completely self taught musicians is there a such thing?

Question

Hi there am a big fan of the new age musician Vangelis, his profile says that he started playing piano at the age of 4 and nobody taught him and they say he can't read music notes till this day which is a proof that he is completely self taught.

My question is : is there any other musicians beside Vangelis that are complelety self taught...I say it again is there completely self taught musicians that no one taught them anything, in which they just started playing music by there own?

Also if you know any other musician who can't read music notes that will really help me.
Thanks in advance.

Answer 1

If you mean famous, yes, absolutely, many. If you mean in general, absolutely.



Every single member of the band I played in was self taught. I can't read music. I am nobody in particular but I'm good enough to have been used for studio work for musicians (which simply says I am capable of playing my instrument competently, it's not a bragging point).



You can listen to our music at nataliewattre dot com to hear a sample (it's free, I'm not selling anything nor am I even in the band anymore but up until I quit a few months ago I enjoyed ten fun years with them). We wrote, arranged and performed everything, including strings. All self-taught.



Now: I wouldn't recommend being self-taught. My theory is if you are good self-taught, you could probably be a lot better if taught. I understand Denise' comment, but I think this points to the exception more than the rule, and also sure you can run into horrible teachers, that's always a liability.

Answer 2

I am a full-time musician of 30 years and music teacher of 25 years. I have met many people who play for hobby and professionally who say they are self taught. But, when I audition them to play with me for a job, they cannot keep up at all. Their idea of being good is like someone in first grade who gets A's compared to a college student who gets A's. They don't know that they don't know enough.



If music theory is holding you back then you are doing it wrong. That would be like saying "Now I can't write well because I am learning new words and better grammar."



Louis Armstrong played a trumpet beautifully the first time he touched a trumpet. But people like Armstrong are 1 in a billion where "self proclaimed" self taught people are a dime a dozen.



To say that learning to read music is holding you back in music is like saying that learning to read english is holding you back in writing poetry.



Playing by ear, reading music and improvisation are all necessary. Just like in the regular world you cannot get as good of a job if you cannot speak, read and write english.



Anyone, with lessons or without lessons, will improve by spending more time with their instrument. But we all need lessons on what ever we are doing to be really good at it. Even Louis Armstrong said that he took lessons long after he was famous.



Music is a language.

Answer 3

There's plenty of self-taught musicians! The first one I know that comes to mind is Kuha'o Case, who is a self-taught and blind pianist.



Although if you want to teach yourself and instrument, learning how to read sheet music is important. Not everything can be learnt by ear. And reading sheet music is actually very easy.

Answer 4

One of the greatest musicians of the 20th century who could not read music and was self taught was the jazz cornetist and pianist Bix Beiderbecke. Bix tried to take lessons from a symphonic trumpeter, but he told Bix he couldn't teach him anything because he was creating his own music outside the confines of printed music. As a composer, Bix had an arranger Bill Challis write down his compositions, such as In a Mist on the piano. Bix was a genius who could play anything 50 different ways and play back what he heard.



A bigger question is teaching yourself music theory. Rimsky-Korsakoff was a Russian composer who lacked knowledge of basic music theory. He took courses in music theory and became an expert in music theory, and was even a professor of music; however, it was a double edged sword. Knowing the music theory from an analytical standpoint hurt his intuitive artistry and musical inspiration. It took him a long time to regain his intiutive prowess after having mastered theory analytically.



The same principle might apply to teaching yourself music from the basics of playing an instrument. Not reading music, or learning music intuitively first, allows you the freedom to find your own unique muse or inner artistic creative voice. Learning music analytically from notes on a page could kill or dampen that creativity. However, to sustain yourself musically, and be a confident composer and player long-term, I think eventually you'd need to learn music from an analytical standpoint as well, and for that you'd need a teacher or outside help.

Answer 5

Vangelis is hardly a good example - can he play anything except his own muzak? I don't think so.

I know people who claim to have taught themselves and can't read music. Their ages range from 30 - 60, and not one of them is of the same standard as a ten-year-old pianist with a teacher.



For Denise's information: Mozart was taught by his father, Leopold Mozart.

Answer 6

Learning theory only hampers your creativity if you let it hamper your creativity, period.



For example, say that you came up with a riff that is almost really good, but something about it is just a little too jarring. If you don't have much theory knowledge, you have to just scrap the entire lick and start over again. When you do have theory knowledge, you can analyze what you're playing figure out what part of it isn't paradigmatic to the style you're writing in, and then you can tweak it to be a bit more paradigmatic. Bam, instead of trashing a promising lick and starting over, you have a sweet lick. All of this being possible because you have knowledge of theory.



In my opinion, a big part of this crusade against theory is based on a misunderstanding about what theory is. Theory isn't a murky, emotionless way of thinking about music, music theory is music. Do you know what a C major chord is? That's just as much theory as a discussion about the merits of nonfunctional harmony in tonal composition is.



I will say that there are a few scenarios where knowing a lot of the theory vocabulary is not useful (ie. pop singer), but even then you're going to have to know the actual theory regardless.



As for self taught musicians, it depends on how they are teaching themselves and who their teacher would be. A pianist is going to learn a lot more about piano from trying to emulate Glenn Gould's technique than taking lessons from a two-three finger piano player, but taking lessons from a concert pianist is better than both.

Answer 7

First of all, I would like to point out--AGAIN--that a musician who CAN read sheet music can ALSO play by ear. If anything, because they have a background in music theory, it's easier for them to know without a lot of trial and error what intervals, chord progressions, etc to play in the first place.



Now about "entirely self-taught". Not unless you were grew up on a deserted island as a child surrounded by musical instruments and no radio, television, cd or dvds, mp3 players, etc. Nothing to actually expose you to other people that you can either copy or other musicians who can show you some of the techniques they use to play. So if you "taught yourself" by reading instruction books or watching videos on Youtube, then you are getting basic instruction from somewhere even if the source might be more than a bit dodgy.



As for Vangelis, his parents sent him to a special music school when he was six. He didn't LIKE to read music...doesn't mean they didn't teach him even if he preferred not to bother with it. There are non-traditional learners. On the other hand, you can't point to someone like Vangelis or Paul McCartney (other musician frequently sited for not being able to read music--though there are indications he can more than he lets on having taken piano lessons as an adult) and call them "typical". Typical are people who often have no clue how poorly they play because their teacher (themselves) never pointed out problems with their playing. They often are unable to play with other musicians--sometimes because they only know "their" version of a piece and can't play in any other key or truly improvise because they really don't play by ear as well as they think they do. I can't tell you how frustrating and downright infuriating it is when as a vocal soloist, my "accompanist" can't read my music and I have to sing whatever the heck he can play in whatever fricking key he can play it in! The people who have engaged this fraud usually have no idea that this person can't play because they are amazed that he can play songs that are familiar (and usually very easy without any music.



Another problem with the lack of formal training, especially if you intend to compose music, is that you must rely on others to write it down for you. This includes someone else's collaboration in order to write full orchestrations, choral arrangements, etc. because you CAN'T.



John Williams, another movie soundtrack composer, can do his own orchestrations because he went to a variety of schools (including Juilliard) to study music.



If you're happy with what you've accomplished, then you don't need to take lessons.



However, don't be smug about what you can do because again--any well-trained musician can do what you do--only better.



And for all those that say things like music theory and actually being able read and write musical notes hamper creativity. What?! I don't think imagination can be taught, but it isn't something that is exclusive to the "self taught". It's like saying that you can't write poetry because someone taught you the alphabet.

Answer 8

I taught myself piano. I was always amazed with it and one day I just sat down on a piano and I sucked at it, but I could pick out melodies.



Pretty soon I begged my parents for a piano, and my neighbors just happened to be getting rid of theirs, so my parents got it. My house didn't have room so we put it in our old cluttered shed and I'd sit down there for hours just tickling ivories.



Eventually I just got really good at playing things by ear. I could mimic sounds I heard and make them my own and expand and today I have developed my own style of music and I'm pretty good. I play for funerals often and sometimes for other occasions. I was already learning well by ear, but I tried sheet music and never really understood it. It just made playing by ear more difficult for me. So yes they exist.

Answer 9

When comparing piano lessons online, look for what makes a program unique. It may look like all methods are the same, especially when you don’t know exactly what you’re looking for. The following information is going to be very valuable to your success in choosing a robust learning program. Read here https://tr.im/howtoplaypiano

Answer 10

in reply to caroline:



i think it really depends on style and type of lesson, and desire to learn. If you want to persue classical music playing, one ought to really have musical lessons, however for jazz and rock etc, ALL the best and biggest are self taught: barbara streisand, madonna, led zeppelin, queen, beatles, presley, m jackson, aerosmith, acdc, m carey, w houston, eagles, were all self taught, the police, django reindhardt, miles davies, david brubeck, louis armstrong, bob dylan, j hendrix, eddie van halen, john bonham, even spinal tap....they were all self taught



start, teaching popular music and the creativilty goes out of it, it becomes a business for music colleges.

Answer 11

Yup, Me. Totally self taught at Piano. I'm working on More challenging pieces without any help. I just sit at the piano and let my fingers fly. It helps to be a kinesthetic learner.

Answer 12

Frank Zappa, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart for two, and there are many many more.

For some, all education does is teach you what you can't do.