[NSP] Re: ear-learners vs note-learners
Richard Hensold wrote: notation, and will tend to visualize musical notes as taking up precise, blocky chunks of time. Such a person is often unable to hear the rhythmic subtleties that give life/bounce or lift/drive to the music. Hi Dick, I like to think I'm quite sensitive to the subtleties of music, but I have a very very poor memory - it's a case of 'new tune in, old tune out' for me when I learn by ear :( -- Anita Evans To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: ear-learners vs note-learners
Richard Hensold wrote: This is a very interesting topic, but the thread that followed AR's post seemed to miss the point a bit. It's becoming an accepted notion that ear-learners (people who started out playing music entirely by ear, and only started reading music years later, if at all) think about/experience/play music in a fundamentally different way than note-learners (people who were taught to read music concurrently with being taught their instruments), Can note-learners learn to play like ear-players? I think so, but I'm still working on what methods work best. I tend to analyze everything and do lots of directed listening, and while this is very good at helping to hear new things, it's sort of counter-intuitive to think that analyzing something will help you eventually arrive at a more intuitively-musical way of playing. Comments, anyone? A very important issue particularly for organisers of playing groups. I run a small monthly piping session- most of the players are what Dick describes as 'note-learners' but I was an ear-learner and learned to read music later. If a new piece of sheet music is passed around the note-learners can generally play it immediately, possibly in a mechanical sort of way but I struggle badly until I have heard it several times, by which time the note-learners are ready for something else. I need to know the shape of the tune by hearing it, not just from the dots. If I play to the group, I interpret the tune as I see fit and I have had the response 'but you're not playing what's written'. In a more formal workshop I will always teach at least one tune by ear but the relief is obvious when the dots come out! There is a significant gulf here and the trick is to try not to let it spoil the fun whichever angle you come from. Group playing is of course a bit of a special case since everybody has to keep together and with more than about three or four players I think it's often not really very musical. This is fine when playing in private, as long as everybody is aware of the limitations, but if there is an audience then there is a problem. One odd personal point is that over recent years I have become more reliant on the dots and less able to memorise a new tune, which I regret, and I think this is due to too much music reading. Cheers Richard -- Richard Evans To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: ear-learners vs note-learners
I can relate to this. I play by ear and, if using dots, use them as a guide where the ear fails a little (oh, it's THAT note) and learn tunes from what I am playing rather than what's on the page. Even at 59, I am pleased to say that, eventually, once the tune is in their, it still stays. The odd thing is that if I'm unsure of a tune and then have to go back to the dots, they don't make sense until I hear myself playing a snippet I recognise and then it all comes back. I have tried to learn the dots for years but still can't get all that's contained in them - more just the actual notes rather than the phrasing etc until I can hear someone else playing the tune and then it falls into place. Dot illiteracy, I suppose. :( Colin Hill - Original Message - From: Richard Evans rich...@evansweb.co.uk Cc: nsp@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 10:17 AM Subject: [NSP] Re: ear-learners vs note-learners Richard Hensold wrote: This is a very interesting topic, but the thread that followed AR's post seemed to miss the point a bit. It's becoming an accepted notion that ear-learners (people who started out playing music entirely by ear, and only started reading music years later, if at all) think about/experience/play music in a fundamentally different way than note-learners (people who were taught to read music concurrently with being taught their instruments), Can note-learners learn to play like ear-players? I think so, but I'm still working on what methods work best. I tend to analyze everything and do lots of directed listening, and while this is very good at helping to hear new things, it's sort of counter-intuitive to think that analyzing something will help you eventually arrive at a more intuitively-musical way of playing. Comments, anyone? A very important issue particularly for organisers of playing groups. I run a small monthly piping session- most of the players are what Dick describes as 'note-learners' but I was an ear-learner and learned to read music later. If a new piece of sheet music is passed around the note-learners can generally play it immediately, possibly in a mechanical sort of way but I struggle badly until I have heard it several times, by which time the note-learners are ready for something else. I need to know the shape of the tune by hearing it, not just from the dots. If I play to the group, I interpret the tune as I see fit and I have had the response 'but you're not playing what's written'. In a more formal workshop I will always teach at least one tune by ear but the relief is obvious when the dots come out! There is a significant gulf here and the trick is to try not to let it spoil the fun whichever angle you come from. Group playing is of course a bit of a special case since everybody has to keep together and with more than about three or four players I think it's often not really very musical. This is fine when playing in private, as long as everybody is aware of the limitations, but if there is an audience then there is a problem. One odd personal point is that over recent years I have become more reliant on the dots and less able to memorise a new tune, which I regret, and I think this is due to too much music reading. Cheers Richard -- Richard Evans To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: ear-learners vs note-learners
I always found that getting the group to put the instruments down, and sing the tune, as best the voice allows, until it's internalised; and only then encouraging people to play it with the same feel as they sang it, works better than some ways of ear teaching, and tends to get more spirit into it. Sometimes you need to sing it at a different pitch, just to be able to reach it, which is not ideal, but still helps. Richard Y Richard Hensold wrote: So, many teachers (such as Margaret) try to counter this by teaching tunes by ear in workshops. It's a good idea, but does it work? In other words, does it actually teach people to hear the subtleties they've learned to miss over the years? This is an honest question, and I certainly invite comment, but I'll start by doubting that it does work. I think once you've learned to hear music a certain way, the simple intuitive approach will no longer work. Your ears can certainly be retrained, but you've developed hearing habits of hearing that must be actively broken. Can note-learners learn to play like ear-players? I think so, but I'm still working on what methods work best. I tend to analyze everything and do lots of directed listening, and while this is very good at helping to hear new things, it's sort of counter-intuitive to think that analyzing something will help you eventually arrive at a more intuitively-musical way of playing. Comments, anyone? To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
