I've experienced the same thing many times. Good question, indeed. Do you mean how many can play notation on the piano at sight---even something simple-----or do you mean how many can actually sing at sight? The latter answer is quite a bit fewer. The latter answer, in my case, is probably 4 or 5, including my wife, and the organist/choirmaster at the parish where I teach music. Sightsinging is just a lost skill, I think: parents are not so impressed, and neither are administrators. They seem to think we can just read music anyway, with no need to work at it. I am desperately trying to teach it to my students, but who can afford to spend all that time working on such an esoteric skill when much more important things are coming up, like the 4th grade musical!

In the Catholic Church? A tiny number. this is an amazing tragedy.

I agree that there are way too few people in many different cultures that truly do NOT know how to read and sight-sing music. This is especially true in America! In addition to being a choirmaster, organist, composer and teacher, I am a professional concert, chamber and symphony violist. Anyone associated with instrumentalist (and especially string players and pianists), will testify that we spend and enormous amount of time practicing scales, arpeggios and all kinds of etudes and exercises; not to even mention form and analysis and chords.

With all due respect to singers (and I am one), singers just simply do NOT spend enough time practicing scales, arpeggios, etudes, vocal exercises and especially in Solfege! This is a cold hard fact and I can personally attest to this since I have been to many music schools, colleges, schools and conservatories. In my opinion, a great deal of Solfege work in such etudes, exercises, scales and arpeggios needs to occur before one can say that they KNOW how to read and sight-sing music.

When a person can truly sight-sing, they can actually hear the music set before them, in their head; like unto their conscious speaking to them except its singing. Then it is only a matter of using your voice to match that which is heard in your head. and THAT is another skill to be developed!

But, Ken- there is an inherent disadvantage for a singer as opposed to an instrumentalist or pianist- all you guys have to do is put your finger (or bow) on the right key or string and there it is- singers have to have a pitch to begin with from another instrument, unless you are simply talking about intervals, not correct pitch as seen on the page. I think it is much harder to sightread as a singer. I can sit down to the piano and sight read lots of stuff, but I certainly couldn't sightread vocally a piece of Stravinsky. Now if everyone had to take piano lessons as a child, as most of us 'older' people did, our task would be much simpler. Children just don't learn this way anymore. So many of them don't even have a keyboard in the home anymore.

Donna

You mean sight-sing? I know plenty of people who can read music. Reading music is more than just pitches: it's also rhythms, dynamics, intervals. Very few people have perfect pitch or the training required to sight-sing. (Edit: I should say, very few choristers, or PIPs)

I know only two or three people who can sight-sing cold; one of them is best at sight-singing Gregorian chant notation. But there are a lot of people in my family who can sight-sing harmonies if one or two other voices know what they're doing (SATB hymns).

Good sight-singing usually results from lots of practice--rhythm and pitch, with a bias toward fluency rather than just the reproduction of intervals--and enough knowledge of music theory to understand keys and clefs well.

The earlier this intensive practice begins, the better; it's very hard to learn to sight-sing after young adulthood.

Working in various clefs, including C-clefs is very helpful for moving from a decent intermediate level of reading to a secure, resilient sight-singer.

With choirs, rhythmic precision is far more important in sight-reading and intonation than commonly assumed.

Confidence and fluency are extremely important, and any instructional method needs to nurture these explicitly.

Most singers are terrible sight-readers because they were taught implicitly that this skill was not important or was its achievement was attributable to 'talent' rather than instruction.

"With choirs, rhythmic precision is far more important in sight-reading and intonation than commonly assumed."

I agree completely with this. As for myself, I can't sight-read with much accuracy, but it helps me (as a bass) to be able to see the harmonies going on. I typically write figured bass in my scores or harmonic analysis. If I know my part is doing a ii6-V-I or some variation thereupon, I can sight sing it, and pretty much any part of a typical hymn.

It is my experience that vocalists are, as a group, greatly inferior sight-readers as compared to instrumentalists. Also, they tend to need more coaching to produce a truly musical result. There is very little that I cannot look at and sight-read or hear in my head without difficulty. Why professional and degreed singers usually cannot do this is strange. Nor do they seem apologetic about it (quite the opposite!). It seems to me that part of being a musician, being musically literate, is being able to look at music and hear it. Also, I have often had greater trouble getting the result I wanted from a paid chorister than from some of the better volunteers!

It is true that a piano playing vocalist will have a better advantage over a non-piano playing vocalist. And string players generally tend to make even better sight-readers than pianist. I (and others), believe that there is a correlation between the three areas that re-enforce each other - aural, tactile, vocal.

Yes, my daughter who started violin (and piano) at an early age developed perfect pitch very early , and altho doesn't have time now in her early 30's with a busy job to play much still has it- I have always been jealous of her. Grrr! She can sight read almost anything and also hear stacked chords of almost any number- a great advantage in music theory and harmony classes,which I always struggled with.

I believe string players have a great advantage over singers
Donna

I would distinguish sight-singing from the ability to read music. Sight-singing is a specific level of reading music.

That said, in the USA, I would say the portion of the population that can read music has been declining for a generation, due to music education being moved out of core primary education curricula into the fringe.

As someone who was trained as a horn player, I would say that singers who are not orchestral/wind ensemble instrumentalists find the culture of such instrumentalists harsh. That is, as from the age of 10 to 22, as a horn player, I got inured to (1) competition (auditions, solos, death-matches to rise up a chair on the spot in front of the whole ensemble), and (2) blunt, brusque and even abusive treatment from directors (hurled music/batons/what not). When I sing with non-instrumentalists, the difference is very apparent: instrumentalists tend to seek correction and don't take correction as personally.

One fun way to deal with reading music is to take one's choir to Sacred Harp sing-ins....

The remarks on the relationship between a wide range of music-making and good singing are born out by my experience of Spode Music Week in the UK, which is a bit like the Colloquium plus non-liturgical and instrumental music making. Nearly everyone who attends sings and plays something, and that shows in the liturgical music schedule, which involves different masses and motets every day, often quite challenging stuff. Apart from the course Mass, none of it gets more than one rehearsal.

Jeff

I would distinguish sight-singing from the ability to really really read music. I've encountered people who can sing intervals correctly but are not good with rhythms or reading all the other musical notation details. And what level of proficiency would count for sight-singing?

I remember having a TA in my second year of music theory who transposed in incipit on all sight-singing exercises by a tritone for the folks who had perfect pitch.....

Ian

Absolutely the frustration with the present situation where no one reads in this country.

I was able to do that once -- open up a score and read it -- but only because I had heard the song before. I didn't recognize the title or author, but when I looked at the notes long enough they awakened my memory of the piece. It would be really awesome to do that cold from just a random score but... I'm never going to be a conductor, so I'ma focus on Gregorian and Byzantine chant notation.

In my undergraduate degree I took a brass techniques class. If you hand me a trumpet I can play accurate pitches and rhythms. However, if you hear a high school freshman trumpet player it will quickly evident which one of us is a true trumpet player. In many ways I think hearing some instrumentalist sight sing is the same way, they get the right pitches and rhythm but the sound quality is lacking.

Someone earlier mentioned that many trained singers they have come across do not have the ability to sight read. It is inexcusable that a trained singer can not sight read. But.... in their defense trained singers are worried about more then just singing the correct pitches. They are occupied with: correct vocal production, breathing, vowel modification and any number of other technical issues. Quality of the tonal production must also be a consideration in what a good choir sight singing is.

Sight singing is a skill that takes lots of time. Many of us had many semesters of study in our undergrads with music professors to teach us this very skill. When you consider that most of our choirs have at most with us a couple of hours a week and that only a small percent of that time can be specifically focused on teaching basic musicianship skills like sight singing, then you can see that the teaching of this skill will take a very long time. After all public school teachers struggle with finding the time to teach this skill and they have many more hours in a week that they can teach it.

I recently heard a prominent choral conductor (she shall remain nameless) that claimed she once taught her church choir to sight sing/ read music in 8 hours! When I hear these clams I am always amazed at how good singers are at faking it and how some conductors are so absorbed in themselves that they can not see the difference.

I have training in using solfege in high school choir, and I know which direction a sentence of notes (?) should go (up or down) based on looking at a measure of music. Can I sing something immediately on sight with 80 (or even 50) % accuracy w/o some reference pitch or somebody next to me to assist me? Absolutely not.

If the criterion is: "Able to get most renaissance polyphony by the 2nd or 3rd time through singing it", I'd say several dozen for sure, because I've done it with them. There are many more who I know have received the training to do so, but I haven't sing with them. if the standard is, "Sings anything at sight flawlessly", then I know very few if any. I am a pretty certain sight-reader and very seldom make mistakes with intervals. But my eyes are not what they used to be. Errors also increase with old clefs, mensurstriche, original notation (esp. in triple time), oddball reduction or barring conventions, or transposition by more than about a step. I can cope with all those, but it might mean an extra time through the music.

If you're a singer THAT's "reading music", not "I can tell you what note C is." And frankly, I have very little patience with singers who can't read, and have a drive to see universal musical literacy. It is IMPOSSIBLE to sustain a culture based on literacy when the literacy is not there. We're beginning to see that with words. It's already here with music.

I just realized how off topic I have become. To answer the original question I know of maybe three people that can really look at a whole piece of music (like a large orchestral score) and hear it in their head. I know quite a bit more that can sing there individual parts with few mistakes. I know a lot more who, with a couple of minutes, can "figure it out". I would love to have a few more people who would be willing to "figure it out" in my choir :)

Oh, and coming from the classical singer and voice teacher perspective, I would like to second Ted's assertion that it takes (much!) more than sight singing to craft beautiful singing. Notes and rhythms are only first base, if you ask me.

How many times have I heard an instrumentalist sight sing something with note accuracy, smiling smugly, but displaying very poor concepts of tone, diction, phrasing, and legato. My dear husband is an excellent classical and jazz guitarist. But he sounds like a broken oboe when he sings. String players seem to do the best, especially with legato and phrasing.

But there is no such thing as "I'm a good musician and therefore an instantly good singer". Pure hubris. And kinda funny!

For me as a pianist, the major leap in sight-reading skills came from playing for a couple of years in the Baptist church, where we had to read hymns together on piano and organ (yes, it makes an incredible racket) while the music director conducts the congregation. The pianist is expected to improvise on the hymn tune while the organist supports the singing. And you think the "touchdown cantor" is annoying - imagine a cheerleader conducting 4/4 time for an entire hymn. It looks as if he were speed-blessing the congregation.

As a singer, I did really well in sight-singing class thanks to the piano background, but it is true that practice is the only way to mastery. If I don't challenge myself with new music fairly often, I find it much more difficult the next time I try. However, the skill always comes back after a few minutes of effort.

About singers and sight-reading, it is an open secret that many Great Singers (Ezio Pinza and Luciano Pavarotti spring to mind as specific examples) rely on their Chorrepetitor to learn every note they sing in public. This is why Pavarotti had a relatively narrow repertoire (~50 roles, if I recall correctly), while Domingo, who has pretty impressive skills as a pianist, has sung over 120 tenor roles, and is currently working his way through the baritone repertoire as well. This does not take away from the greatness of those who are less proficient with sight-singing -- indeed, who could argue that Pinza was not at the top of the basso cantante heap? -- but it explains a lot. One might even argue that the increased time required for learning solo music for these singers gives them more opportunity to polish the sound and the other musical considerations.

A better question is:
How many musicians (amateur, volunteer, or professional) do you know who wish they could read music and sight sing BETTER than they currently do?
I suspect the answer is: All of us.

Two things to be done:

1. I think we all know that singing and learning chant and polyphony makes us better sight readers, especially when it is learned and sung without the aid of instruments and with the aid of solfege.
So... you know... more of that, please.

2. I belong to a generation that is significantly less well-off, intellectually and culturally speaking, than the several generations which came before us. I'm increasingly finding people my age who are "mad as hell" that they were not taught certain things when they were children and students (music, foreign languages, philosophy, literature), and are determined that we will not let the same thing happen to our children.
My point: Children's choirs are (as they have ever been) vitally important. And it is more important than ever that part of rehearsal time (as precious as it is) be spent learning music skills and music literacy, rather than just learning the next piece of music. Most of us probably know that already, but it bears keeping in mind.
We need to give to our children what we lacked growing up.

Mario Lanza never sang an opera, said to be unable to memorize a role.

OTOH, how often does a church musician have to memorize?

VERY few people do in the United States. I am pretty sure that sight reading is much better in general overseas. I remember my audition for Chanticleer the first time and the sheet of music they handed me with the most atonal, awful passage to sing. It was the first time in my life I felt completely inadequate with sight reading. The next year I actually practiced with 12 tone scores in the practice room beforehand and it helped a TON! It just takes real practice.

Matthew Curtis
www.choraltracks.com