followed tags: 5
followed domains: 1
badges given: 0 of 0
member for: 1340 days
Uh, yeah? Why would you do that to yourself? It's like saying "I tried cutting out the Big Four macronutrients from my diet, and I got hungry".
I learned piano as a kid, and then taught myself guitar as a teenager, so by the time I picked up a guitar I had already been sight reading on piano for 5+ years, and additionally I had very little access to guitar tabs at the time because this was before my family had internet access, so a lot of the material I learned early on was from piano-centric sources, typically sheet music, occasionally with some guitar chord charts thrown in.
So if the problem is that too many guitarists are exposed to tabs first and then are too lazy to learn to read sheet music, I should be immune to it. I knew how to read sheet music before I ever touched a guitar, and from the start I was attempting to learn guitar by reading sheet music on it.
Yet to this day, I find tabs far quicker and more intuitive to read than sheet music, when playing guitar. Even if I use a score that has both sheet music and tabs side-by-side, I find myself primarily relying on the tabs, and only glancing at the sheet music if I need a clarification on timing.
Now I definitely agree with you that it's possible for a guitarist to learn to read sheet music quite well, but it takes a lot of work, far more so than what it takes for a pianist to learn it, and it's because of the issue mentioned in the article: sheet music notation maps nicely to the keyboard, but not the fretboard. That's why there are plenty of mediocre, amateur pianists out there who can sight read competently, and many excellent, sometimes even professional guitarists who struggle with it.
The reason guitarists use tabs is because of the nature of the instrument, not the nature of the guitarists.
If I'm not mistaken, all those considerations are taken into account when they calculate caloric information on labels. If the package says 100 kcal, that means that eating it will give your body 100 kcal to burn for fuel, build into muscle or store as fat. Obviously if you did something like convert the matter into energy direct by means of nuclear fusion you'd get a hell of a lot more than 100 kcal out of it, but the label is meant to be understood as the amount of net energy the average human body can extraxt from the product.
In terms of strictly weight gain and weight loss, a calorie is a calorie. In terms of general nutrition there are other considerations (which basically boil down to: eat lots of vegetables and lean sources of protein, and get your carbs from foods that are high in fiber), but the number on the scale will directly correspond to the number on the nutritional information.