To the last: My first taught experience was a 2nd grade teacher having us sing while she pointed to a solfege board. I internalized the major scale and natural minor scale, which in that system started on La. At age 8 I was given a little organ, and a book for adult learners - it was very diatonic (so same system) and for the most part in C major and A minor. I associated the notation with the aural patterns I'd learned. Thus a diagonal set of notes going line-space-line-space etc. described a scale, and "sounded like" a major scale. I "heard" that major scale from the page, and then played on the organ what I heard from the page. This "hearing" was in relative pitch, but I also knew where to find Do (usually C, or F, or G).

Later I was given a piano and a bit of music, especially a set of sonatinas - above all Clementi who is predictable, but all the music was pretty well diatonic. I stayed in my solfege world, and I kept hearing the music off the page. I thought everyone read music this way. As an adult I brought a song I loved to my violin teacher, and I didn't know why he brought it to the piano to find out how it sounded. Because I "heard it from the page".

I can also get confused by visual symmetry; what makes dyslexics confuse p b q d and cat vs tac but learned that later. I played in a tactile way, feeling for where the sound was.. When I first tried to look at my hands for technique I got confused by the symmetry of the keys and had to look away. So this thing people have, just wasn't there.

Otoh, there are people who can hear from the page in a way I can't. Chords and chord qualities aren't there much. I know someone who looks at a page and says "This part doesn't sound good." But that person also feels in their fingers what they see on the page.

This is OT to the topic, but goes to hearing and reading maybe.

twocats By finger memory, I don't mean that I see my fingers in my mind, but that my fingers learn the patterns of the music and are able to play easily and automatically (as one does once the music is "learned").

I might have that. (?)

    This discussion is getting quite interesting, @twocats and @keystring !!

    So, I think I do have finger awareness.... like, I can see the keyboard in my mind, and my fingers....

    I think I am very visual and very text-based... I read Japanese (character writing) and I am a pretty fast reader in Japanese even though it's my second language. And I learned how to read in Japanese before I started playing piano (I started learning piano after I moved to Japan)....

    Anyway, I think as a student, and now as an academic, and in my hobby life as a pianist, I am very visual in terms of how I learn, how I remember... for example, if I read a physical book, I can remember where in the book a particular word was. IOW, was it on the left or right side page, how far down the page, how far into the book, that kind of thing... That's sort of visual, sort of spatial I guess...

    So I think I have a very developed "mind's eye" and I am very good at getting information from visual codes, including English, Japanese, and musical notation (I also used to sign ASL and speak and read Korean, though I've mostly forgotten both)

    But I don't have a good "mind's ear." When I played guitar, I could tune my guitar (using a tuner though) and I used to sing a lot.... IOW, I have a good enough sense of relative pitch. But I can't sightsing, and I don't "hear" music just from looking at a score....

    Just rambling now though... 🙂

      Oh and to the earlier point, I don't "hear" when I read written language, I know that my reading is much faster than it would be if I was hearing spoken word in my head....

      ShiroKuro So, I think I do have finger awareness.... like, I can see the keyboard in my mind, and my fingers....

      Interesting, I only see my fingers in my mind through the process of memorization (basically remembering my finger placement on the keyboard)!

      When I was younger, I think my memorization process was remembering what my fingers looked like on the piano combined with finger memory, which would autopilot once I started. I think my current attempt will add in conscious learning of the notes on top of that.

        I'm working on memorizing the first two lines of Chopin Ballade 2 (which are easy!) and I have never studied an easy section so hard in my life. Strangely enough, I find myself doing chord analysis! Not just figuring out the chord but also how it relates to the tonic. I'm not sure if it'll help, but I find myself doing it.

        I'm definitely memorizing how my hands look as well as getting it into my finger memory. When trying to play back from memory I sometimes close my eyes. This part is tricky to memorize because Chopin is not consistent, most of the times the right and left hand are each playing two notes but sometimes it's one or three. So hands separately at times definitely helps to lock in what's actually going on.

        I think it's getting a little easier as I work on it. My brain was probably like "what the heck are you doing?!" but hopefully it continues to get easier and I think small, manageable chunks is key! Also I think for me, I need to learn the piece to a decent level before starting to memorize. I don't think I want to do both at the same time.

          thepianoplayer416 An ear training exercise from Muso Academy in Australia. Students would listen to a phrase played by a teacher and repeat it.... Don’t know if people with perfect pitch are also good at remembering music.

          Back before I dropped out of music school, they would do this sort of exercise in aural skills (ear training) class! Perfect pitch certainly helps (not sure what part of the video challenge was supposed to be "crazy"), but they often threw in a twist to make it harder for us: They would say e.g. "I am starting on C#" but then actually start playing on C. People with relative pitch were fine, but I would have to either transpose in my head on the fly ("ok that's a C, up half a step, write C# on the staff"), or occasionally I was lucky enough to brainwash my perfect pitch into believing the C was actually a C# (kind of like unfocusing your eyes deliberately but with your brain lol).

          "You're a smart kid. But your playing is terribly dull."

              TheBoringPianist Perfect pitch certainly helps

              Whoa, you have perfect pitch? I'm guessing it helps with memorization 🙂

                I (not very solidly) memorized the entire first A section, which was a lot more than I had intended! I did the work in 9 separate chunks (3 of them are pretty much the same, so freebies!). I plan to do as close to Dr. Molly's practice schedule as possible since my friend swears that it changed his life.

                Since this section is very easy to read, I think really internalizing the notes in minute detail is making this a part of me, since I never had to pay attention to the notes before! It's been a long time since I've been able to play with my eyes closed and just let the music happen. I think maybe I should also try to memorize the sections of the Bach that are giving me trouble.

                It is a lot of work but I think worthwhile for this Chopin at least.

                  twocats I have never studied an easy section so hard in my life.

                  😆 oh my gosh, I’ve met pieces like that! (Probably not as hard as the Ballade, but you know…)

                  twocats I'm definitely memorizing how my hands look as well as getting it into my finger memory. When trying to play back from memory I sometimes close my eyes. This part is tricky to memorize because Chopin is not consistent, most of the times the right and left hand are each playing two notes but sometimes it's one or three. So hands separately at times definitely helps to lock in what's actually going on.

                  Did you take some of these ideas from the Greg N. video?

                  twocats I need to learn the piece to a decent level before starting to memorize. I don't think I want to do both at the same time.

                  Yes, this is what I was thinking while watching that video, just how hard it would be to learn and memorize at the same time…. But the funny thing is, for people who habitually memorize, even beginners, that’s probably what they’re doing.

                  I have been playing piano for a long time, but this is the most time I’ve spent thinking about memorization vs. reading… very interesting!

                          twocats I think maybe I should also try to memorize the sections of the Bach that are giving me trouble.

                          Definitely!

                          Obviously, my pieces are not as challenging as yours, but since you started this thread, this has been the biggest benefit for me— IOW just making it a point to memorize small sections that give me trouble, instead of reading only. And I’m not even necessarily succeeding in memorizing those parts, it’s more just the things I’m doing in attempting to memorize are helping me in unexpected ways….

                            ShiroKuro Yes, this is what I was thinking while watching that video, just how hard it would be to learn and memorize at the same time…. But the funny thing is, for people who habitually memorize, even beginners, that’s probably what they’re doing.

                            That's what I do indeed. But what happens when I do that, is that at some point halfway I keep practicing/playing/perfecting the part I already learned, because it's never good enough, but even more because it's more fun than learning and memorizing the other half of the piece, so I think, I'll do that tomorrow. And tomorrow I think, well maybe not now, maybe I'm a bit too tired for it now. Tomorrow is better.

                              Sgisela I’ve got a long reply; hopefully it’s useful. ......

                              I'm quoting this just in order to be able to refer back to this post. There are many useful ideas in it. I could call it a "reference post" if there is such a thing.
                              I'd also say it includes some variants of what the pianist video gives, but has quite a few more elements.

                                @keystring thank you for quoting @Sgisela because I had read that post originally (a week ago?) but now, after all this discussion, my own thinking etc., returning to Sgisela's ideas is a great reminder!

                                Esp this:

                                Sgisela He had some very concrete recommendations for approaching memorization. 1. Work on small chunks — maybe a few measures. 2. Start with the music, then try to play from memory, then go back to the music and read through the phrase. Continue this (alternating between memory and the music) until every note in the small section is memorized. Then expand the section or work on the next section, but always alternate between reading the sheet music and memorization (I think this will actually help to not have the problem of feeling that you can’t continue to work both from the sheet music and from memory, which others have described). 3. There are several aspects to memory, and each is important. They include a. Visual memory — both the visual memory of the notes on the score and the visual memory of the appearance of the phrase on the keyboard (what does it look like your hands are doing?) b. Kinetic memory — how are you moving between notes/chords? C. Aural memory - how the phrase sounds; my notes from the lesson say “hear the ‘song’ of the phrase,” d. Conceptual memory - what is the structure of the music? Chord progression, etc. my lesson notes are, “ it is Impossible to memorize without understanding a phrase” and “Transitions can be perilous; it is important to understand these.” And finally e. Technical memory. Lesson notes: “technical failures often causes memory slips.” Make sure you are technically secure. As you memorize a section, you need to pay attention to each of these things and memorize each of these aspects.

                                I added bold to make those categories pop out... I feel like I want to print out a list with just those categories! For one thing, it really makes it easy for me to look through those elements and target the ones I'm better at, and the ones I'm worse at.

                                Re this:

                                The recommendation was also that if you are planning to work on memorizing a piece in its entirety, it is beneficial to do so from the beginning so that you incorporate all aspects of memorization before the purely kinetic memory sets it (and you will be over-reliant on ‘muscle memory’). He also recommended memorizing hands together as much as possible.

                                This also makes a lot of sense to me... despite what I said about it being difficult to think about learning how to play at the same time as learning the piece. I am sure that in my own playing, by the time I've learned the piece, my "memory" of the music is based on a lot of muscle memory and also on cues from the score, and so it surely must be harder at that point to engage those other aspects of memory.

                                Lastly, it seems clear that even when we don't plan on memorizing a whole piece, using selective memorization (of a tricky passage, of a part where mistakes frequently crop up etc.) is a key technique that us "habitual readers" can really benefit from.

                                I'm super excited to apply these ideas to my recital pieces and also to the "hard piece" I started with all the four-note chords I keep playing wrong! 😅

                                  twocats I'm not going to do chord analysis in the sense that my friend is doing-- as in "what's happening relative to the key". His chord analysis layer in forScore showed I, IV, VI, etc. Since he majored in piano performance he says all that is second nature to him, but that's like adding a non-trivial math step to me. But I can recognize a simple chord on its own without much effort, as in "that's an E major chord".

                                  On the I IV V type of analysis. This is helpful if your music is rather diatonic. Like IV are the 4th, 6th, 8th note of a major scale in that key - in a minor key you could have IVm (or iv). But what if the music uses notes and chords not in that key (so, not diatonic)? Although very often we do have these, maybe with others interspersed: I (stuff, stuff) IV (other stuff) V - kind of like a rough framework of the general path of the music.

                                  But then, even if your music does have that kind of structure, you have to already know them - you must be able to recognize what key the music is in (at that moment) and be able to recognize those principle chords.

                                  I just finished working on a piece my teacher wrote to make the pattern of the "Tristan chord" (sequence) more apparent to students; kept "simple". It's an A B A' B' type pattern where all the A's are block chords, all the B's are like broken chords. There is a level of memorization just knowing this first fact. But the 2nd thing is that it is not diatonic - deliberately. the I IV V doesn't happen except maybe somewhat at the very end.

                                  I did, however, memorize the pattern in the A sections, and that did help me. There are different kinds of patterns in music, which is why I thought of this little piece.

                                  This isn't polished. I put it together shortly after getting the notation, but it might give an idea. I'm thinking of other types of patterns.

                                  https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/q3duahrhe91p8mo6sd63p/25.03.24a-Chr-Tristan-Pastels.mp3?rlkey=zvhr4oxlu1wmg244jtjxs8wep&dl=0

                                  The pattern starts: Em7b5 (half diminished), E7b5, Eb7b5, Eb7 ...... new sequence: Gm7b5, G7b5, F#7b5, F#7 ... new sequence Bbm7b5.... etc.
                                  Or the pattern is: half diminished chord (Em7b5), raise the 3rd so G to G# for the E7b5, do that same chord a semitone lower, turn it into a straight Dom7 (E7) by raising the 5th ..... do not resolve E7 normally (would be to an A) - instead start the whole cycle again starting a major 3rd higher.

                                  This is the pattern I memorized. It's type of chord with one or two notes sliding over to form a different type of chord, and knowing that pattern. It would be a short step to memorizing the whole thing. The first Chopin I ever did, the Am Prelude, I learned how one chord note slides down to form the next chord note for much of it, and that helped me play the piece. I'd have memorized it more easily had I planned to do that.

                                  I wrote yesterday about my beginnings, where mostly I simply had that book of sonatinas. They were very formulaic: esp. the Clementis. I was predicting what would come next. At that point I picked up patterns without knowing the names of anything, like a child learns to speak grammatically, but might end up saying "I knowed" instead of "I knew".

                                      ShiroKuro I think you are right that there's a close connection between sight reading and what you call read- playing which is commonly called just reading. They're both related to one's ability to read notes with sight reading just being the first time. It would be very rare for a person to be a good reader but a lousy sight reader or vice versa. And I think it's also almost universally true that the more one plays a piece the less one is very closely following the score because the piece becomes semi memorized so following the score very closely becomes less necessary since one starts using aural memory and finger memory.

                                          ShiroKuro Did you take some of these ideas from the Greg N. video?

                                          I think I wouldn't have made it a point to do hands separately if it wasn't for him. Memorizing hands separately for the easy part just doesn't make sense, but it does (for me) to at least play it through a couple of times HS to see exactly what's going on since Chopin likes to change things up.

                                          twocats Actually I think having the score removes that cognitive burden for me! I literally don't have to think about a piece that's not difficult to read

                                          Having gone through the process of memorizing last night I think "reading the score" every time I play does indeed put a small cognitive burden on me. I think it can take a very long time to reach the "autopilot" stage where I know the piece so well that it just happens. Greg N. mentioned that it helps to "forget and relearn" and there's one piano-violin sonata where I came back to it after years away and I think I really internalized it the second time around. I can just pick it up and play it competently with someone even after not playing it for a couple of years.

                                          I think this kind of "deep learning" to memorize really accelerates the process of internalizing the piece, especially if I'm studying the phrases and trying to reach the point of being able to recall exactly what notes a phrase starts on without the context of the one before. (Years ago I remember watching a video where a pianist talked about doing this and I was like "ugh that sounds like way too much work, glad I'm not a conservatory student" 😆)

                                          keystring On the I IV V type of analysis. This is helpful if your music is rather diatonic. Like IV are the 4th, 6th, 8th note of a major scale in that key - in a minor key you could have IVm (or iv). But what if the music uses notes and chords not in that key (so, not diatonic)?

                                          I'm doing some analysis but it's just extra info, I'm not writing anything down or doing it for everything. I think this process may help me to remember what's happening at the beginning of the next phrase though. If it's not diatonic then I won't associate a chord with it. Honestly I'm very surprised that I'm doing any analysis at all!

                                                To me, the argument for memorizing from the start make the most sense. But you wouldn't want to do this with every piece or your reading skills will suffer. If you're only memorizing an occasional piece, problem solved.

                                                It would be an interesting experiment to take two similar pieces (you obviously couldn't use the same piece) and memorize one from the very beginning and the other only after you'd 'learned' from the score, and see which approach worked best for you.

                                                  keystring On the I IV V type of analysis. This is helpful if your music is rather diatonic. Like IV are the 4th, 6th, 8th note of a major scale in that key - in a minor key you could have IVm (or iv). But what if the music uses notes and chords not in that key (so, not diatonic)? Although very often we do have these, maybe with others interspersed: I (stuff, stuff) IV (other stuff) V - kind of like a rough framework of the general path of the music.

                                                  But then, even if your music does have that kind of structure, you have to already know them - you must be able to recognize what key the music is in (at that moment) and be able to recognize those principle chords.

                                                  I think you have to know Roman numeral analysis beyond I through V7. Being able to recognize secondary dominants, for example, will help explain notes not in the key signature.

                                                  keystring The pattern starts: Em7b5 (half diminished), E7b5, Eb7b5, Eb7 ...... new sequence: Gm7b5, G7b5, F#7b5, F#7 ... new sequence Bbm7b5.... etc.
                                                  Or the pattern is: half diminished chord (Em7b5), raise the 3rd so G to G# for the E7b5, do that same chord a semitone lower, turn it into a straight Dom7 (E7) by raising the 5th ..... do not resolve E7 normally (would be to an A) - instead start the whole cycle again starting a major 3rd higher.

                                                  This does not work for my brain. At all. 😀

                                                        When I watched the video, in the selections the RH seemed to have some kind of melody or melodic passage, and I'm assuming the LH was more of an accompaniment. I'd do HS or HT depending on the nature of the music.

                                                        In one spot he identifies a chord as missing the 3rd, then states that with the LH it would be a different chord, but he's ignoring that part. I didn't quite like that. For one thing, music often does have common chord progressions and these help make the music predictable for memorization.

                                                        I don't know which chord it was so I'm inventing one where in the RH chord the 3rd is left out. In the imaginary chord we're in F major, and the chord including the bass is C7b9 going to F (C E G Bb Db). Our RH notes are E G Bb Db which is a fully dimininshed chord (Edim7) But the 3rd is left out so we have E Bb Db. -- with the LH we'd get C E Bb Db. Is it easier to memorized Edim7 to F ..... or C7b9 to F? I'd say the latter because of V7-I. In fact, the C7b9 would help me remember the E dim7 (where we're assuming the G, btw.)

                                                        I'm ambivalent, because I have run into this, where the LH gave the actual chords, but I saw a clear pattern via the incomplete chords for RH alone which actually helped me. I think I preferred to perceive both.