I realize that this may simply be a fluke, but in my experience I've noticed that all of my female students (and I mean ALL) tend to have little problems with sight reading, (beside the usual blemishes) and my male students struggle with it and make some rather irksome mistakes, despite the fact that the levels of tone production and technique vary considerably between both genders.

Has anyone else ever experienced this phenomenon? And if so, what do you think attributes to it? And let's all stay civil!

My singing teacher says that men are (typically) no good at sightreading which is why they often claim to have high voces so that they get more of a melody line to sing in her choir.

Surely it just depends on how much music you've studied over how many years?

I don't struggle with sight reading... I must be a girl





I agree with that

It really help playing lots of music. The other day I was in a situation where I had to play a piece on the saxophone with 5 sharps, so I thought of a piece that I already play which has 5#'s and got my mind set in that piece. So when I sight read an A# i would automatically put down an A# fingering without the need to think of it.
Also I recognise rhythms from other pieces, so I won't read the music as such

Does that make sense?

I've had 20/21 for sight reading in grade 8 sax, grade 8 clarinet and grade 6 flute. My sight reading on wind instruments has always been OK. Sight reading on piano is attrocious though.

I don't think there is a lot of truth in your supposition to be honest.

I teach 54 students currently, all female. Some have problems with sight reading, some do not. It is as much a problem of nurture as nature - the ones who have most problems (excluding dyslexics) are generally those taught in group lessons for the first few years.

I tried sight singing (grade two) for the first time a couple of weeks ago and got 9/10. Don't know how though.

I haven't noticed any difference like that between the girls and boys I teach.

Obviously some are better sight readers than others but in general the results reflect the amount of work put in by the student. I have found the more academic pupils seem to pick up sight reading very quickly, but I suppose that's not too surprising really.

xxx

I haven't noticed a gender difference either, though I have noticed a link between good coordination and good sight-reading, with regard to younger children. If they struggle to pat their head and rub their tummy with ease, then they tend to struggle when we get to two hands when sight-reading!

I do find a slight difference. As in their playing, I find the boys are more likely to just go from the beginning to the end. The girls on the other hand are more inclined to want to correct their mistakes and will stumble more.

Most of my students are boys for some reason, and I find they like to do their own thing most of the time

So I have girls stumbling and wanting to correct
Boys going from beginning to end satisfied even though they haven't played a note correctly.

Thankfully, by the time they get to the exam, I've managed to persuade them that neither way is ideal.

Great comments Louise - really made me smile. Thank you!

I have over 40 students, aged 6-75 years of age and there seems no correlation between age, gender or anything else as to who can (or who cannot) sight-read. I have two dyslexic pupils and even they are different.

Yes, without doubt, the oboists find it easier than the pianists but that's the difference of one stave or two, nothing else.

I have never noticed a difference between the genders but my recorder players who come to our weekly group are streets ahead of those that don't as we read new material constantly and it is second nature to them now. The singers are getting far better since I have asked them to use an online sight singing site. It is the pianists that find it the most difficult.

What is all this about gender!!

Male and Female are biological terms used to describe the *###* of an animal or a plant. A boy belongs to the male ###, not the male "gender". This is a grammatical term used to desribe a noun / pronoun and it is a misuse of the English language to say that a person has male "gender".

There is absolutely nothing improper or impoliet about the word "###", although the autocensor will probably delete it from this message.

I can't understand why people are so prudish these days - thank goodness I grew up in the permisive society!!!!

(However, I must admit that the chambers dictionary now says that "gender" can be used in this way so maybe I'm just a boring old reactionary)

Unless your sample population size of males and females is the order of a statistically significant sample size then your assumption is groundless as it is statistically insignificant.

I would like to bet that in a sample size of say 200 grade 7/8 standard males and females of 50% gender mix, the results would be fairly even. Either males and females approx equally as good as each other or equally as poor as each other at sight reading.

Well that just takes all the fun out of it...


I'm tending to agree with Louise here - boys seem happier about just playing through regardless of mistakes whereas girls are more reluctant to play through their mistakes and want to correct themselves.
Of course this is a generalisation, but it has proved itself more than a few times in my teaching practice.
I am not in any way saying it is true for everybody though of course!

Well that just takes all the fun out of it...

Yes it does rather, but as both my old maths and music teachers once said "when science comes in through the door art flies out the window"

Oh I don't know - I think they could possibly co-exist...

That's the problem with women - they tend to make sweeping generalisations.

Hmmmm, sightreading.

I'm definitely male then!

Oh StuMac... that's you off my christmas card list...

StuMac, you're a woman right? Since you just made a sweeping generalisation about women...

Actually, I've heard all kinds of sweeping generalisations in music e.g. men play more forcefully with greater power/volume...blah blah blah

Well! they do with me I suppose as I have science and medical qualifications and also grade 8 (OK! so you may think that's not much of a qualification in music ) and love playing the piano and all things musical

Well there you go then - I have a degree in Pure Maths but work as a Musician - we are both clearly prime examples of well-balanced all-roundedness

I havn't got as far as any qualification, but my two strongest subjects are music and science. Perhaps it's not so strange after all?

We can't compartmentalise them. They are mutually dependent when it comes to life and to music. I often find that people who excel at the theory of music and those who excel at playing Bach, Handel, Scarlatti et al are those who have a natural mathematical / scientific bent.

LR

[quote name='StuMac' date='Dec 11 2006, 09:53 AM' post='433005']
What is all this about gender!!

I just used it because I could not think of another word apart from the one that gets picked up on by auto censor!