Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner - Non Classical Playing by Ear

I was wondering, when you guys improvise, how much of what you do is something 'you play by ear'? I personally feel like the whole idea of "playing by ear" is somewhat misguided. When I improvise, I am relying heavily on both my tonal/muscle memory. I have things I've worked out that I know would work over certain changes and I play them. Although I don't play them note by note the same, there are certain concepts behind the lines that I worked out in my practice.

I also think that not many of us are actually capable of hearing complex idea and play them on the fly without any kind of training. I have been transcribing for years, and I can transcribe big band charts,film scores etc.. but my ears are nowhere near being able to play anything by ear. I can probably recall simple melody/chord changes by ear.. and I might be able to figure out complex bebop heads fairly quickly (like conception, Milestones(old) etc), I can even figure out melody and chords to chopin op9#2 nocturne by ear if you give me some time.. but there is no way I can just play them right away by ear.

I can say the same thing about doing jazz piano solo, if I want to do complex reharmonization and extensive counterpoint, I will have to work them out, and I will have to rely on what I learned from books, teachers .. etc I would not have come up with very hip reharm stuff on my own.

I know there are people like chet baker who couldn't read music.. but I don't think those people are completely ignorant of all that goes into jazz improv. They might not know the theory, but they have a very deep understanding the language that they acquired from imitation and extensive study.

I am not saying ear is not important.. jazz musicians do listen to themselves.. but the way we use our ears and is much different than the way non jazz musicians think. What we improvise is combination of theory,muscle/aural memory.. etc and you can't single any of it out.

good topic...



...and that is dead wrong approach, and the reason why jazz is dieing today. 'Jazzers' are just doing what you've described which hardly you can call a music - it's rather exercising.

Playing 'by ear' means you're able to play what's in your head. During improvisation you should be playing ONLY what's in your head dynamically composed on the fly not what in your static fingers memory.

Hence the reason of the biggest problem - you have to have something interesting in you head to begin with (and let's face it, not everybody can have it) and you have to know how to communicate it to the world. IMO Musical theory is the biggest obstacle to free improvisation for musicians.
Another interesting implication from this is - your improvisation is real and unique when you're in the 'mood' because if you're not you start playing from memory and that's just exercise.

Ah, the debates of students.

In jazz there are these things called chords, and unlike horn players piano players have to actually play chords with their hands, and when it's time to improvise they play melodies that associate with those chords. And without some "muscle memory" the hands are useless.

I have known many many great players and have never heard one espouse the idea of playing with out any thoughts of harmonic concepts.

tremens, delirium,

Can you cite examples of people who play purely by ear? because I can't.. Every good player has some stuff that have worked out beforehand. To me the whole "playing by ear' thing is a myth. You can't play something you don't already know.

Do you think that Bill Evans played all those hip chords because "he just happened to hear it"? Bill Evans pre-arranged a lot of stuff extensively before he played them in gigs. If you hear Bill Evan's doing different take of the same tune from one CD, you would hear remarkable similarities in his solos. In fact sometimes he would play an entire phrase note-by-note the same. Would you be surprised to find out Oscar Peterson practiced his fingering?

If you want to hear the difference between something that is worked out vs something that isn't, just listen&compare Coltrane and Tommy Flanagan's solo on Giant Steps.. I'd love to see someone who's never played Coltrane changes play by ear and see how well they can actually pull it off!!


I also think whether jazz is dying or not is a matter of opinion, and most people who say that don't really have an idea as to all the good stuff that is happening now. I've heard Shelly Berg play just like Oscar Peterson, and heard about how Ray Brown used to steal ideas from Oscar Petifford so much that people used to call him "Ray Pettiford" but that does not make any of these players deriviative boring player..

one last thing, can you name any piano player who can play a complex chord solo purely by ear without working any of it it out? because it took me years of practice to be able to do that, and I'd love to meet someone who can just play that on the fly!!

exactly, mature players don't have to - they know music theory is only for wannabeplayers...




really? where exactly?




so are you suggesting horn player don't play chords?




Obviously you're hanging with wrong company
Again that's the reason so few good jazz musicians today.

btw I do agree that there is overemphasis on theory in school.. but that doesn't mean theory is not important. For some reason people think that playing by ear means playing only 'whats in your head'.. do people realize that many great players learned to play by ear by imitating other great players, stealing licks and ideas from them? Many of them actually learned to play an entire CD note-by note by ear.

To me it seems like what jazz musicians call "learning by ear" is quite different than what non-jazz musician think, and its often misunderstood.

If anyone thinks that Bird played all those hip substitution and extension because 'he just happened to hear it' than that person is clearly deluded. He actually had to spend a lot of time practicing worked all that stuff into playing. And John Coltrane worked a lot of stuff out beforehand on his "giant steps" solo.

tremens, delirium

Who do you actually consider good musician? Can you name a single musician who doesn't transcribe or who doesn't know their theory?

Would you be surprised to find out that Clayton urges students to transcribe and analayze solos.. and that people like Tamir Hendelman, Gearld Clayton.. etc have learned entire album worth of Oscar Peterson CD by memory? As far as I am concerned they are darn good players.

By your defintion, would you consider Bill Evans a wannabe player then? because he obviously stole a lot from Bud Powell and George Shearing (Just listen to his block chord solos!!) and he is quite a theory buff too!!

So please by all means name a single piano player in the history of jazz piano that didn't know theory or didn't imitate someone else. I'd love to know who these real players you are talking about, because obviously those players are way better than someone like David Kikoski, Geri Allen or even Brad Mehldau!!

We're not quite understanding each other here, although there were numbers of musicians who didn't know theory this is not the point here. The order of events is important - first learn to play by ear and then so called "music theory" will come to you later by itself that you won't even notice...self-taught Hendrix, Monk is a good example here. The problem today is we completely reversed the order. You have to play what in you head, not in your hands.



yeah, I heard about that - this is the most stupid idea someone could come up with. I guess you're confusing good players with technique efficient players...



Evans is one of my favorite players, again we don't understand each other - in music we often repeat ourselves or someone else and nothing wrong with that. Otherwise after Bach and few others we would have no more notes to play...



You forgot about the topic I guess. BTW Why are you limiting improvising music to jazz??? but if so self-taught Monk comes to mind.


Anyway that's what I'm talking about in regards to improvisation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlPQD04tn88&feature=related

What's great with Mozart and Bach is their ability to blend music from preceding styles and forge into something unique, creating a new idiom by building on tradition, just as Jarrett or Evans.
Anyway why would you want to restrict yourself anyway? Theory vs ear, use whatever you got. It's what it sounds like that matters, not how you achieve it.

You are citing a movie as an example? Do you realize that the movie is a dramatization and the facts in it are heavily distorted? Can you cite a more realistic example that is not from a work of fiction and doesn't involve Mozart-caliber talent?

Also do you realize that the example you gave me is an example of composition and not improvisation which requires you to actually play an instrument? I doubt that anyone can improvise anything that complex on the piano.

If you really think the Clayton brothers are just "technically-efficient" players, then well, all I can say is that we have very different taste in music. Btw the Clayton brothers got their ides from Ray Brown, Oscar Petifford etc etc..

What they are saying is not stupid at all, it's how jazz musicians used to learn before and they are just trying to bring that tradition back. every great player I know have transcribed 100s of solos and learned to play them. As far as I know, what they are doing is what jazz musicians actually mean when they say 'learn by ear'.

The problem is that people talk about ears/muscle memory as if they are two different things. And there are many different levels of listening.. when you play a chord, you are not necessary hearing all the notes moving/resolving in counterpoint. chances are you probably won't be able to process all that information and play them on spot if you have to rely completely by ear.

If you are really playing you shouldn't be thinking about whether you are listening.. you should be wailing and let what it is that comes out come out.

btw do you actually play jazz?

Erroll Garner couldn't read music but he started playing piano at around age 3.

At the age of 11, Monk was taught by Simon Wolf, an Austrian émigré who had studied under the concertmaster for the New York Philharmonic. But the direction the boy would go in, after two years of classical lessons, was jazz.

I want to elaborate more than whole hearing thing.. Most people play chords like C7#11 not because they hear each individual notes, but they "kind of know' what that sounds like in their ear.

So I am not sure what people mean when they say play by ear.. esp when it comes to chords. Like I said, I can figure out chords/melody to chopin nocturne op9#2 fairly quickly (it took me like 10 min), but there is no way I can do that on the spot. And it would be nearly impossible to figure out the exact voicing chopin uses on the piece.. that will take me at least an hour.

I really think that if you have to rely solely on responding to what you hear you'll be very limited in what you do. How many of us can actually hear 2-3 voice couterpoint, and actually be able to play them on the spot?

So in my opinion, if you really want to play by ear, your ear and your hand coordination have to be so good that you can hear chopin nocturne or bach fugue in your head and play them instantly. The only person I know who can do anything like that is keith jarrett.. someone requested him to play Ravel's Bolero on a hotel gig and he played the entire thing by ear.

I really think those who say play by ear usually don't know what they are talking about and just how difficult that is. that kind of a ability is a myth.. only ppl like mozart or jarrett can do it, and most pro musicians don't have that kind of ability.

Mozart could do it.

My trumpet can not play chords ....

In this context what I mean when I say I `play by ear' is that I could play the basic melody of op9#2, probably with some mistakes, and maybe some vague attempt at some of the harmony.

I'd certainly make a better job of both the melody and the harmony if I tried it in the key of say, G, rather than the original Eb. So it's clear (I think) that I'm relying on some theoretical knowledge of harmony that I have better grasp of in some keys than others. I'm certainly not translating directly from the `sound in my head' to finger movements, and I'm certainly not interpreting individual notes. I imagine that I'm relying on my expectation of how chord progressions typically work in music of this genre.

I guess `playing by ear' can mean different things to different people -- but being able to play, say, a tune in three-voice counterpoint using only the information stored in your head is a prodigious talent, and one that I doubt many people have. Limiting the term `by ear' to that situation probably robs of it any practical meaning.

BTW I'm certainly impressed if you're saying that you can work out the exact voicings of the left hand in an hour. Some of the harmony is actually quite subtle, and I'm not convinced that I could get all of it ever, let alone in an hour.

Hi, etcetra , I guess I qualify as being able to play by ear, I have piano pieces I made and recorded that were spontanious, I know nothing about chords, I can plan songs from George winston but I do need to work that out before hand but I do that in my head for the most part, I always tell my wife if it is iin my head I can play it, I can improvise very easy and creat or just fool around.
I don't know if this is what your talking about by playing by ear, I also saw a piano player who could listen to a song and then with in 1-3 min. he could play it. Aloha.

Chris

Kalai,

I don't doubt that people can play be ear somewhat... I guess the question is whether people can actually come up with something as complex as a Bill Evans piano solo or a chopin nocturne just by ear.

I do think that some people have to actually learn how to improvise more than others.. and it sounds like for improv just came naturally for you

kevin,

I've been transcribing music for a while. I've transcribed big band charts, film scores..etc. I was able to figure out most of the harmony without looking at the music.i think it took me like 20min. I am not sure.If I have to sit down the piano, I can probably pluck out all the notes in a chords.. although its probably not going to be 100% accurate, at least I would know 2-3 notes of a chord for sure.

I've also transcribed the block solo from this clip.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5gcMTD8jZc

I agree with you that having theoretical knowledge helps quite a bit. If I had to learn it note by note, it would be extremely difficult and time consuming. But I can kind of tell which voicing Gearld playing although I might not be hearing every single note.


Bottom line is that your ear is something that you can infinitely develop, and there are different levels of playing by ear. I am mainly refuting those ho say that it's all done spontaneously by ear.. and somehow you are hearing all that complex music in your head and your hands somehow just plays them... that sounds like a fantasy, its something you hear about in movies, but as far as I know, jazz improvisation doesn't really work like that.

that's because you don't understand how playing by ear works - you don't necessary hear all parts/notes of 'complicated' chords etc (although at some practice you can do that too) but you see such chord like a painting. I often compare music hearing to painting because it's very similar and I hear that way. I don't even care what notes are being played.
Ability to repeat tune after one hearing only is something else - it's musical memory which you can practice too.

Every real pro can play by ear the way I say - not only in the movies! I met many people including my teacher when I was a kid
who could do this easily, that's the ESSENTIAL skill of being pro! My teacher after one hearing only used to write down a tune without instrument on the scoring sheet.

You guys are putting very low bar for a pro as I see it...

Here's a thing to try: have somebody play four arbitrary notes together on the piano, with the restriction that they have to be within a couple of octaves. See if you can reproduce those four notes without knowing what they are.

I'll bet there aren't many people who can do that reliably. That you say you don't care what notes are played, but see them `like a painting', then you should do well at my four-note test.

But I would bet that such a skill, without extensive training and practice, is very, very rare.