Does the ability of reading and writing music on staff help with learning music fundamentals?

Question

As I see it, notation on sheet music is a tool for translating musical ideas into something that can be read/interpreted by others and played back, given they understand the same set of rules. I assume also that the way one approaches to music or the instrument played makes thinking about music itself very different. So when it's time to write or create some music, maybe someone trained to see through the lenses of musical notation would come up with some sort of "patterns" or ideas that another person more used to digital creation would have different. It's like if the tool was shaping the craft somehow. Some time ago I've came across a bass workshop by Victor Wooten that made me think about music in a different way. He explains music as made of 10 elements (notes, rhythm, space, dynamics, articulation...). He believes that all of these are equally important to make music, not even good or bad music, simply music, because you can find them in every melody or song. Introduction made, now the question. On my personal journey to learn music I've tried guitar playing with no attention to music theory and after that some time in an music school. I'm not reluctant to theory, in fact I like it, but what I fail to see it's the point of making the staff the center of my learning when I don't want to be a classical nor professional interpreter. I want to understand music, its elements and details to be able to express myself with no more limitations than my abilities. Beyond some basic knowledge of notation that certainly is good to have, is there any fundamental element that is better learned using music written on a staff? I'm thinking in rhythm but not sure.

Answer 1

There are some concepts of music theory that notation simply lends itself better to learning. Some examples:

1. step-wise/diatonic motion
2. tertian harmony
3. intervallic relationships
4. form
5. dynamics
6. stylistic direction

Those are mostly pitch-related. Rhythm is best remembered when notation is used. I mean that in the most typical case I see in my own life which involves rehearsing one set of music and the same day performing a different set with a different group of people... I need notes! I can't remember all of that!

I have also found that notation (and able readers) expedites the learning process in a group setting, and drastically increases the probability of a successful learning experience and/or performance.

Answer 2

I honestly believe that there is nothing essential about reading, notation, or theory for the creation of, understanding of, or interpretation of great music.

If you do know how to read and the theory, you will see (unlock?) new patterns and ideas you may not have access to otherwise. You will be able to more quickly learn and dive deep into some music that otherwise could be very very challenging. That being said, many people out there are expert music readers but are they musicians? Can they really hear what's happening? Can they interpret and phrase and experience / create feelings? What's more important? What of those things, is music!?

Music is much older than notation and some music out there is still passed down entirely aurally (much of it, very rhythmic)

I have had the pleasure to work with Victor Wooten (and also came across his book The Music Lesson as a young teenager!) and can I imagine he would certainly emphasis the hearing and expressing over the theoretical and technical. Yet he himself is a master of the 2nd pair! So in the end, I really think it is all worthwhile.