Well, Bill Gates did not complete his University study.  That doesn't means that we don't study hard for university education.  There are many good players who read as well there are many who don't.  But unfortunately most of us who are not in the same class with these greats who don't read.

 Larry Adler, in his autobiography, mentioned  that he had played the Romance for Harmonica (which was written specially for him) badly during his premiere performance because he can't read notes and he remember the piece by ears.  That poor performance has prompted him to learn note reading seriouly and he did read notes in the later years of his life.

 There are many advantages if one could read music note especially for the average player (this writter included).  One that immediately come to mind is it widen your repetoire(???).

 After all said and done, do remember that music making involved more than just notes reading.  Even one is a good reader, one would still need to listen and feel the music and experience the relationship between notes.  That explained why composers still compose music by having instrument beside them. Composer can very well write music without them (Beethoven wrote his 9th symphony after he is blind).  After all, music is meant to be listened.

When I started playing, I didn't know or care much about music notation; I used my ears and played from my good musical memory, of which I don't know if it is a native talent or a trained skill - maybe a combination of both. This brought me many advantages in my work as a jazz musician; indeed, I have an ear for the relationship of notes, the intervals, even though I still can't express it in music-theoretical terms (a "fifth" or "augmented sixth") without thinking about it. Before I think it, I hear it in my mind, I feel it, I play it. And in 95 %, I know where I can find the notes (which I hear in my mind) on the instrument. It's almost like singing or whistling a tune. That's an ideal basis for improvisation.

 On the other hand, I always found myself a bit handicapped with my ignorance of music notation, because when I seriously started to play with bands, I often couldn't communicate my musical ideas to my fellow-musicians, or understand what they meant when they talked about music. I also started to compose own music, so I had to use the notation system, and the system of chord symbols (my guitar-playing helped me a lot in that field) for my co-musicians. In early days, I did it a bit like the famous American composer Irving Berlin: He simply whistled his compositions in the ear of an assistant who then wrote down the score. I played the tunes into a cassette tape recorder to document my ideas. Then, when I had time enough, I wrote them down, note by note, which needed a lot of time. (Today I use a computer software, so writing down music is much faster now!)

 When sound studios began to ask me to play (simple) lines in mostly easy-listening music (German folk and pop songs), they usually faxed me the notation charts 1-2 days before I came in the studio (so I had time to prepare...), but sometimes they spontaneously had to change something in the studio, or even handed me another song as well. So I was happy that I could read at least the simple stuff at first or second sight. Being a member of a church choir (singing in the bass section) also improved my reading skills a lot. The bass voices usually don't sing the simple theme melodies as the soprano, so reading was more important there than singing what I heard...

 I still regret that my reading skills are not up to the standard I would like them to be.

So I have to agree with you, that learning to read and write music is worth the effort, IF the ears are able to listen, and the soul is able to feel the music as well.

 Currently, I play in an instrumental group (www.chantal.de); they first hired me for their successful program "Beatles Strictly Instrumental", but now I also play Cat Stevens' "Lady D'Arbanville", CCR's "Who'll Stop the Rain", or the Scotish traditional folk song "Loch Lomond" with them. The bandleader's wife is a classically trained concert harp (not "harmonica-harp") and guitar player. She can read perfectly from music sheets, but she is often so helpless and inflexible when we play pop songs, especially with a slow timing in a "rubato"-part; she is only focussing on her notation sheets, but she can't feel or react on the music going on around her. Even if it's all right what she plays, it sounds awfully wrong in the musical context of the band. Most of what happens in music cannot be written down in the notation.

 And many great musicians who are blind can't read music at all: Stevie Wonder, George Shearing, Ray Charles. Last october I heard Toots Thielemans play a concert with a blind pianist, Bert van der Brink. Both of them didn't have music sheets in front of them, they just listened to each other and played so sensitively together.

 So I would agree with you: Music is meant to be listened - but being able to read, too, also brings you advantages. 

Jens, Owen,

 You guys could not have said better.  I think (stand to be corrected) the main problem with classical music player is they generally paid too much attention to notes readings.  I know because I am one of them.  Who wouldn't be if they have to sit for 8 stages of music theory examination and that is only considered as preliminary just for them to advance their musical learning.  Sigh, I have not even finished the 8 stages and I already have the same problem with them.  Hey, Leonard Bernstein has said that classical music is "exact music".  So, you don't play what is not written on the music sheet.

 In this respect, I would like to share my daugther Yamaha music course experience here for the benefits of all.  When her teacher teaches a new song, she will not ask the students to read the music sheets but to listen to the song and follow the rhythm by ear and try to feel them.  Rhythmic actions are encouraged.  The teacher will only refer to the music sheet when she need to convey certain comments ie the notes are used for communication (right on spot! Jens) or my daugther will refer to the music sheet when she forgot the lyrics.  Therefore, music theory is still part of my daugther lesson as it is a tool for the teacher to explain the various elements of the song to her.  How I wish otherwise.  Imagine asking a 6-year old girl to sit down quitely and listem for 15 minutes to the fundamentals of music.  Over in Malaysia, there appear to have a general consensus among the music teachers that Yamaha students are better than those students under the London Royal School of Music which only emphasise on instrument playing.

 Jazz is not my main favourite music although I have tried very hard to like it.  I believed jazz is at the extreme of the other end where there are not much music notes (as with other pop music) involved and the musician are expeceted to improvise on the main theme or whatever given.  I have once looked at the jazz music sheet for Begin the Beguine and it is only half page for the lead part.  This is definitely not a piece for classical musician.

 But you can't really blame the musician that can't play the pop/jazz piece as they are not trainned in that area.  There always musician who are all rounded and there are not.  Even in classical music, we are suppose to feel the rhythm of the music as well but the approach for classical music would be difference from that of jazz/pop music.  Always remember that Bach was a great improvisor at his time but the only difference is he wrote all his improvisation in notes.  So, the main challenge for classical musicican is to present those notes in a "touchy" way and that is not easy.

 After the long winded post, I guess the conclusion would be for all music or performers to be great, it has to be able to touch the listener heart and soul.  You will not be able to do it if your performance itself is not from your own heart/soul.  So, musical feels, be in any type of music, is the utmost important elements and not music theory.  The instrument, technical capability, music theory, amplification and etc are means to acheive that end and the priority among these depend on individual.  As with all things, there always no harm to know more because it helps.  As for music theory, hmmm, I still strongly hold to my view as said in previous post.

 Got to go now and sorry for the long post.