Reading Music/Faster Learning of Pieces

[Fingerstylist]

Seems like I read that people who learn their music from standard notation can pick up arrangements faster than us tab guys. Is this true and if so why?

[Doug Young]

I suspect that varies from person to person. Just speculating on your theory.... The notation, if done correctly, contains a bit more information, like timing, that tab usually skips. It might also be that reading standard notation encourages you to know what notes and chords are being played, which isn't as obvious with tab, and with helps you understand the piece and assimilate it bette. Or maybe it's the process of working out the fingerings that cements in it better, or... or maybe the basic idea isn't even true.

I actually think the best way - maybe not the fastest, tho - to learn is by ear, transcribing it yourself. Not only is it good for your ear, but you develop a better understanding of the piece. Plus most tab I know of is close, but not quite there, ranging from simply wrong, to just failing to capture all the nuances (almost impossible to do). A lot of the time, if you work it out yourself, you end up with your own mental image of the piece that is easier to deal with than if you have visions of tab in your head as you try to play it.

[rick-slo]

Not necessarily. It depends on how much info is contained in the tab - mainly how well the tab conveys timing information unless the timing is pretty straight forward or you have an audio to listen to. On average people who can read standard notation are better musically trained than those who can’t and that may help. I prefer to have the standard notation and tab together.

[Fingerstylist]

Makes sense guys, thanks

[mmmaak]

I would say "not necessarily". But, as Doug mentioned, most tabs leave out a lot of dynamic information. This is why I always use "hybrid" style tabs for my transcriptions.

[Laird_Williams]

Tab was created primarily because it carries information that standard notation does not carry. At the same time, there is a lot of information that standard notation carries that tab does not contain.

A lot of us who can read standard notation can get a fair idea of what a piece sounds like just by looking at the score. You can see harmony, modulation, and voice leading FAR easier with standard notation. I have been playing for 37 years and LOVE using tab - but it does not replace standard notation - even when you add stems, flags, and rests to the tab.

When I explain the need for tab to other musicians - esp. those who do not play strings, it goes something like this:
1) You instrument has no unison notes, mine does
2) For you, a note on a staff corresponds to ONE key, or ONE valve position...
3) Hence, when you see a score, you see both WHAT notes to play and HOW to play them (what key to press, or what valves to open, etc.)
4) For me, a score only tells me WHAT to play...I am still left with several choices of HOW to play it. While experience can make such choices less difficult, it is often better to have the information telling me HOW to play also.

[mmmaak]

A lot of us who can read standard notation can get a fair idea of what a piece sounds like just by looking at the score. You can see harmony, modulation, and voice leading FAR easier with standard notation. I have been playing for 37 years and LOVE using tab - but it does not replace standard notation - even when you add stems, flags, and rests to the tab.
True, but I'll go out on a limb and say that relatively few guitarists have the kind of training (formal or otherwise) that would allow them to extract such information from standard notation. For the average Joe like myself, usually the only information we get from standard notation is timing and rests (which are pretty straightforward to learn). Hence why I "add stems, flags, and rests to the tab", as you mentioned. Of course, there's really no reason not to have *both* standard notation and hybrid tab in the stave, which is my approach anyhow.

[wcap]

I don't know much about classical guitar scores, but my impression is that they tend to have a bit of extra information on fingerings than what you would find on normal standard notation.

Am I correct? If so, what extra information is included?

[mmmaak]

I don't know much about classical guitar scores, but my impression is that they tend to have a bit of extra information on fingerings than what you would find on normal standard notation.
As far as I understand it, classical guitar scores *are* written in standard notation :)
But yes, they often do include fingering (for both hands) and barre information as well.

[Doug Young]

I don't know much about classical guitar scores, but my impression is that they tend to have a bit of extra information on fingerings than what you would find on normal standard notation.

Am I correct? If so, what extra information is included?

It's typical in classical music to indicate both fingerings and also which string notes are played on if it's not obvious. I assume most of the music in the steel string world doesn't do that simply because there's usually also tab that fills that role.

[rick-slo]

Both together is how it ought to be, even with classical guitar music.
I left out RH fingering that might be helpful also in places.
These days with the computer software programs there is IMO no
valid reason not to.
http://dcoombsguitar.com/Guitar%20Music/Other/Tab1.jpg

By itself the notes could be played in different places on the neck.

http://dcoombsguitar.com/Guitar%20Music/Other/Tab2.jpg


Need timing indicators. You could add some basic timing to tab but it gets messy.

http://dcoombsguitar.com/Guitar%20Music/Other/Tab3.jpg

[TBman]

Both together is how it ought to be, even with classical guitar music.
I left out RH fingering that might be helpful also in places.
These days with the computer software programs there is IMO no
valid reason not to.
http://dcoombsguitar.com/Guitar%20Music/Other/Tab1.jpg


I agree with Rick. Alot of my time learning a classical piece is spent figuring out where on the neck to do this or that. Some classical pieces do tell you what position from time to time. The example Rick gave is the best of both worlds. When I have a short piece that I want to learn I'll spend the time putting it into Guitar Pro. Its tedious, but faster than learning it by notation only.

[mmmaak]

You could add some basic timing to tab but it gets messy.
I think some basic timing indicators are quite informative and reduces the need to go back and forth between tab/stave :)
Quite easy to read once we get the hang of it.

(Sorry for the big-ness!! Must have oversized the screen capture)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2643/3996178660_c3cebf6c56_o.png

[Fingerstylist]

Wow guys, I haven't seen too much of the tab that you've been putting forth. I'll certainly look for it as it's much better than what I've been reading. Thanks!

[wcap]

This last bit of tablature posted above looks like it came from the TablEdit program. This is a wonderful program. There is lots of tablature on the web in this format ( .tef files), and there is a free tef file reader program you can download (sort of analogous to what Acrobat Reader is for PDF files).

One of the web sites with an absolute GOLDMINE of great fingerstyle tablature in .tef format is http://www.frettedinstrumentsnyc.com

I also know of a flamenco guitar website and a classical guitar website that both use .tef format. I can dig up the links if there is interest (and I previously posted these in some other thread a month or two ago I think).

The full version of TablEdit is not very expensive, and it allows you to create tablature like this. It will even read in midi files and make tablature from those. And it does a pretty good job of coming up with playable fingerings. (there are lots of midis up on the Web for all sorts of things, ranging from full orchestral arrangements of classical pieces, to, well, just about anything - TablEdit will either keep all the different instruments separate as they were in the original midi, or condense them down into one instrument).

If you also have Finale (a much more expensive program), you can scan music, convert it into a Finale file (I have had mixed results with this - it can work very well sometimes though), export as a midi, and then read this into TablEdit. I just did this the other night with a choral piece, converting the full organ + choir arrangement into guitar tablature. Then I decided it would be easier to play in a different key, and then I decided DADGAD would make it even easier, and TablEdit did the transposition and altered tuning in just a few clicks of the mouse, adjusting the fingerings accordingly.

Though the fact of the matter is that often the best guitar arrangements are going to require custom arrangements tailored to exploit the strengths of the guitar, there are times when you just want to convert some existing music into tablature, and in such cases TablEdit is indispensable.

[rick-slo]

I much prefer PowerTab (free) to TablEdit both for tabbing out my own music and for learning a piece off of someone else's tab. Power tabs are widely available on the internet, or used to be before the industry crack down.

[mmmaak]

This last bit of tablature posted above looks like it came from the TablEdit program. This is a wonderful program. There is lots of tablature on the web in this format ( .tef files), and there is a free tef file reader program you can download (sort of analogous to what Acrobat Reader is for PDF files).
That's right (it's my transcription of "You'd be so Nice to Come Home to"). TablEdit is a very powerful program for a good price, but the steep initial learning-curve turns off a lot of people. It takes quite a lot of practice and experimentation to make accurate, presentable tabs in that software (the one above can look appreciably better with the right formatting).

[wcap]

The newest version of TablEdit will read PowerTab files too.

I've never used the PowerTab program, so I can't compare it to TablEdit. I should check if out sometime.

[mmmaak]

The newest version of TablEdit will read PowerTab files too.

I've never used the PowerTab program, so I can't compare it to TablEdit. I should check if out sometime.
In my opinion, PowerTab isn't nearly as powerful. But then we're comparing a completely free product to commercial software. Not a fair match, obviously :D

For most users, I think PowerTab does what it does really well, and at a great "price"!