the flautist, our best musician, was at the stage where she could transpose automatically by fingering all the intervals.
Where it gets really interesting is when I get lost. I'll look at a note on the page and not be able to figure out what it is or how it fits into the chord pattern. But my fingers will continue to move - and as often as not, they land on the right notes. ("Oh, that's what it's supposed to sound like.")
If I'm totally lost, knowing the intervals will help me get from one note to the next. Practising scales really helps here.
I've had times where a small piece of my mind will detach itself from the bulk of my brain that's playing the music, and sit back and watch my fingers moving as if I'm watching another player. It's a bizarre feeling.
I am pretty sure I go with the first way, even though I do anticipate the pitch as well (it seems to branch out sideways somewhere).
Of course all this comes with the common caveat: It is really hard for our brains to understand themselves.
Thinking of factors that may cause players to do without audiation, maybe the involvement of a third area of the brain could actually have a slowing effect on the process? Those of us who do a lot of sight-reading (I'm thinking also of second violinists and violists whose material is often non-melodic) may have discovered that it's possible and even desirable to skip the middle step of audiation and leave the work entirely to the visuo-motor system.
The game changes completely when we play music we already know and I suspect audiation enters the process for everyone. Consciously "hearing" the next note is (or should be) an essential element of phrasing.
Pianists have much less need of audiation (discuss?) which may be how they can learn to play fistfuls of notes so fast. As he recently described it to me, at least one very skilled sight-reader works not by identifying individual notes but by translating the patterns on the page into configurations of the hands. In relatively simple music there may time to audiate the chords with advantage to phrasing.
This discussion has been archived and is no longer accepting responses.
Violinist.com is made possible by...
Miroirs CA Classical Music Journal
Dimitri Musafia, Master Maker of Violin and Viola Cases
Coltman Chamber Music Competition
Johnson String Instrument/Carriage House Violins
Discover the best of Violinist.com in these collections of editor Laurie Niles' exclusive interviews.
Violinist.com Interviews Volume 1, with introduction by Hilary Hahn
Violinist.com Interviews Volume 2, with introduction by Rachel Barton Pine
On the other hand, within a fast passage, I'm relying much more on intervals than on identifying note names and probably have to stop and think for a moment to identify the actual note. In a fast passage, I'd probably be quicker to identify the key or scale the passage is based on (even with a lot of accidentals modifying the key signature) than the note I'm playing at any given moment. So maybe it's a combination of strategies that my brain picks from.
For reference, I have been almost exclusively a violist, having switched from violin after only a year and a half of self-teaching. It does take me a little time to adjust to reading on violin, but my adjustment on violin is mostly getting used to having an E string and no C string. I know I'm not using shortcuts to read treble clef. That said, most of my musical training is as a pianist and composer. I could already read alto clef somewhat fluently on piano before starting to learn viola. The only clef that has ever given me difficulty is tenor clef, and that's probably because it looks like alto clef and makes me want to read as if in alto clef.