What's in a name? - The relation between pitch notation, note names and sight singing in different forms of pitch notation and in different ways of approaching pitch notation

Suzanne Konings

Sight singing is a part of almost every music theory curriculum in conservatoires. But one might ask oneself why lessons in sight singing are needed for students who can already read music notation? The answer usually is: to develop the aural imagination in relation to music notation. The way students have learned to read music notation in the first place did not develop this skill well enough then? Experiences in teaching made me think that we need functional note names (unique sound names) to be able to aurally understand pitch in staff notation, and that the absolute note names (unique pitch names) may be an instrumentally useful, but less effective step ‘in between’ in the process of aural imagination. From existing literature and recorded tests with students performing special designed scores I hope to learn more about connecting the inner hearing world to music notation in the most effective way.

Description of the test plan

The tests were set up to investigate the experiences students have when reading and sight singing music in different forms of notation. Most of the test persons will have learned to read music notation in the traditional, instrumental way, where the symbol (a written note on the staff with clef) is presented first. Then a name (pitch name) is connected to the written symbol, and a place to play this note on the instrument is found. The sound is the result of these actions. For singers, who have been introduced to music notation in this way and who do not play a musical instrument, this is known to be a problematic approach, because there is no one ‘position’ on the vocal chords to ‘play’ the notated pitch. It would be interesting to see if there is a difference between instrumentalists and singers when they perform the test. Other test persons may have been trained the other way, where the notation was introduced from sound to symbol. A questionnaire is added for the test persons to fill in, to see what their background in musical training was. In the tests the aural understanding from symbol to sound is tested. The symbols are presented in different ways.

What information do the symbols give and what is needed to understand the notation in such a way that aural imagination is activated in the most effective and secure way?

How do we know if and how the aural imagination works when reading from notation?

The test persons are singing the right notes.

The test persons sing the notes with good intonation (showing they understand the meaning or function of the notes).

The test persons can sing fluently.

The test persons can sing with confidence.

The test plan has been performed mostly the same in all the tested groups. The groups differed in size, the main subjects and the level in solfège of the students. All students in the group read the music from the Music Scores for Research book. They sang the pieces in groups (in unison) or in two parts. In some of the groups four-part singing or canon singing was tried.The basic test plan was sometimes slightly modified if the skills-level of the group asked for different exercises, more repetitions or different challenges.

Model test plan:

1. Sing in different versions of stick notation: ‘The bird that soars on highest wing’. Major mode, mainly stepwise progressions.

2. Sing in different versions of stick notation: ‘Under this stone’. Minor mode, with larger interval and bigger range.

3. Sing in staff notation with different note naming systems and with pitch clefs or do-clefs: 77 Two-part exercises, Nr. 6, 7 and 5: Pentatonic mode (do-/la-pentatonic). Upper and lower parts were mostly sung separately. In some groups two-part singing was performed.

4. Sing in staff notation on different note naming systems and with pitch clefs or do-clefs: ‘If Ye Love Me’. Major mode, two (or four) parts.

Tip

Tip