QUOTE(Robert Booth @ Mar 1 2004, 08:13 PM)
When one begins to break down these activities into component parts the number of variables can become bewildering.
Well, yeah. The different processes of reading, learning, speaking, playing, etc.
all consist of numerous sub-processes, some of which may be shared and others not. None of them are unitary, monolithic, or even straight-through sequences. Thus, trying to compare reading music with reading text without looking at them in more detail seems futile to me.
QUOTE
I wonder if the processes for reading music, and the apparent dependency on the dots of some people, are similar to the the process of reading and spelling print ?
I think you're neglecting some factors here. If you're going to compare reading music with reading text, I think it should be a comparison with reading text
out loud. While some folks learn to read music and "hear" the sounds in their mind without actually playing them on an instrument, I think most note readers can't do that. However, reading text silently is much more common than reading out loud, even for most parents, school teachers, and speechifying politicians.
That last does suggest a potential comparison, though. Some folks read notes to
learn music, after which they can play it without looking (or glancing down only occasionally for reference), while others simply can't play at all without looking at "the dots". Similarly, there are those public speakers who speak from memory use notes as a guide vs. those who can only
read their speeches from paper. (There's the famous story about President Reagan missing four pages of a speech -- of which reporters had pre-printed copies, so
they could tell -- and being completely unaware of it.) Extemporaneous speech might be compared with musical improvisation.
One difference between text and standard music notation -- though I don't know how much difference it actually makes in the two reading processes -- is that text is linear, while music notation is two-dimensional. (ABC music notation is also linear.) But different people also have different ways of reading text. Some can only do it a word at a time; some take in larger units -- a phrase, a line, a sentence -- at a time; and some even seem able to perceive a large block of a page (or even an entire small page) as a single unit.
QUOTE
The two happen in different parts of the brain; so, I suspect, do the reading of music and the "by ear" method.
Now, I think the reading/speech equivalent of learning "by ear" would have to be learning speech from listening. That's what a lot of folks do with popular songs, and is something I've never been good at. On the other hand, I
am good at singing along in real time with songs I've never heard before, and I can sometimes do that with tunes, too. Go figure. What I think may be an intermediate process is picking up a tune gradually as others play it through a few times, though often forgetting it afterward. (I.e., there are "short term" and "long term" versions of learning by ear, just as there are for memory in general.)
QUOTE
So, how about it, you readers of dots, Do you experience printed music the same way as printed text?
I don't think so, though I don't think I can analyze
how I "experience" either, and I wonder how many can.
QUOTE
And the "Listeners: how's your facility for spelling?
Well, I'm great at spelling, but I'm both a reader and an ear-player.
QUOTE
Maybe I'm way off base here but now I'm curious!
I suspect you are, but it is an interesting idea.