Out of curiosity: Who uses traditional notation in their music

[jopy]

There are a lot of statements about how frequently anyone uses traditional notation in their music in the piano rolls vs. staffs thread, and it made me curious about just how many KVR members use traditional notation as part of their music creation/performance process.

[jancivil]

I never do in composing. That choice has nothing to do with my reading ability or background. I haven't scribbled a note on paper since I've had a piano roll. Years ago I started one project from Finale before I had good piano roll chops, and found that it would have saved me exactly no work, it was so mechanical-sounding. For me it is only a middleman to insert between the impulse and the realization.

My answer was 'fish'. "I can read traditional notation fairly well, but I never use it in writing and performing" doesn't apply either, I can read very well, and if I had to lead a performance in a live venue I might have to use it. I don't know why I'd want to, just to use musicians, unless it meant getting paid good. (For predetermined parts, the piano roll is the best! Past that, I like contributions from a musician.) When I hired somebody I made a lead sheet for one bit I wanted doubled. It turned out to be an impossible part for the horn anyway so mighta been a waste of time in that case, he had to approximate it... except I learned that some things can be actually impossible for people even with top notch chops.

[jopy]

interesting that the two early leaders (with pretty few responses, so grain of salt in drawing conclusions) are frequently and never.

i really don't know how to use a piano roll very well, it's way too confusing for me. a conventional staff is like a second language to me, i guess. but i've never written a score out, i improvise a lot of parts as well after sketching out the basic ideas in notation.

[Musicologo]

I'm on the other side of the coin. I ALWAYS do a score. But this has to do with my working method.


I compose on my head and on the piano the basic melodies and chors. But then:

I write the piano reduction + voice in Finale first. That's HOW I compose. My piano skills are not THAT high and I write way too complex music for myself to play, or at least, my piano reductions are complex enough for me to not being able to play them. I add too much layering and variations to the initial idea I have on me playing at the keyboard.

From there I export a beautiful score. And then I work from there.

Sometimes real people play them.

Other times I just use it to make the other parts (bass, strings, choirs, winds, etc).

Some times, I even write all parts in Finale, apply a humanizer (this is very important so it doesen't sound square), and then open the midi file in LOgic, and go from there, editing some notes and refurbishing some parts.

It's very rare for me to "play things from head or scratch" (though not impossible) in Logic directly.

[mystran]

I voted fish, 'cos I read traditional notation perfectly fine, prefer it when actually playing (or singing, but I rarely do), but generally rarely write it, because most of what I write isn't for humans to perform, and there just isn't much of a point when you'd have to redo it in piano roll anyway; traditional notation just doesn't have precise enough control over note lengths etc for computers to do the right thing. That said, in the rare case that I actually write something down on paper, I always use the traditional notation.

[jancivil]

when I started, the vertical vs horizontal orientation of the keyboard sure wasn't my idea of something to do.

but, now I just don't look at the keyboard a whole lot. I do use a lot of keyswitches so I check that often enough. I still don't have a visual orientation, C might as well be F to me at first glance.

when I'm working, duration is left to right, pitch is bottom to top. I make music out of intervals and durations, and as far as tonality, I tend to be free or modal, with the former it's all relative and with the latter the center is fixed.

I don't dwell in problems, I find another way.

You could almost put me in the never, but again I was asked to provide a pdf for a line to save the guy some time and I expect to do that. (Soprano sax. I needed soprano recently but I didn't want to call him and talk about money I don't have or beg (he actually said he could get a rep for working for nothing! but I drive a hard bargain) and did the soprano lead in the piano roll. I was pretty skeptical and it was a lot of work, but I created the illusion.)

I wanted to be able to suss the whole band, every role... I'm not a reliable keyboardist at all so piano roll chops is key. I turn my deficiencies into strengths. I can't do polyphony on a keyboard, I'm a lead guitarist/frustrated horn player, so I always approached music as lines, counterpoint.

[jancivil]

i really don't know how to use a piano roll very well, it's way too confusing for me.

when I was shy about a sequencer, had ridiculous latency which was part of that, I did write basic ideas out but I never worked with them in the DAW, I get much better ideas directly in the thing. I'm rather an outlier I think.

[tapper mike]

I always work from the bigger picture down. If I don't start with form then progression I usually wind up with something undone.

I open band in a box define my form and start filling in the blanks with chords. I don't choose a style untill those are done. If I need a quick drum pattern for a feel I'll dig thru the patters but turn the parts off because I don't want to be overtly influenced by the style.

From there I'll export to mid and open in RealBand or PowerTracks pro because it will display the progression. I try not to flesh out the parts aside from the melody and solo. Unless I expect to be playing everything. This gives band mates a little lattitude with shaping the song. There is no difference with covers and originals if someone thinks they have no part in the creation of the song.

On the other hand if it's all about me and I'm doing all the parts I don't bother writing it out. I know what I want to achieve and I'll fight it thru till I get what I'm after.

As far as students go. If I'm transcribing something for them. I'll score it in Guitar Pro5

[The Chubu]

I do everything with a mouse. Dont know much bout traditional notation. Just a few things like bars and such. A basic thing or two bout music sheets and thats all...

[jancivil]

I'm teaching someone basic to intermediate theory right now. I'm using notation, period. We're interested in results.

[wrench45us]

I have learned theory to help analyze lead sheets, but a friend of mine took the 'real' classes and has a graphically oriented visual intelligence.

And the gist of that is I work out voice leading by being ecomonical in how my fingers move. He works out voice leading through the visual orientation of the staff and the taught direction certain notes 'generally should' resolve.

I had no sense of this graphic interpretation of a staff-based notation system until I spoke to him about this. My assumption is he's not the only musician that reads music this way -- seeing voice-leading movement at a sort of macro level.

[toddhisattva]

I always use notation.

Even if I've changed things in a sequencer's piano roll, I roll it back into the notation program. I pretty much "hate" piano roll.

But I like to pretend I can't read music notation, "The notes with holes in them, are those hole notes?"

[Nystul]

I have learned theory to help analyze lead sheets, but a friend of mine took the 'real' classes and has a graphically oriented visual intelligence.

And the gist of that is I work out voice leading by being ecomonical in how my fingers move. He works out voice leading through the visual orientation of the staff and the taught direction certain notes 'generally should' resolve.

I had no sense of this graphic interpretation of a staff-based notation system until I spoke to him about this. My assumption is he's not the only musician that reads music this way -- seeing voice-leading movement at a sort of macro level.

I find that writing things out puts me in a more analytical perspective, for better or worse. Instead of refining things by playing it over and over and making the changes as they come, it becomes more of an conscious decision making refinement. There is very much a visual element to that. I'm sure the piano roll could have a similar effect, but I don't actually work with the piano roll that much whereas I've sightread hundreds if not thousands of piano and percussion scores.

[Jace-BeOS]

I understand the basic concepts of notation & have tried to learn notation several times but it never becomes music to me. I cannot process it. "the water does not turn into wine."

I don't know if this has to do with my neurology or not. I have dyscalculia as a comorbidity of my autism spectrum issues. I'm great with spacial things (rather above the average), but horrific with maths & similar. Seems likely to me since my dyscalculia may stem from horrible "working memory."

i wish I *could* mentally process notation, though.

That's my long-form response

[tapper mike]

Music is not about math it's about relationships in time. How notes inter react with each other.

I'm going thru a ground up process of re-educationing with notation. It's not been easy. I'm choosing a different tuning which is very disorienting to begin with. It's complicated by the fact that I've got too many options. As an example I've got 4 middle C's to choose from and because it's a full tap method I can approach it with 9 fingers (thumb on right hand) While it does allow me to play certain chord voicings which are unattainable on a guitar (regardless of the tuning) and some that wouldn't be possible even on a piano.

Visual fretboard/keyboard view methods aren't a good method of studying music in motion. The most you can hope for is a scattering of partial ideas. If you want to study music in motion beyond stringed instruments you really need to study notation.