If I may have given the impression that I am perhaps a harsh critic of modern standard notation, let me take this opportunity to say that I am definitely not.  It is a useful system, I do not regret time spent learning it, and I make regular use of it.  But at the same time I recognize that it is definitely not perfect or the only valid system one can use.  It is not the best for everything, but it is definitely useful enough that I generally encourage learning at least the basics.

But if it is being a barrier, then that is not good.  If learning an alternate system can get a specific person up and playing a little sooner, it can make the difference between them being another musician or another person that believed they couldn't do it and gave up.  I feel the better objective is to get people playing any way they can and encourage that than to insist on something like a specific notation system that may seem to a beginner to be more of a barrier than a doorway.  Tear down those walls by any means possible, and if the person later decides they want the things that they can get by learning some specific notation system, they can learn it then and that is great.

A personal example would be this last year when my youngest daughter decided it was time that she actually was going to learn to play the old Fender acoustic guitar that had been standing in a corner of her room since she was little.  She signed up for the beginning guitar course in college.  I didn't let her neglect her sight reading, and when she was finding it a bit confusing at first how to turn the dots into notes on the strings, we made some flashcards and did some "see it, play it, name it" games for a weekend.  She picks things up quick, so that obstacle was gone just that fast.  But her course material didn't include tab, so I also taught her tab and loaned her one of my old books from back when I was learning to play a bit of fingerstyle (which also wasn't covered in her beginner college course) that was mostly in tab.  I don't want to digress too much into talking guitar, since this is a violin forum, but yes, she did very well in that course.

So to re-route it back to the concept of learning, there were some tricks I used to get her to learn faster.  For example, I would look at what had been covered so far in her class and say "Y'know.. if you are up for learning just two notes on this next string, you could play the melody to that song you were just listening to on youtube.."  or "If you are up for learning just one more easy chord, I can teach you at least 4 more songs by monday."  Being able to impress classmates and play songs she actually wanted to be able to play was a good incentive.  Learning to play music shouldn't be drudgery, and every bit of notation learned should open up new songs the person can play if you really want to motivate someone (including yourself, if you are teaching yourself).

It is not the fault of the standard notation system that music is not always taught well.  I personally feel that lesson books fall short of what is needed because not many people fantasize about learning to play "row row row your boat" or whatever.  To really fast-track a new player and get their "fire" going, it is necessary to get them in to the kinds of music they like right away and show any notation system as a useful tool for getting more.  I feel the music should be a priority over how it is written down or read.  A new player will learn the value of any type of notation as they find the need to communicate with other musicians or when they want to expand their repertoire or write down their own ideas or changes that they feel improve an arrangement they are working on learning.  

So to my way of thinking, standard notation, tab, carnatic notation, tracker data or MIDI data, playing by ear or by learning moves by watching another player.. it is all good.  Anything that can get a person playing and keep them playing works.

cpiasminc: Very interesting observations on the cultural differences and the effects they have had on the development of harmonic structures.  I do have to agree that while I personally do not feel every influence of the church over the centuries has always been good, that the influence on music and the arts has been undeniable.

I also agree that standardized tuning and pitch references have been of key importance in the development of complex harmonies and complex musical structure.  Standard notation does have some "code rot" symptoms, but so does the Windows operating system.  But both result in more people having access and being able to communicate and develop ideas as a daily activity.  Not perfect, but good enough until something better is developed and adopted into widespread use.

While there are many good and usable musical sounds in the microtonal pitch ranges, and many more "colours" of harmony possible, the standardized 12 tones are a good basic pallete with a large enough assortment available to be very useful.  One of the things I find interesting about violin/fiddle in particular is that it actually does use subtle inflections of pitch more than most instruments.  Experienced players intone notes a few cents high or low to make a passage sound sweeter or to apply a little more dissonance when they want to heighten tension and it is considered a normal part of how an experienced player will use their interpretive skills.  For being such a physically small and portable instrument, the potentials for tonal expression are nothing short of amazing to me.   

eoj02 said
I love the idea of the flash cards with say it play it.  And I love reading these intelligent posts.  Actually they are a liittle (or maybe a lot) over my head.

The flash cards actually are the best example of what I was trying to figure out.  I think some people skip the "say it" part and don't know what note they are playing.  They just match what they see to a position on the instrument.  I know that the two high school players i've played with can't play anything that isn't of sheet because they don't know what notes they are playing.

But either way, thanks for the explanations.  They are very informative.

I'd usually recommend it in the order "see it, play it, say it", since I tend to think that the sound should come first in the mind before the letter name.  That's just the logic that works for me, though.

So far as not being able to play anything that isn't on a sheet of music, I'd think that is more either just "high school attitude" or that they must not have been playing very long.  Maybe they can't play anything too complex without written score because they haven't developed the memory skills for it?  In any case, if they're serious enough to stick with music until they hit a theory course, they'll learn the notes quick enough.  I mean, it is 7 letters to learn   Not real hard stuff.  If they ever want to write/compose or even transpose a piece or modify an arrangement to spiff it up a bit, they'll learn it.

FM: Definitely a useful skill.  "Chamber music parties" sound neat.  I would bet you also have done some "Jam parties" though, where there isn't a written note in sight and everyone just improvs their parts. 

I'd never thought about how session work (including recording sessions) works for violin.  For guitar, bass, sometimes keyboard, though, you often don't get the luxury of written music.  Instead you may get handed what they call a "lead sheet", which usually will have the chord changes, maybe a very basic written version of the melody to use as a reference, how many times each section should repeat, if it should modulate up a third or whatever for the break, maybe the notes that cue your solo or that you are supposed to play to cue someone else, and you basically have to work it up "on the fly".   Because if the producer or whatever had someone on staff that could compose a good blues solo or whatever, they wouldn't have needed you in the first place. LOL 

I have known musicians who play by ear that were actually afraid to learn to read music because they were worried that it would somehow ruin their ability to play as they usually did.  It doesn't.  But it is a different discipline and it takes a certain amount of going back to basics at first.  For all I know there are people who usually play from written music who avoid learning to play by ear because they think it will be harmful somehow.  Similarly silly, in my opinion.

Which reminds me of a misconception a few people may get from some of my posts that I should clear up.  I got a PM the other night from an "Anon" in the chat who seemed to have gotten the impression that learning to sight read piano/keyboard had "ruined" my ability to improv or compose on it.  Not at all. 

But putting in a semester of regular practice at sight reading on keyboard and then a year or so of having fun playing just about every interesting looking written score I could find just resulted in my playing better from written score on that instrument than I can improv on it now.  To be able to think of cool sounding lines and etc when improvising or playing by ear and fit them in well takes practice and has a learning curve to it.  Doing one does not automatically get you the other, in my experience.

If I wanted to play in some band as a keyboardist where I would need to be able to improv on the fly or jam in certain styles of music, then I would just have to put away the sheet music and put up a backing track to play to and put in the time to get my skills in that up to par.

With violin/fiddle I want the jam/improv/ear ability first, so it is what I am training first.  Some of my "play time" every day is spent playing in on backing tracks for different styles of music and working on being able to identify the key and find things that fit in well, and sometimes also adjusting my intonation to fit the tuning if the track isn't tuned to A 440 (and a lot aren't, if you play against pop music and etc).  Those are the sort of skills I need to practice for the sort of situations I see as likely to find myself playing in.

Stuff like chamber music sounds like fun and all, I like the music.. but.. Well, the performance aspect has a certain image to it. and I have a real aversion to suits, and wouldn't be caught dead in anything like a tux. 

I am more than , if you can understand that. LOL