Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum Do you teach your students "how" to listen?

Is there a concept in piano pedagogy that focuses on teaching your students how to listen?

I don't mean saying to your students to listen, but really teaching them how, in a formal way (using various techniques).

I did not wish to hijack this thread , but it got me wondering if students can hear this mistakes they're making (not the obvious clunkers, but the more subtle technical errors). Yes, of course, they can hear it, but do they recognize when something doesn't sound right because they're not really 'listening' to what does or does not sound correct. I could not help but think that one possible reason the student that is the subject of the thread above does not hear her hands being out of sync is because he/she does not hear it or does not have an understanding of what to listen for.

It reminded me of a similar HT problem I recently had on a Hanon exercise. It sounded fine to me at home, but when I got to my lesson, I discovered I had a problem. One of my fingers was not lifting properly and, rather than sounding distinct, two of the notes were being blurred together (because of the improper technique). Honestly, I did not hear it. My teacher did. I thought about it a bit. Was the error I made the result of me not listening closely enough, or my teacher's fault for not teaching me 'how' to listen and what to listen for?

Would love to hear what you do with your students and if you incorporate "how to listen for your mistakes" into your teaching program.

Great question, Akira,

Not all listen easily when they are so busy doing. Many totally stop when they hear their mistake. Many continue on playing anyway.

Teaching students about mistakes is part of what you are calling listening.

I believe it plays a big role in developing a pianist regardless of what his goals for himself are, he NEEDS to be a good listener of what he is producing.

To be a good listener, one must have clear intentions of what will happen. To be able to check that result while passing forward to a new note or group of notes is a big achievement.

Some have talent for this, some have no clues, some can acquire the skill.

I agree with you that not everyone puts this step into their playing, and not every teacher knows to teach it. They would be unable to teach it if they themselves are not "primed" with it.

I will do some more thinking about the "what" because it is quite individual based upon the individual situation. I'm not sure I can give examples today.

So how are you proceeding with this, Akira?

Betty

Maybe I shouldn't be posting over here with the pros and stay with the beginners but here's my 2 cents anyway.

The problem that I have is when I'm playing the piano I have found I can't listen to my playing at the same time. The focus is on this, that, or the other and not what sound is actually coming out of my piano - or even worse what bad habits I am continuing.

I think the most important thing a teacher can do for the improvement of a student is to be the student's eyes and ears until they are able to record themselves and have the ability to actually see the problem areas and be able to correct them.

Your thread here tells me that a least two teachers out there are aware of our beginner problems.

Akira, you hit on a topic which is a favorite of mine. I've mentioned it in many posts, but it often passes unnoticed or uncommented on.

Listening is what music making is all about. We must hear the music in our brain, then train our mechanism (fingers, hands, wrists, arms, body) to behave as we expect, so the resulting sound is what we hear. And correct it if it isn't the sound we want.

Teaching students to listen to the sound they produce is one of our major tasks as teachers. I do it using several different techniques. One is to play a problematic passage twice for the student. Once, the way I would expect them to play, and the second, the way they are playing it (or in reverse order) and challenge them to identify the differences. Many times, especially with young students, this requires multiple times at playing both examples.

Sometimes they fail to grasp the difference, in which case, I verbally point it out, then play the examples again. Students do learn to listen, but it does take time.

Woody, perhaps one reason you think you cannot listen to yourself as you play is that you haven't had an opportunity to develop the skill yet. Another reason may be that you're trying to bite off more than you should be. If technical demands are excessive, it's really difficult to focus on musicality.

John

John, if music is what we hear in our brains, for you does part of the process involve hearing what we are about to play before playing it, then during - rather than discovering it after the fact (or not at all)?

I had this discussion with my teacher just last week. When we (beginners) first learn a piece we concentrate so much on the timing and playing the correct notes that we often fail to listen.

I was voicing my concern that I still feel as though I'm sometime just playing the notes. I know immediately when I DO hit a wrong note most of the time but a piece that has an accidental for one measure and not for the next can trip me up. Often my teacher will get me to play it again just to see if the mistake was a one-time thing or an actual error.

This week after my confession of not really listening... he asked me to identify major or minor chords by listening and then name them (including inversions). This was a very helpful lesson - and although I was right, I was a litle embarassed at how long it took me to figure it out. I expect we'll be doing more of this in the weeks to come.

keystring, I think the exact mechanism differs from individual to individual. Consider that before you say something (words), your brain has a though process which figures out what you're going to say, how you're going to say it, and you ears (and eyes) provide feedback on what you've said. Contrast that with memorized recitation where you are not talking extemporaniously. Now, you're much more focused on individual words, phrases, etc., and my guess is that different parts of the brain are engaged. Your "performance" becomes more stilted, people are immediately aware that you are reciting, not speaking freely.

Returning to your question, for me, I know what sound I want to produce, and that sound is what my mechanism produces. It is an almost instantaneous process.

Think of it this way, when you're listening to a favorite recording, your brain knows exactly what it expects to hear, and if it somehow is different, it objects, and as there is no corrective mechanism, you suddenly become conscious of what ever is unexpected, and are no longer paying attention to the onflowing music. When students play this way, they have a "halting" performance. Many stop and correct an error rather than "let it go" and maintain the flow.

There are, of course, different levels of listening. The listening I am talking about is a composite of the overall sound, not just the elements, ie, notes, rhythm, dynamics, etc. I am constantly working with my students on voicing, inflection, articulation, but with a goal of an overall musical sound coming out of the piano.

I guess I would add that if you're "surprised" by what comes out of the piano, at least you're listening, but you're not thinking ahead. And that brings up a tangental discussion, and that is teachers should be working with students to read well ahead of what they are playing, just as when you read orally, your eyes are at least a sentance ahead of your voice.

Thank you, John. That is why I asked the question. It is also good for all of us reading this forum to see these things. I was taught not long ago that one should picture what one wants to produce before one produces it, and listen to that sound whether it is what we are producing it, while producing it. There was a rather intensive (for me) training going with that.

I think many of us have a piece in our minds and "generally" play with that in mind, but we are spending more time imagining what we have played, than playing it. Or we play, and we discover how we played after we played. Then we correct. If we do that often enough, the music does become better, nad we even fall into anticipating that mistake and being alert just before getting to that part.

But to be present to one's own playing in a constant state of anticipation is quite an eye opener. At the level I was to do it I lasted all of three seconds initially. That doesn't mean I drifted off and played badly, but it was no longer the same.

Other things we just can't hear in the beginning. We don't know what to listen for and can't recognize it if we do try. I like your exercise of trying to find the difference. Simply realizing that you didn't hear something and now you can, is an eye (ear?) opener, I think.

I remember when every orchestra and ensemble in the whole world had suddenly started to have excellent timing. That was my subjective impression. I had become aware of timing and was hearing it for the first time in my life.

John, I can confirm that I still need to develope the skill of listening to myself while I'm playing it and not afterwards in a recording. My ego would like to think that my technical ability just a little behind the music I am playing but....

When I was in Brussels many years ago I repeatedly nearly got ran over by trams. Though I looked both ways I couldn't see them - because I didn't know what they looked like. Even though I was only 40 I realized I never will, so I'm quite wary when in an area that has them.

Some of the 'mistakes' students make they've never heard because they don't know what they sound like. When students initially play thirds the notes are never together. The students needs to be shown what the mistake sounds like through the teacher singing and playing exaggerated. Hearing the dynamic differences between the tune and accompaniment also has to be learnt - far more so than the physical ability to do so. Even scales the same. There is a legion of technique that needs to be addressed this way. The problem is too many teachers attack technique from the physical side - the real answer, the aural, gets sadly neglected. Until the student can hear both the right and the wrong way the mistake doesn't exist.

I also found that being told what to listen for and aim for also helped. If you don't know that the melodic line should be stronger you may not come up with it on your own.

Keyboardklutz, did you ever get to find what a tram looks like? It almost reminds me of the conversation we had about Mr. Snuffelupegus the other day.

Playing both for a student and with a student is why it's incumbent upon all teachers to have a two piano studio. Yes, it's expensive, and it's why piano lessons should cost more than other instrumental lessons (the student brings his own instrument, not renting the teacher's instrument). This is a goal for all young teachers to work for.

No. They have them in South London. I walk very slowly there.

Ah, a topic near and dear to my heart. I think this is the single least appreciated and discussed problem in learning any instrument, not just piano. Actually I think it is worse for most other instruments.

No, beginners don't hear subtle mistakes, OR obvious clunkers. I think the amount of progress they make is determined mostly by how quickly they gain skill in hearing themselves, and it may be that the sole talent that separates the virtuoso from the rest of us is that they either have innate skill at hearing or they develop it quickly.

I think that not hearing is some kind of hard wired protective brain mechanism. If we heard how bad we sound at first, we'd quit. Even when we've learned to hear ourselves on one instrument, we may still have problems on another. Pianists can pick up a recorder and play it badly without noticing and vice versa.

This problem is really obvious when playing brass instruments. Students have to learn how to produce good tone, but none of the mechanics for this are conscious or observable. The process involves gaining a clear focused concept of the desired tone in the mind, then listening to the produced tone and comparing the two, then somehow adjusting "something" to improve it. The internal concept is usually arrived at by hours of listening to top performers. But hearing the produced tone is the hardest part of this, and completely unaddressed. Without the feedback there is no improvement.

For many including myself, the internal tone concept can override hearing the produced tone. Doing both at the same time becomes difficult to impossible.

Hi Akira,

Your topic definately caught my eye.

It's late and I should be asleep, so I regret not reading all of the posts, and sorry for rehashing, if I am.

Listening is what I teach, first and foremost. Listening for a beautiful tone and how to produce it with proper techinique, as well as getting the pitches correct, musical phrasing, etc...

Mistakes are one thing, but clarity and tone in playing, are another.

To me the ability to listen is something that needs development. A discerning ear is so important in being a true artist/musician.

It is very satisfying, as a teacher, to spend time with my students on listening. Two pianos help immensely in order to demonstrate and compare.

I disagree with the first point. I've played classical guitar since a teenager. After having not played for some years I found my fingering automatically changed itself to get a beautiful cantabiule line - something as a teenager I had no awareness of.

On the second point, it holds you back to have an internal image of a tone, or to try and achieve someone else's. If you listen to what you find beautiful in your tone you will make it so.

I would agree with Keyboardklutz that the skill of listening, and especially knowing what to listen for and play "toward" transfers from instrument to instrument. The conscious awareness of tone, tone quality, the textures and vibrations of an instrument, is an awareness that transfers. On violin there is a feeling of vibration on the string which if touched "just so" brings out a tone quality "just so". On my descant recorder (the most responsive), there is a certain breath that opens up tone in a combined sweetness and resonance. In fact, that is why I find playing a digital piano so disturbing. That responsiveness is not there. Listening has become an active thing, where you play, listen toward something, adjust - and there is a ghost-pianist programmed in whose touch prevails regardless of what I do.

I guess I would qualify what Klutz and keystring say to include "if you have an ear" to begin with.

I do not. I work on it every day, but what I hear on guitar does not transfer to the piano. I find I must learn how to listen anew. I just do not hear the same from instrument to instrument.

It's probably as hard for those who can do it to understand the point as it is for me to understand just how you guys do it.

Gmm1, is anyone guiding you in what to listen for, and giving you feedback? "Ear" is something one has, true, but it is also something that develops under guidance.

Maybe you could teach me what trams look like and in exchange I'll teach you what a guitar/piano/voice sounds like?