How many of you read standard notation?

[b0b]

for the ones that use standard notation - i've been "thinking" it may be best to use the grand staff for C6 - i know its a left hand / right hand piano staff, but being that guitar music is written up an octave, i dont see why you couldnt write it in actual pitch using both staffs - this may seem un-necessary, but i find most of the time I'm transferring piano to steel...plus the C6 has a lower range and i dont like all the ledger lines - what 'ya think before i get to far into it.

btw - the early steel music (30's-40's) i have was written for actual pitch which got me to thinking why not

I'm in favor of anything that reduces the number of ledger lines. They are harder to read. If you're writing the music yourself, you can mark passages with 8va or 8vb to specify an octave above or below what's written.

as far as the reading notation thread - i think everyone should at least be able to play a melody line from sheet music. i find that if i concentrate on the intervals, its easier to do on the steel as far as where you need to be - if its a pretty straight forward diatonic piece then it shouldnt be that much of an issue, both the E9 and C6 are surprisingly well thought out.

Being able to read melodies is basic musicianship, in my opinion. Sight reading complex music on steel can be hairy, but plopping the bar at the right fret and picking a string of notes from written music is a fundamental skill. With diatonic melodies, it's not much different from a little kid's xylophone. Really, it isn't! Put your bar at the 8th fret on E9th and play the scale in C. You have almost two full octaves to play with in that position. What's so hard about reading when all of the notes are right there, without even moving the bar?

[Brint Hannay]

I can't speak for anyone else, but I agree reading single note melody shouldn't be harder on steel than anything else, if one knows the instrument reasonably well. It's the simultaneous intervals and chords where I see the difficulty arising. Of course, that's true even for piano, and certainly for guitar, but I'm still of the opinion that PSG poses extra challenge.

[Jim Cohen]

With diatonic melodies, it's not much different from a little kid's xylophone. Really, it isn't! Put your bar at the 8th fret on E9th and play the scale in C. You have almost two full octaves to play with in that position. What's so hard about reading when all of the notes are right there, without even moving the bar?

With diatonic melodies, as you say, maybe not so bad. Next, try plopping your bar down and ripping off a transcription from Charlie Parker. Let me know how it goes for ya, b0b...

Actually, simple, diatonic (monophonic) lines are (obviously) much simpler to play than are polyphonic passages. Grab a piece of commercial sheet music, typically written for piano, and it's not necessarily immediately clear that you'll be able to get all the voicings called for at this fret as opposed to that fret (and possibly not at any fret, so you'll have to figure out which notes you may have to leave out entirely). Trying to sort all that out, especially at tempo, is particularly challenging on pedal steel, whereas any average third year piano student can probably handle a bunch of it, at tempo. (Of course, they have the advantage of having had the music written and/or arranged for their instrument, so there should be no 'impossible' configurations, whereas we don't have that luxury and, consequently, will routinely run into impossible note combinations.)

But if all you're shooting for are simple, diatonic, monophonic melodies, then I agree with b0b that it can be accomplished with a modicum of effort.

p.s. For the record, I'm not saying that learning to read on pedal steel is impossible, and I'm not saying that the difficulty should be an excuse for abandoning the effort to read on steel. (And I probably have spent more time working on reading than the average steel player.) My only point is that it is harder to do on pedal steel than on most other instruments. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

[b0b]

Piano music isn't really intended for pedal steel anyway, Jim. Almost all of the reading I do is from fake books. Without basic reading skills, I'd be at the mercy of "melodic interpretations" from recordings. I'd have to memorize them and just hope that the player on the recording is actually playing what the composer wrote.

This week I learned "Lover", a Rodgers & Hart standard, from two different fake book sheets. They didn't exactly agree on chords, but the melody was the same and (surprise!) it was substantially different from the Speedy West recording.

This isn't a simple diatonic tune, but a good bar position for each phrase was obvious from the chords. Without the written music, I would have overlooked some very nice, unusual notes in the melody. This week I learned something new from written music that I could never have learned by ear.

[Jim Cohen]

Well, that's the reason for our divergent viewpoints: you're talking about reading a single lead-line, and I'm talking about reading musical scores that are polyphonic, with mixtures of chords (written in standard notation) and single notes all mixed together. Yes, I agree, a steeler, with practice, should be able to read a single lead-line from, say, The Real Book. But to pick up a piano transcription of Rogers & Hart and be able to play what is written, not just the melody line (if you can pick it out of the chords, never having heard the song before, let's say), is a much different trick.

You say that "piano music isn't really intended for pedal steel anyway". Well, of course not! But there is virtually NO music written in standard notation that is "really intended" for pedal steel. So, the whole point of us learning to read music is to be able to play on pedal steel music that was really intended for some other instrument.

[Ad Kersten]

Does anyone know what happened with the Musymtab system that Jimmie Crawford and others were promoting?

I was quite fond of their combination of sheet & tab music. I also believe that Musymtab would be a great for reading sheet & tab music at the same time and building experience to convert one into the other.

Ad

[Tony Prior]

I do, slowly now as it has been years since I have needed to site read.

Every Good Boy Deserves Fudge
FACE


I am thinking that back in the olden days when we took music lessons, the teachers were 20 years ( or more) older than us kids so site reading was what we learned. I am also thinking that today, unless you take up an Instrument in Public School the opportunity to study site reading is now at a minimum as today's methods are chord diagrams and TAB, both very use useful, but still not site reading.

[Bob Russell]

I read standard notation pretty well, but the written parts I've seen for steel guitar have been basic "fake book" style notation and depend on the player to do a lot of interpreting. Arrangers don't generally know much about steel guitar.

[Erv Niehaus]

I am not a fan of fake books either.
They just don't give you enough information.
I really need music with both the treble and the bass clefs to come up with a proper arrangement.
You need to see the notes in the bass clef to come up with accurate chords.

[Frank Freniere]

I read haltingly and usually only single note lines. But I think it's important to know where the notes are.

[b0b]

[Igor Fiksman]

The discussion has been fierce, perhaps it's time to restate the original questions premise. I really don't question the fact that competent musician should be able to read (or at least pre-read) a single note melody line. If you're a working recording or gigging player that routinely takes jobs from different employers you have to at least read a melody line and standard notation provides more info than tab (tempo, key, codas, number of measures to lay out etc.). If on the other hand you're working with a regular band every night, that skill is not essential regardless of stature of the band/ artist or the audience size, because you'll learn all the material in advance and will have many nights to memorize and perfect your parts.
I was trying to find out if the top "hired guns" in the world of steel guitar (Paul Franklin, Tommy White are a couple of names that come to mind) have ability to read complex steel parts, not just single note passages but chording and two, three or even more note polyphonic runs on the fly, much the same way as a top of the tier piano or horn or string player would surely be able to.
Do top guys have the skills to sight read on steel? That still seams like a gargantuan task to me.
Most logical way to write steel parts in standard notation would seem to be similar to standard guitar notation, chords and single note runs on the same line, although the fact that some steels have very wide range a single line may require a lot of extra dashes below and above the lines in which case a piano style notation may work better.
BTW, the only time I have ever played PSG from standard notation on steel was for a jazz gig, all the arrangements were made by a very acompished local jazz guitarist and the music looked like a jazz guitar notation - single note melody runs intemixed with rhythm slashes with chords (letter plus number like B7maj) written on top of each measure. It seemed to work well, but I did have 30 days to practice and prepare for the gig, so it was hardly reading, more like keeping up with reference locations, I had all the single note runs fully memorized before even the first rehearsal, and Jazz leaves room for improvisation, not so for more rigid musical styles.

[Erv Niehaus]

This how I do it:

[Jim Cohen]

This is what I'm talkin' about...

[b0b]

I don't think that's playable on steel, Jim, but if you remove the left hand part it's mostly doable. Even on piano, most players can't sight read a piece like that without a fair amount of study, and very few can play it well.

Erv, you added notes that weren't on the music.

To answer the original question, I don't think that challenging steel guitar parts are often written and presented to studio musicians cold. It would be foolish to do that and risk spending valuable studio time learning the part. But listen to Alvino Rey with Esquivel. Those parts were probably written and presented to him in the studio. I would expect most studio players to be able to handle things like that.

[Erv Niehaus]

Bob,
I also added chords that aren't on the music.
I tab and play in a "chordal" style.
It's left-handed Norwegian arrangement!

[David Mason]

I was trying to find out if the top "hired guns" in the world of steel guitar (Paul Franklin, Tommy White are a couple of names that come to mind) have ability to read complex steel parts, not just single note passages but chording and two, three or even more note polyphonic runs on the fly, much the same way as a top of the tier piano or horn or string player would surely be able to.

I think that in the world in which they work, they are specifically hired for their ability to invent parts that are as well or better suited to the song than what a good Nashville arranger could do; with the common pairing of Paul Franklin with Brent Mason on guitar, there might be a certain direction or style discussed, how to change the beat in a chorus etc. But hiring them to play on a Nashville country song and ordering them to play exactly this note then would be like hiring Picasso to illustrate your comic book and then telling him where all the lines should go.

I haven't heard of any "classical" reading gigs in Nashville, that seems to be concentrated on the left coast; there may be good reasons for that, but this hypothetical gig is almost impossible to envision anyway. The steel guitarist parachutes onto the stage of the New York Philharmonic, he's never seen or heard the music before, it's quadruple enharmonic 12-tone counterpoint, the conductor raises his baton, AND...???

The fact that there are dozens of violinists who can whip off the basic 12 or 15 violin concertos without the music is a clue that there's a lot of memorizing going on out there. You'd be nuts to put a steel guitarist, a pianist or any other "...ist" in that position. Can Paul Franklin play a Beethoven string quartet - by himself? He's probably too busy being Paul Franklin.

[Mike Perlowin RIP]

This is what I'm talkin' about...

I could figure out how to play either of the 2 parts of this, including the scale passage in measure 4. It would take me a day, to figure it about, and probably somewhat longer to be able to comfortably play it, but I could do it.

This kind of music is infinitely more complex than any country song. Personally, I find it very rewarding to figure out and play this stuff.

I don't expect too many players to feel the same way, ot to take the time and trouble to learn to read anything as complicated as this, but I believe that everybody should be able to read the examples b0b and Erv posted earlier. Without the tab.

[Jim Cohen]

... at least he wrote it as a "Grave" (66 bpm). Probably he anticipated the trouble all us poor steel players would have reading this stuff any faster... A true gentleman, if you ask me.

[Rick Schmidt]

I'd be remiss if I didn't post this inspirational piece again that we should all aspire to.

[Jim Cohen]

Rick, would you use a Universal copedent for that? Some of those Cro-Magnon tunes can get a little tricky, especially around the bridge. Other than that, I think Perlowin can handle it...

[Erv Niehaus]

I think I could handle the "Hey, hey, hey-o, ho hey!"

[Rick Schmidt]

I think I can "gradually become agitated" if the tempo was slowed down a few clicks...

[André Sommer]

@ Rick Schmidt: that chart you posted was absolutely hilarious. Thanks for the laugh!

[Erv Niehaus]

I can't understand the "Keep both feet together" and "Insert peanuts".
Sounds kind of kinky to me!