Hi everyone

I have a hugely embarrassing problem with scales - you'll all think I'm a complete dimwit!

I'm doing G3 clarinet this term and I can play all the scales, no problem. But I'm playing them automatically - ie not saying the note names in my head as I do it, and I've never been able to do this with scales. I can count up the scale ABCD etc, but I simply cannot count down the scale DCBA etc. I can count numbers backwards quite easily so why can't I count letters backwards??? I'm sure primary school children can do it so why can't I do it? It's ridiculous and very embarrassing! I have to find a way of overcoming this problem! I've been trying for two years and I still can't do it, so embarrassing as it is, I'm going to have to admit my dark secret and ask for help...

Has anybody got any ideas as to how I can get over this blind spot???

If you are able to play the scale requirements for your grade three exam on autopilot I cannot see any problems at all. I think of patterns when I play scales on both my recorders and on the piano. I suppose that I used to think of note names when I first began to play them but not for the last forty-something years!
As long as the notes are correct when you play and that you are able to play them at the correct speed it does not matter a hoot how you achieve the end result. Good luck with your exam by the way.

I don't really know that I can say anything terribly helpful apart from maybe practising saying the letters backwards without your instrument first and then playing the scale very slowly with a pause between each note to think the letter name before you play it. Also possibly looking at the written down scale while you are playing so that you have some sort of visual reminder of the note. (These are things I tried with my daughter).

But do not dispair
My nine-year-old daughter uses the fixed do, ré, mi system because we are in France. Fairly quickly She could say them all in order going up but could not say them backwards, nor could she say them in the right order starting on any other note than "do". Like you she could play scales but could not say the notes as she was playing them. I had run out of ideas to help her (in fact for several months I didn't even mention it as it used to annoy her) and then suddenly the penny dropped. It took almost three years so if you've only been trying for two maybe you just need to wait a bit longer.

I think it must depend on individuals as my seven-year-old could sing all the notes in any order within weeks of starting (although she says "do, ri, mi").

Firstly, the fact you can play your scales for your grade is the main thing skylark - like petrat, I think of patterns/fingerings for scales when I play.

For working out the alphabet backwards, how about a mnemonic to start with : go for each dream - can't be awful......

... Cheese Boards Are Good For Every Dreamer....

I like it!!!

I taught a girl who had a very specific form of dyslexia diagnosed. She could not reverse letter strings of more than two letters successfully. So there may be an underlying issue of this sort.

I would memorise the last seven letters of the alphabet backwards. You can do it in three groups: G; FED and CBA. Try repeating this to yourself like a mantra for a week, and see if it helps.

Whilst automatic playing is the main aim with scales, it's also important that the brain doesn't kick in during stressful moments and start questioning what the fingers are doing. If you can create a bit of stress while you're practising it can help. You could play against an ever-increasing metronome click, or set a target number of repetitions without making a mistake.

One neat little way I've discovered recently is to keep a pile of pennies (I use 8) one side of the music stand. Whenever I play the passage I'm learning successfully, I transfer a penny to a pile the other side of the stand. If I make a mistake, I move a penny back again. The aim is to get all 8 pennies in the new pile. You can make it even harder for yourself by moving all the pennies back to the original side if you make a mistake.

Good luck!

Yes thanks for reminding me to do this. Because you have to know the scales automatically for the exams, I always do them without reading them. But that means that knowing the scales isn't actually terribly useful because you then don't necessarily recognise them when you see them in a piece of music. So I must start reading them as well as doing them automatically, and as you say, that may help me with the note names.


I think part of the problem is that when I first started learning music a couple of years ago, every time I did a scale, I found myself saying doh-re-mi etc in my head, which must be an ingrained hangover from my early childhood. I've found it very hard to get out of this habit and think the note names instead.

I'd agree with petrat, that if you can play your scales fluently it really doesn't matter if you can name the notes. I'm fairly certain I don't think of note names when I play my scales.

I'm starting to realise that I think of note names less and less with my playing. I can read treble clef and name notes without thinking about it at all (at least as long as there's only a reasonable number of ledger lines), bass clef is a bit slower but getting to the point where there's only minor hesitations. In my weekly jazz class we often learn tunes by ear - I play alto sax in the class but at home I'll transpose the tune so I can play on tenor too, and transposition exercises are a standard part of a jazz practice routine. When I do the transposing I rarely think of letter names, except maybe at the start of phrases or to determine the key I'm playing in. After that it's a combination of the sound, the degree of the scale, and the interval between notes. I appreciate it's a bit different with classical music, but I feel I'm playing more musically and with more understanding when my thought process is "start on the fifth, up to tonic, up a minor 3rd then semitone etc" rather than G, C, Eb, E.

The dyslexia thing is curious. A friend of mine has mild dyslexia and he is a very slow and reluctant reader, whereas I'm an avid reader and love words, so I would never have associated my "reverse letter" problem as a form of dyslexia. But maybe it is? But hopefully not such a problem that I can't overcome it...?

I think memorising groups of letters is a good idea, I haven't tried that one. So far I've found it relatively easy to memorise the arpeggio groups (if possible by association - CEG/Central Electricity Generating !) so this one might work.

What you said about the brain kicking in has made me think. It's true that when it's all going well and the scales are flowing, if the brain does kick in and you start questioning what you're doing, then it can cause a mild panic. On the other hand, if I'm having an off-day, and I'm not playing as confidently, that's when I wish I had the note names in my head as a sort of aide-memoire. So I think creating some stress is a good idea as well.

Thanks for all that advice.

The girl in question was only picked up when her drama teacher noted discrepancies between her very fluent reading aloud and the way she tackled a new passage. It's a specific problem with her working (short-term) memory, in psychological terms.

Curiouser and curiouser! Particularly in respect of what you've said about her working (short-term) memory. Much as I love reading, I am aware that I can read a paragraph and then not have a clue about what I've just read. If it's something important, I have to write it out, but fortunately it's never caused me a problem so I've never really considered it a problem. Makes you think though, doesn't it!

Where you and petrat are at is where I will probably get to eventually, or ought to anyway. But you are already secure in your note names whereas I'm not! I know I can pass the scales section of the exam by playing on auto-pilot, but the notion that I would then (hopefully) be working towards G4 without being able to count down a scale in my head just seems ridiculous. It's such a basic thing to be able to do... I've tried some simple transposition (up/down an octave), and some of the time I found I could do it automatically, but sometimes I had to think of the note names. I'm sure it's something that will get easier with more practice, and I'm looking forward to getting G3 out of the way so that I can get back to a more varied musical diet, which will include more transposition.

Surely being able to play them faultlessly is most important - not HOW you manage it?
If someone names a scale and you can launch into it without a problem and complete it, do you really need to complicate the issue by saying (in your head) a backwards alphabet?

anyway scales are made up of intervals aren't they, not letter names? That's where the pattern comes from --- ??
As Tsax suggests - does it really matter. I think of finger patterns as you have to on most instruments except the piano. It seems much more important to me that my fingers go the right place at the right time!

I am also wondering if I should actually start to worry now that I have done G4 and G5 without thinking of counting down! Is it really such a basic thing? Is it necessary? Perhaps a pianist on here could say if he/she mentally recites the letter names as she plays rapidly descending scales in a piece of music.

What I've found through teaching scales, SaxFan, is that every flautist I've taught keeps a subconscious tally of letter names in their heads, although most are completely unaware they are doing it. It is apparent from the mistakes they make. I can always tell if they are thinking of a note by the 'wrong' name (G# instead of Ab in Eb major, for instance) because they will omit the G and then try and play A natural after the A flat.

Saying the reverse-alphabet thing is interesting, because it's something I try to get beginners to do in the first 2 or 3 lessons - and fluency is quite rare. We only do it as part of a general "getting to know the keyboard" approach, I don't think it has enormous value, other than underpinning keyboard geography, and I don't spend much time on it, nor do I bother much if they find it difficult.

I'd go along with those who feel that as long as you can play scales fluently, how you remember them is less important.

Much as I love reading, I am aware that I can read a paragraph and then not have a clue about what I've just read.

I can do that too !

Much as I'm flattered to be put in the same category as petrat I feel obliged to 'fess up that my playing is nowhere near the same level!

Actually, giving it a bit more thought I must sometimes think of note-names because enharmonic equivalents can confuse me. I'm reasonably happy with C# major or Db major, but much prefer C# minor to Db minor - I can just about cope with E# and Cb but B# and Fb throw me. Thankfully I only really come across them in evil transposition exercises.



I'm not sure this is necessarily the case - it could just be muscle memory, remembering the G# to A movement from e.g. an E major scale.

I think you end up in the position that we can never tell for sure what's going on in someone else's head and how they're best able to learn and remember things. One of the reasons for trying different ways of approaching a new technique until one clicks.

Don't think so. Firstly, because they usually learn Eb major before either A major or E major on flute, and secondly because I ask them!

I'm amazed that the general consensus is that it doesn't matter! And yes, I'd assumed that it was a basic skill, so although I wouldn't expect anybody to recite the note names in a piece of music, I'd expected that everybody would be able to practise a scale and recite the note names as a matter of course - hence my original embarrassment as not being able to do something which I thought the rest of the world could do standing on their heads

I still think it would be useful in an exam, when I might otherwise stumble through nerves, to be able to have the note names in my head. And since I've got to have something in my head, it might as well be the correct note names as "doh-ray-me". If nobody else is saying the note names to yourself when you practise the scales, what are you saying to yourself?

I think that sounds a good way to look at it. Am I right in inferring that you see it rather as a mental agility 'trick' in the early stages of learning? Once it has helped then we don't need to think of it or rely on it?
A little like learning tables? Useful to know why they work, but even better to know that they DO work. Get onto 'auto-pilot' and go for it?

Actually whatever I am playing I always sing the notes along to myself in my head, even when I am playing the piano I sing something (obviously not all the notes I'm actually playing but not necessarily the right-hand ones) and if it is a fast passage I sort of slide one note name into another. I didn't realise quite how much I did this until I started having lessons in France where my teacher uses Do, ré mi and I use C, D, E. If he says the names of the notes I find it interferes with my own internal voice and I just don't know what to play. I ended up asking him not to say any note name out loud. My dependence on my internal voice was also obvious when he asked me to imagine I was singing "oh" in my head to improve my embouchure - when I first did this I played loads of wrong notes, even on a piece I thought I knew well. Now I sort of think "oh" first and then sing my notes along in my head.

Impossible ! You cant recite them quick enough ! . I reckon you can only say 4 letters per second. So assuming the sales are in semiquavers, thats only Crotchet= 60, about a third the speed piano scales should be.

I think the "tables" is a good analogy. I feel as if running up and down the note names of a scale should be as automatic as knowing the tables. Then it's not something that you use all the time, but it's something you can call upon when you need to. So even though you're on auto-pilot, if you suddenly have a signal failure, you've got back-up. If you see what I mean

Interesting.
You seem to be separating scales from music, Skylark. I don't suppose we recite note names as we play a written/composed piece, so why should scales be different? Aren't they music, too?

as to tonic sol fa, I can't think of that backwards.

When I play scales, I try to ensure they are right whatever comes into my head. I find a good way to play them is with the television on - this really does check if my scales are secure enough to beat the lure of the flickering picture and the sound!!
I was told once to 'comparmentalise' - make sure each part of playing and technique etc is so secure that if by chance one part slips, the rest carries on automatically!

you have raised some interesting thoughts

That's it exactly, skylark. Belt and braces (motor memory and back-up theory knowledge).

Most players have a scale they know they can play correctly all the time (for the students I teach it's either C major or D major). The aim is to make all the other scales as fluent and secure as the one you know best. If challenged, I'm pretty sure I can play accurately most major and minor scales, but I know I have a few that sometimes crumble under pressure: A and B majors and F# minor being examples. It's not to do with not knowing the notes, but more a set of awkward fingering changes.

Ruth Bonetti is very good about learning scales. "Practice is a Dirty Word" is a good book, see chapter 5 'The dirtiest word of all: Scales'
She is a clarinettist too.

They are different for those of us who tend to prefer to play from a score rather than from memory. So it's a memorisation problem rather than a scales problem. I'd also venture that it's a woodwind problem rather than a strings or piano problem.

I'm not very musical - I just try hard and practise a lot!




That's quite a good idea... I've always thought that I shouldn't have any distractions when I'm practising but andante_in_c has said to create some stress as well, which is similar to having a distraction. So I think I'll try putting the television on sometimes as well

me too, I try and I practise (though not enough)

you may find it a useful tool.
Even with pieces I can get to a point where I think I know it reasonably well, then maybe I try to put more thought into dynamics (for example) and at first it falls apart... perhaps I didn't know the notes well enough!!

With piano now I don't think I could even recite the names of some scales going up! I just learn patterns and actually quite often practice with my eyes closed to make sure I'm not just playing them by looking at them.

As for times tables, I'm expected to get an A or A* at GCSE but I still don't know my tables!! Not in the conventional recite them out loud way. But if I see two numbers I can times them together, so maybe it's similar to scales in that they have sunk in, but I can't actually recite them, I'm not sure.

Yes, something like that. Perhaps once it has helped you know it's there and could be pulled out if needed ?

But you could do it when you were at an earlier level? When I'm Grade 7 (I wish!), I'll maybe not find it helpful to know scales backwards, but I feel as if it would be helpful at the stage I'm at now. And a bit like a "rite of passage", it just feels like something I ought to be able to do - it would help now and also it's there in the future if I need it It must just be the way I personally would find it helpful to learn - even if nobody else learns this way!

Just trying to think... oh dear I am rather forgetful, I don't actually know!! I'll think about it for you...

What chance have I got of remembering scales if you can't remember them at your age!!! I must be at least, erm, twice your age!

haha no what I meant was I can't remember if I could say the letter nemes of scales!! I can't remember because I was rather small then and now my brain is full of coursework and deadlines!!

I wouldn't worry about it! I hope to take my grade 8 next year, and I've never been able to say a scale backwards!



I play mine while reading the forum

Do you play your scales 'backwards' Skylark?
Starting at the top, going down and then finishing at the top... or if it's perhaps 2 octaves, you start in the middle octave, go down and then up to the top and finish at the middle? or of course up from the middle, down and up to the middle again.

[lengthy explanation, I hope it's clear]

or do you change the rhythm, swung quavers for example? or triplets?
or different articulations? all ways to help secure your scales.

Ruth B's book also has graphic representations of scales to help remember the 'shapes'

Or you could try my 'over-the-top' method. Based on the principle that the turn round at the top is usually the hardest bit, I start with just the top note. I then add the one each side, then the one each side of that, until an octave has been reached.

For example: F major would be top F; E-F-E; D-E-F-E-D; C-D-E-F-E-D-C etc.

Most of my scales learning systems are based on ensuring that the hardest bits get played the most.

I only ever play scales in the "conventional" fashion, ie as they would be required in an exam. I've read threads about doing other ways, but I've always been worried that it would confuse me and I would get in a mess with them. So no, I've not been changing the order or the rhythm, only the articulations. And because I don't have a major problem learning scales, or mind practising them, I've never really thought it necessary to try playing them in other ways. Maybe I should ....? If I did play them in a different way, though, I'd still feel as if I ought to be saying the note names as I did it!

I've done a search on Google and some book sites for the Ruth B book. My search also came up with a forum thread where you'd said you'd paid £8.40 two or three years ago. It's now £15.00 plus P&P, and I've just spent nearly £20 on a composition book plus some stuff from the Myatts sale I'll see if they've got it at the music library on Saturday

That is brilliant andante_in_c - I've just tried it with F Major and I eventually managed to remember most of the notes back down the octaves. I didn't go on to the next group until I could recite the current group. With a bit more practice, I think this will work. A bit late at night to start a serious session on it now, but I've got a lot of hope for this method. Thanks!

EUREKA! I can now do two octaves of the F Major scale, and recite all the note names up and down, and play quite fast as well, probably faster than my teacher would advise but I just wanted to see how fast I could recite it. I've no doubt I'll have to do it lots more times to be totally secure on it, but considering I couldn't count backwards at all before I started, it's a huge breakthrough.

Presumably you do a similar thing for the arpeggios?

andante_in_c, would you now say that I should work my way through the scales starting with those I find easiest, or start with those I find hardest? Or work up from F Major, G Major, A Major, Bb Major, C Major, D Major, and then do the same with the minor scales?

Thanks ever so much for recommending this method.

And thanks to everybody else for your advice - I will try the other things recommended such as reading the written scales, adding distractions and stress etc, and hopefully I'll become expert at them...

I agree that the 'over the top' is a good way to work it out.
I would suggest that it doesn't have to apply only to the top of a scale - with wind, like clarinet or sax if you find any series of notes a bit tricky to finger, then slow right down, take one note, then its neighbours and so on... spreading it out gradually.

I think that's in 'Practice is a Dirty Word' too -- it's a really good point andante



and sorry Skylark that the book has gone up in price. It's probably still a good buy. Thanks for letting me know

I'm glad it's been so successful, Skylark.

Yes, I'd start with the hardest scales as they need more repetitions to get them fluent than the easier ones. My 'scales challenge' system I use with my students (which I described in the 'won't practise scales' thread) uses this principle. The Scales Game from the practicespot website is good for this as well, as it concentrates practice on the scales you can't get right first time.

SaxFan: yes, the method should be used starting from the hardest point. It's very rare on the flute that the top isn't the hardest, though, as it's the third octave fingerings that cause most scale problems. I'm not surprised I wasn't the first to think of it - I'll hold off from applying for a patent, then.

And of course, the method can also be used for tricky runs within a piece, especially those where one section is harder than the rest.

If it helps I tend to learn scales by numbers. Draw yourself a circle of fifths so you can get to understand to key signatures. For some reason its much easier to remeber as a picture than as lists (or so my pupils find) the as scales are grouped as four quavers count your way up. Its easier to deal with minor scales that way, and most people have learnt to count backwards from childhood. (just think of ten green bottles)

Jo

I'm really happy now about being able to count down the scales, but this thread and things I've read on the "Practice" thread, have made me wonder whether I'm missing something. People keep talking about "scale patterns" and I'm not sure I know what you all mean by this. Does it relate to what jod has described about the Circle of Fifths, ie the sequence of sharps and flats? Or something completely different?

It's a piano thing. There are fingering patterns for scales on the piano. That doesn't apply to woodwind instruments.

I find there are some patterns, but they are simply not as obvious on the wind instruments after all.
And if it's about, let's say, major scales then they all have the same pattern don't they? The way they are built up, the pattern of intervals is just the same, only we start on a different note.


Skylark: I meant to ask you, when you recite the names of the notes (not aloud presumably) do you mean the written clarinet note or the concert note?

or maybe a jazz thing

For me scale patterns mean playing e.g. in thirds (all egs in C major)

C, E, D, F, E, G etc;
E, C, F, D, G, E etc;

or others e.g.

C, D, E, D, E, F, E, F, G etc;
C, D, E, D, E, F, G, F, G, A, B, A etc

and literally hundreds of others

Phew! For a moment I was worried there!



The written clarinet note. The reason I want to be able to count down the scale as well as up (in my head) is so that if my auto-pilot fails in an exam, I've got the back-up of knowing what the note should be as well (the belt and braces approach, as andante-in-c described it earlier). I'm quite comfortable now on counting two scales up and down using andante-in-c's formula, and I'm working my way through them. It seems unbelievably easy now that I've got a formula!

What a great way of doing it!!! I shall be using that and passing it on.......

I have just learnt a new way of practising scales too. It's called crabwise. you start on c, do C major one octave then come back down in C# major, the note you finish one is always the second note of the next scale. After coming down in C#major you go up in Eb major etc. That way you get to do all scales in half the time!