Ear Training

[Harmony]

Hello,

Does anyone have any musical background to help me out?
My ds needs more ear training. He plays piano...pretty well...and very good with theory but seems to have difficulty to distinguish the interval sounds.

Harmony

[JennW in SoCal]

How old is he and how long has he been playing?

My experience with most people is that the kind of ear training you are talking about is developed over time. It takes a few years of musical experience to recognize the difference between a major or minor third, or to hear that something is a fifth or sixth. I don't know if people with perfect pitch also automatically have that kind of aural discrimination built in, but I know from experience that the rest of us have to learn it. Many a college freshman music major suffers through the first year required ear training course!

People who play by ear pick these distinctions up while musicians who only play what is written on the page struggle with this. You could encourage your ds to pick out songs he likes on the piano as it will require him to figure out how far apart notes are in a melody. Playing arpeggios and learning chords will help develop an ear as does singing. My kids did a little bit of harmony when singing in elementary, but really mastering vocal harmonization -- which requires a good ear to pick up intervals -- didn't come until the teen years with the help of a good coach.

Assuming your ds has a good teacher to guide him, he will develop an ear over time -- just give him a chance to mature into it.

[mominsac]

:iagree: I taught beginning ear training class as a student instructor at a college music conservatory during my junior and senior year. Also private tutored it. My major was piano performance and minor was music theory.

If your DS is young and relatively new to music, I would not worry. Ear training enhances overall musicianship (if a performer) and is helpful for performance, but it will not limit. Distinguishing major/minor/dim/aug or 7th chords aurally is always helpful, as well as knowing your intervals -- but again not critical, especially when young. Make it into a game, and have fun. Over time, with more years of music performance training, it will sink in more naturally.

The written theory is easier to learn and study at a younger age. It also elevates the students' ability to learn music. I highly encourage getting the basics of written theory early on.

[Donna]

My dd has been playing violin since she was 3yo using the Suzuki method. She has perfect pitch and can play anything she hears after 1-2 listens. Her teacher says her brain isn't wired like most because whatever she hears goes immediately onto her violin including bowings. It makes learning new songs or fiddle tunes very easy for her.

She may have been born with the ability (perfect pitch) or it may have developed through some of the ways we used to play when she was very young. Some of the things we did when she was just beginning lessons were... I would play a series of notes on the piano and she would immitate them on the violin, gradually we worked up to entire songs then she started learning fiddle tunes. She learned to sing Solfege as well when she was young and her current teacher who had never used it prior has had her relearning it recently. We also played a lot of games where she would have to name the note she heard played then play it on her violin. She plays a lot of intervals now along with her scales so she can name the intervals easily...they used to just come naturally to her but now she has the vocabulary for them.

My dd learned by ear from the beginning. She was the opposite of your son. She has recently begun learning to read music. It never interested her before she was accepted into an orchestra in September (why bother learning to read music when you can listen 1-2 times and play it) and in the last 2-3 months has really learned to sight-read well.

[Harmony]

Dear everyone,

who was so kind enough to write down everything for me (who is music ignorant). I printed out all of your comments. I will use them into practice.

Contrary to my dd8, My dd6 started learning violin from the age of 5 with Suzuki Method. She has very good hearning and can tell the difference of the notes once she hears the music and when she plays. She can even tell the music (after many many months of watching the movie only once) that was in the movie with the particular scene, when she hears it again.

Maybe that was the reason that I thought my ds needs ear training.

I appreciate all of your kind assistance. Thanks a lot!

Harmony

[Karin]

Ear training tips:

First, a student needs to be able to hear higher and lower sounds, and how close together these are depend on the age and level of playing of a student. They should be able to tell which note played is higher without looking, and all around the keyboard, not just in the middle. Clapping simple rhythms and having them clap back is also important, and generally I will clap something twice first, which is what examiners did when I did music exams.

Intervals need to be learned. First the basic ones (second, third, etc) but later the different between minor and major intervals is also important (eg a major third is different than a minor third). First played separately, but eventually played together.

However, there is a whole lot more to ear training than simply learning intervals and playing by ear (playing by ear is good.) You need to be albe to sing back and later play back what you hear, so singing something to your child/student that is very simple and having them sing it back correctly can help when starting off.

Eventually students need to be able to distinguish various triads & chords, both separate and solid, be able to play back simple melodies, do clap backs, etc. I doubt that I'm remembering it all. However, this is generally done over years; I don't expect young children to do all of this, and when I did exams, playing back a melody when 2 parts were played didn't have to be done until the senior levels. You're not really supposed to do this, but because I wasn't given enough ear training early, I used songs to help me remember my intervals & chords for exams because I would get so nervous. If taught young enough, students do NOT need that most of the time, because they can learn a third is a third, etc just by the sound.

While it's true that often students who learn by reading music can have more trouble playing by ear, that often happens when ear training is neglected early on. However, some students have an easier time playing by ear to begin with. Often children who play well by ear and who memorize the sound of music easily have difficulty learning to read music. Ideally, musicians ought to be able to play by ear, play with music and be able to improvise. However, improv is rarely taught, and often one excells in only 1 or 2 of those. Nevertheless, training in all three is important, but usually you want to help students strengthen the area they are weak in: if it's reading, do lots of sight reading. If it's ear, then lots of ear training. Get kids "composing" to help cement skills, too.

There are books out there with ear training exercises, I believe, but I haven't bought one in years so am not sure what's out there now.

[Coleroo]

I've played by ear since I was 4, and never took lessons. I did however learn to read music very well in school through years of choir & band. I think the biggest problem with those who play by ear is that we tend to want to play music OUR way and can usually play modern pieces on our own much better than how they're written down anyway. After playing by ear, reading music can feel very stifling!

For his age I would suggest the best "ear training" would be simply lots of time banging away at the piano. Give him a list of easy songs that he loves - have him hum them one note at a time and then find the note he is humming on the piano. Provide a variety of song lists each week that you know he is familiar with...the First Noel, TV Theme songs, Hymns, etc. If you have a tape recorder let him have fun recording his songs. Let him play with just his right hand if that's what he's comfortable with. Once he's ready to add left hands, it's easy to learn the basic 3 finger cords (such as C, G, & F). He'll be able to "hear" the harmony of the chords if you search online and show him basic finger placements - he'll be able to take it from there. Don't push him right now either...let him enjoy the pleasure of playing around on there. He has a gift that he wants to let out! FUN is what I would emphasize most at his stage or you could easily turn him off (another reason why many who play by ear have trouble learning to play by music - it's makes it into a chore that is no longer fun!).

There is no better feeling on earth than to be able to sit at a piano and make the music that you hear in your head randomly pop out on those pearly white keys. :)

---------------

P.S. Just re-read the thread and realized I don't know how old your son is...I had thought you said 6 years old, but that was DD. So your son may be well past the stage I just talked about...sorry. :)

[zaichiki]

Often children who play well by ear and who memorize the sound of music easily have difficulty learning to read music.

Karin,
Why do you think that is?

I have to admit that my two oldest are being Suzuki-trained and have both been in orchestras for several years. They (and all the other Suzuki-trained kids in the orchestras) don't seem to have any trouble at all learning to read music. I'm guessing it's because their teachers have taught them to read music and they do practice it regularly.

Of course kids who play by ear have to be taught to read music and they have to practice -- but if that is the case, why is it often difficult for them to learn to read music? More difficult than for kids who cannot play by ear?

I'm genuinely curious. My experience is limited to my own children and being a third-party watching a total of approximately 100 different Suzuki-trained kids in orchestras over the last three years. I am not a musician.

[Nan in Mass]

Karin - Can you explain improving to me? LOL I know that is rather a large subject, but I have a 15yo who this year has chosen not to take lessons and is instead just playing piano. He learns a bit of a piece of something or some chords, usually via youtube, and then sits down and plays. I'm not sure exactly what he is doing, but I suspect he is playing chords with the left hand and something a bit like what a lead guitarist does in a rock band with his right hand. The result sounds nice (to my uneducated ear anyway), but I am wondering if there is something he should be doing that would help him to advance and become more versatile. I don't want him to get stuck in one place and become bored and stop playing. I can hear him working on things, going back and playing one small bit over and over until his fingers can play it, then moving on, so I suspect that he is hearing what he wants to play in his head first, at least for the right hand. He can only read music by laboriously counting despite years of lessons. *I* can read piano music better than he can. Sigh. In the end, what I really want most for him is that he continue to love and play music throughout his life. I'm just afraid that without being able to read music easily he will hit a wall. Or without lessons, he will hit a wall. Or something. If he's not going to, I'm happy to have him play however it pleases him. At least he is still playing even though he stopped taking lessons quite a few months ago. I'm not even sure what my question really is, I guess. How can I help him grow and learn?
-Nan

[Donna]

Karin,
Why do you think that is?
Of course kids who play by ear have to be taught to read music and they have to practice -- but if that is the case, why is it often difficult for them to learn to read music? More difficult than for kids who cannot play by ear?


For my own dd, playing by ear was sooooo easy that she only had to hear something 1-2 times to be able to play it. Teaching her to read music was and is still, to some extent difficult because we have to constantly find different pieces for her to read otherwise once she has read it and played it, it is in her head. So, she is no longer reading but simply looking at the music and playing what's in her head.

Until she joined an orchestra, there was never any "need" to read for her so she didn't really learn to do it. She could name or play the notes and knew the time values from being taught and practicing but did so very slowly and she didn't sightread well. Since being in an orchestra for the past few months, she has discovered the need to read and has learned to sightread very well.

So, I think some kids who play by ear may find it difficult to read music unless they find a real need to do so like an orchestra or similar group where they aren't always playing a melody and there are many other parts going into their ears.

[zaichiki]

So, I think some kids who play by ear may find it difficult to read music unless they find a real need to do so like an orchestra or similar group where they aren't always playing a melody and there are many other parts going into their ears.

Maybe we just lucked out then? My kids have always been very interested in trying out new sheet music. I'm sure their teachers' attitudes and the way they presented new sheet music (as exciting and as "rewards") had a lot to do with that. So, we've been buying new sheet music frequently for a few years. (Oh goodness it's ALL over my house!) My kids' Suzuki music school also does a once-a-month sightreading party (with the more advanced musicians, so it feels like a privelege to the younger ones). Kids bring snacks to share.

The kids enjoy playing in little ensembles with friends and being in orchestras from the time they learned to sightread. That was very motivating for them.

It's gotta be the way sightreading is presented. That makes sense. If it's "work" they're just not going to be very motivated, after all, they already play lots of music well by ear.

Now, my kids aren't *phenomenal* sightreaders, but they do very well and can learn just about any beginner to intermediate level pieces via sightreading. They also learn easily by ear.

I am remided to be thankful for the wonderful cello and viola teachers they have had and the way they have been taught. We SO lucked out. I know *nothing* about music.

I really appreciate this thread! I think I've gotten a little insight.

ETA: Ah! I just re-read your post, Donna, and the bit about not always playing the melody jumped out at me. I think you've got a good point. Both of my kids play "harmony instruments," and therefore have had plenty of opportunity to play parts (in ensembles and orchestra) where it's harder to rely on your ears. Ya gotta count. Ya gotta read. And because their instruments play harmony most of the time in orchestras, the teachers have a *great* approach to harmonies. From the time the kids are young they *look forward* to playing the harmonies, because when they play in groups it's the "advanced" kids who get that special privelege. The teachers will also jump in with a harmony many times, making it seem like the goal. ("Once you can play the melody well, you might get the opportunity to try the harmony!")

[JennW in SoCal]

Nan,

If your son is happy and able to do what you describe -- hear a piece and play it by ear, then let him be for now. Let him know that all he has to do is ask and you can find a teacher or music opportunity for him. He may not be motivated for more until some cool opportunity arises to play with others or for others.

Improvisation starts with chords -- knowing what notes are in what chord, and learning to play them in different inversions and rhythms. When I play violin at church with the contemporary band, I sometimes ONLY get chord charts for a song. The pianist and guitarist will play those chords in the rhythm of the song, the bass player will usually play the "root" note of the chord in a rhythm, and I on the violin will play one of the notes in the chord that is the same through 2 or 3 chords, or "fill" between chords by doing a scale or arpeggio to the next note in the next chord. Pop music is easy to figure out because the chord progressions are predictable.

So if your son is able to hear and play chords, perhaps he can also follow just chord charts, which would make it possible for him to play songs for his friends to sing, or to play with other musicians. Getting together to pla with friends is one of the biggest pleasures in life, for me at least. Perhaps at the moment it is enough for your ds to play for himself.

Jazz improvisation is a giant step above what I've described, but there are basic rules that are a starting point for Jazz, blues or rock improvisations. Once you've learned those, true improvisation comes with listening to lots of music, just spending hours "noodling" on your own and being coached by someone. I'm thrilled to have just learned to not panic at the sight of a chord chart, and I generally listen to and copy what I hear the professionals playing on recordings.

[mominsac]

Ear training tips:
While it's true that often students who learn by reading music can have more trouble playing by ear, that often happens when ear training is neglected early on. However, some students have an easier time playing by ear to begin with. Often children who play well by ear and who memorize the sound of music easily have difficulty learning to read music. Ideally, musicians ought to be able to play by ear, play with music and be able to improvise. .

There's been interesting points made in this thread, so I could not resist chiming back. Lot's of great suggestions.

WRT what makes for a comprehensive music education and musician, I agree with Karin that an ideal musician would have mastery of playing with music, by ear, improvise/compose. That's how it was in the old days of Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Liszt and even early 20th century. (ie. all great masters of all these disciplines, including improvisation).

So what's the objective? I think it depends on what instrument you play (piano, voice, orchestral instrument?) and what kind of music you want to do (ie. classical music performance?, jazz or improvisation? composing? or is it all just for enrichment, hobby or enjoyment with family/friends?). I think earlier in the thread, we were also speaking of young children -- again, how old, what instrument, what goals?

I can share my personal experience and perspective of learning by ear vs. reading music. I preface by saying that I was pretty serious pianist from when I was young, went on to music school for both performance undergrad and grad, minored in music theory (pretty unusual for performance majors). I did have perfect pitch, so ear training, sight-singing tonal or atonal melodies was instantaneous for me. I also learned and memorized music fast, once I heard it. Had I been a voice or instrumentalists where I only had to read one line, sight reading any piece would have been a breeze. If you are a string player or voice, great sense of pitch is critical for pitch formation. For improvisation or composing, having harmonization-training is critical. If you played in ensembles, having a discerning ear is important to blend properly, but it is a different kind of ear training from music theory-related ear.

Now for the "but". If you learn easily by ear, your brain does rely on that, and you can be less reliant on your visual learning process. I learned to read music from since I was young, my entire piano training was from reading printed music. However, I was still an "ear" learner. Sight-reading one-line was easy (so had I been an instrumentalist or vocalist, no problem) but as a pianist, you have to read two staves (or more if you are accompanying) and read multiple "notes" in forms of chords at any given time. Sight-reading piano music, for me, was a bear, even when I practiced sight-reading as a skill! And pianists are always called upon to sight-read for accompanying or ensembles. Or how about just sight-reading sheet music for fun at home with the relatives? Honestly, I was terrible! It did take some enjoyment out of playing piano "just for fun".

So, I am of the opinion, if you are a pianist, having very strong music reading skills and training (ie. visual processing) is a must, unless you are focused on improvisation. Read through tons of music, and learn multiple pieces at a time. Harmonization training is great.

If you are a string instrumentalist, though, initial training primarily by ear, like Suzuki-method works great, since it truly trains your ear to hear/listen for the pitch. My two DDs having been studying violin since 4, first by Suzuki-method, but by 7, we forced them to learn by reading music (ie. took away the CD learning) -- it was tough for them, since both learn easily by ear, -- but I wanted them to be versatile in learning by ear and reading music, even if reading one-line is less of an hurdle.

BTW: having a perfect pitch can also be a clutch. I recall our Advanced Ear Training professor really coming down hard on students with perfect pitch because we were not learning to hear the intervals precisely and was thus, "sloppy". We just sang the pitches we heard in our head serially, versus, hearing and understanding the "intervals" or hamonies. I also recall being more challenged with harmonic dictations that were multi-voiced or multi-staved, (ie tougher time hearing vertically) even when I can do single-line melodic dictations real-time as it was being dictated.

So to me, this whole area has been an interesting observation in how your brain works! Sorry for the long post, but it has been a life-long interest.:001_smile:

[Nan in Mass]

So are the rules for jazz, etc., like the ones for counterpoint? Not that I know counterpoint, but I have heard the rules before and played with them.

I think I understand what you mean about the chord charts. I can do that a little, but I do it by ear. I hear what might go nicely with something and can sing it or play it on the recorder or flute. (I guess wrong enough, though, that I don't do it with anybody except my husband or sisters. It is much, much easier to do if someone is playing bass, too.) I didn't know how to do it from a chord chart, though, until you explained. It must be figure it out quickly, on the fly! No wonder you are pleased with yourself!

I asked my son more about how he plays and for once got an answer other than "I don't know. My fingers just do it." I think (but I'm still not sure) that he is learning elaborations like putting in a grace note or repeating a bit in a different octave, and different rhythm patterns, or different chord patterns. Then he adds those to something he already knows. When he gets bored, he goes and learns part of a new piece and then starts working on that. He didn't say so, but I'm fairly sure he is making up melodic parts, or at least parts of parts, to go with whatever else he's figured out. He didn't want lessons because the teacher was making him learn whole pieces and he just wanted to learn the interesting bits out of them and then go play with them. I guess he won't be bored for awhile, if that is the sort of thing he is stealing out of other pieces of music. As you suggested, I offered lessons or help of some sort if he ever feels stuck.

Thank you!
-Nan

[Karin]

For my own dd, playing by ear was sooooo easy that she only had to hear something 1-2 times to be able to play it. Teaching her to read music was and is still, to some extent difficult because we have to constantly find different pieces for her to read otherwise once she has read it and played it, it is in her head. So, she is no longer reading but simply looking at the music and playing what's in her head.

Until she joined an orchestra, there was never any "need" to read for her so she didn't really learn to do it. She could name or play the notes and knew the time values from being taught and practicing but did so very slowly and she didn't sightread well. Since being in an orchestra for the past few months, she has discovered the need to read and has learned to sightread very well.

So, I think some kids who play by ear may find it difficult to read music unless they find a real need to do so like an orchestra or similar group where they aren't always playing a melody and there are many other parts going into their ears.


Thanks! You just saved me a lot of typing. Kids who are really good at playing by ear naturally often fall into this category, and Donna explained why very nicely! I teach piano and speak from experience. Naturally, there are always exceptions, and, of course it's not impossible for most people who play by ear to learn to read music well, but it's hard when kids memorize pieces almost right away or are playing by sound after hearing it once or twice.

[Karin]

. If you are a string player or voice, great sense of pitch is critical for pitch formation. For improvisation or composing, having harmonization-training is critical. ".

So, I am of the opinion, if you are a pianist, having very strong music reading skills and training (ie. visual processing) is a must, unless you are focused on improvisation. Read through tons of music, and learn multiple pieces at a time. Harmonization training is great.

If you are a string instrumentalist, though, initial training primarily by ear, like Suzuki-method works great, since it truly trains your ear to hear/listen for the pitch. :001_smile:


This entire post was great. You can't play some instruments well without a great ear (violin, horn ...aka French Horn..., etc) so learing to play them isn't the same as the piano. Also, the woman who coached me for my last ear tests, a vocalist, but a college theory major, told me she thinks pianists tend to have lazy years because they don't have to hear the pitch before they play it. She is the one who convinced me that I had a great ear, just lazy, and I got a perfect score on my last ear test.

It's true that your ultimate goal does affect what you do, and we're not all going to have the ideal training. I didn't. However, since I teach piano with the two staves, I am a real stickler when it comes to reading music (but I also work on ear training, etc, from early on) and have a favourite method that I find works better than any other one I've tried, for reading music, but also for certain other things. With piano, it's not just that you're reading two staves, but you might be playing up to 8 notes at once if you're playing solid chords with both hands. How about Bach Preludes and Fugues where you might be playing four different "voices" with two hands.

That said, I wasn't taught to improvise, and wish I had been, etc. Naturally, if I'd been highly motivated I could have learned it, but I wasn't :).

At any rate, I approached my reply as a piano teacher rather than as a musician, but it does depend on your goals (perhaps I mentioned something about that.) I also wanted to add more to it than intervals to give a bigger picture. Thanks so much for sharing your post, and for everyone who has shared valuable insights & information since there is always more to learn.

[Karin]

So are the rules for jazz, etc., like the ones for counterpoint? Not that I know counterpoint, but I have heard the rules before and played with them.

I think I understand what you mean about the chord charts. I can do that a little, but I do it by ear. I hear what might go nicely with something and can sing it or play it on the recorder or flute. (I guess wrong enough, though, that I don't do it with anybody except my husband or sisters. It is much, much easier to do if someone is playing bass, too.) I didn't know how to do it from a chord chart, though, until you explained. It must be figure it out quickly, on the fly! No wonder you are pleased with yourself!

I asked my son more about how he plays and for once got an answer other than "I don't know. My fingers just do it." I think (but I'm still not sure) that he is learning elaborations like putting in a grace note or repeating a bit in a different octave, and different rhythm patterns, or different chord patterns. Then he adds those to something he already knows. When he gets bored, he goes and learns part of a new piece and then starts working on that. He didn't say so, but I'm fairly sure he is making up melodic parts, or at least parts of parts, to go with whatever else he's figured out. He didn't want lessons because the teacher was making him learn whole pieces and he just wanted to learn the interesting bits out of them and then go play with them. I guess he won't be bored for awhile, if that is the sort of thing he is stealing out of other pieces of music. As you suggested, I offered lessons or help of some sort if he ever feels stuck.

Thank you!
-Nan


If he's enjoying it, let him be. One doesn't have to take lessons to love music, of course, but the piano teaching background rears it's head in me. I think of kids that might go on to play classical music seriously, and that's certainly not for everyone, nor should it be. Imagine if that's all there was to music--I love so many kinds of music (well, I'm choosy within each type, but I like lots of types.)

[JeanM]

BTW: having a perfect pitch can also be a clutch. I recall our Advanced Ear Training professor really coming down hard on students with perfect pitch because we were not learning to hear the intervals precisely and was thus, "sloppy". We just sang the pitches we heard in our head serially, versus, hearing and understanding the "intervals" or hamonies. I also recall being more challenged with harmonic dictations that were multi-voiced or multi-staved, (ie tougher time hearing vertically) even when I can do single-line melodic dictations real-time as it was being dictated.

So to me, this whole area has been an interesting observation in how your brain works! Sorry for the long post, but it has been a life-long interest.:001_smile:

This was a great post, and I agree totally with it.

An off-topic question, but I don't often "meet" people with perfect pitch. Do your kids also have perfect pitch? I have perfect pitch myself, but neither of my children do. I sometimes find it difficult to teach or explain things to them.

Jean

[zaichiki]

This was a great post, and I agree totally with it.

An off-topic question, but I don't often "meet" people with perfect pitch. Do your kids also have perfect pitch? I have perfect pitch myself, but neither of my children do. I sometimes find it difficult to teach or explain things to them.

Jean

Karin,
Another OT question -- but what exactly IS perfect pitch?

I remember a game dd's viola teacher did with her class. She took 8 chairs and lined them up next to one another in the room. She told the kids that each chair represented a note on the scale. Then she asked my dd to choose a chair to sit in. She played a note for that chair (maybe it was D, I don't know). Then she played another and another, in sequence, from Twinkle or another easy song from dd's Suzuki repertoire. Dd was to choose the matching chair for each note. (Sort of like playing Twinkle on the chairs instead of on the viola.) I thought the game was teaching the kids to hear intervals or something? But did it have something to do with knowing which notes were played? Or is it different because it's a song dd could already play (and therefore already knew the notes)?

Another scenario -- if a child can play a song they already know, but begin on a different note, and play it all the way through the first time with hardly any wrong notes, is that perfect pitch? Or is that relative pitch? Dd's teacher seemed very surprised when she could play Jingle Bells, which she plays by ear, in several keys, though she had never played it in those keys before. Is she just hearing the intervals? Maybe this has nothing to do with either perfect or relative pitch? Anyway, I was surprised that the teacher was surprised -- because dd does this sort of thing all the time and I didn't know it was surprising.

I have a musician friend who tells me that her son has perfect pitch. He can sing a perfect A (or any other note) on request. She has tuned her violin, and b/c she's the concertmaster, an entire orchestra, to her son. Isn't that something?!

[Donna]

Karin,
Another OT question -- but what exactly IS perfect pitch?

Another scenario -- if a child can play a song they already know, but begin on a different note, and play it all the way through the first time with hardly any wrong notes, is that perfect pitch? Or is that relative pitch? Dd's teacher seemed very surprised when she could play Jingle Bells, which she plays by ear, in several keys, though she had never played it in those keys before. Is she just hearing the intervals? Maybe this has nothing to do with either perfect or relative pitch? Anyway, I was surprised that the teacher was surprised -- because dd does this sort of thing all the time and I didn't know it was surprising.

Perfect pitch is being able to hear the note without any reference point. For example, dd can tune her violin without any reference note (from a tuner or tuning fork) and can hear that a string is out of tune, even slightly, and it really bothers her. I noticed that when the orchestra director is tuning the kids after they've tuned themselves, he never changes anything on dd's violin. When playing along with a couple of her older Irish music CDs, she will re-tune her fiddle a little flat because she says the fiddle on the CD is slightly flat and it bothers her to not play at the same pitch.

When dd was 3yo and just starting Suzuki, she would hear a bird chirp or a lawnmower running and would tell me what note the noise was. A couple times I would run in to check her on the piano and she was always correct. She doesn't do that as much anymore but does tell me what key a tune is in all the time and it blows my mind because I took piano for 10 years and my teacher never explained music theory so it seems like magic to me though I am learning about it now and realize it's not.

Relative pitch is being able to "hear" a note with a reference like another note.

I don't know what it is called when they can play a song easily in another key but dd can easily change the key a tune or song is played in and often has to do this when fiddling because other fiddlers know the tune in a different key. Just like your dd's teacher, my dd's teacher will ask dd if she can play a Christmas song in another key then give her the first note and dd will easily finish the song. Also, there were people in a session in Ireland who seemed amazed that dd easily did this with a difficult fiddle tune. I was a little surprised as well because she had never played it in the other key and it wasn't just a matter of moving up a string, it was entirely different fingering and a much more difficult tune than the Christmas and Suzuki songs she had changed before. It was pretty neat.

[Nancy in SoCal]

Look into the Kodaly method books. They are small books with singing exercises in them. They are great at helping to distinguish intervals and to gain confidence. It's what I was taught in college.

[Nan in Mass]

I don't know what it is called when they can play a song easily in another key but dd can easily change the key a tune or song is played in and often has to do this when fiddling because other fiddlers know the tune in a different key. Just like your dd's teacher, my dd's teacher will ask dd if she can play a Christmas song in another key then give her the first note and dd will easily finish the song. Also, there were people in a session in Ireland who seemed amazed that dd easily did this with a difficult fiddle tune. I was a little surprised as well because she had never played it in the other key and it wasn't just a matter of moving up a string, it was entirely different fingering and a much more difficult tune than the Christmas and Suzuki songs she had changed before. It was pretty neat.

Maybe it is just called playing by ear? Because it isn't really any different than playing a song that you know but have never played before, is it? Except possibly a bit easier? I don't think it has anything to do with perfect pitch because I can do it and I don't have perfect pitch. I just hear the song in my head and my fingers play the note I hear. It seems like I ought to be able to sight sing, since my brain can obviously calculate how far apart notes are and tell my fingers which notes to play, but it doesn't seem to go the other way. Sigh.

What I want to know is whether one can learn perfect pitch?

-Nan

[zaichiki]

Maybe it is just called playing by ear?

Hmmm... it's gotta be more than that, though, in order to surprise a seasoned Suzuki teacher, right? I mean, this teacher was raised a Suzuki kid, is Julliard-trained, and has taught hundreds of kids using the Suzuki method. She was surprised. Maybe dd just "plays by ear" a little better than she expected? I have no idea. I just noticed the reaction and wanted more info. I *could* ask the teacher, but she does lessons back-to-back and there really isn't time before/after. And... I don't want to ask her in the lesson in front of dd.

I don't think it's perfect pitch. But I had wondered what perfect pitch IS, exactly. And what exactly does it mean to have good relative pitch? Is that just recognizing intervals? Does it basically mean just being a little better than expected at playing by ear? You know... maybe that really is it.

[Donna]

Maybe it is just called playing by ear? Because it isn't really any different than playing a song that you know but have never played before, is it? Except possibly a bit easier?

What I want to know is whether one can learn perfect pitch?

-Nan

From everything I have read on perfect pitch, the jury is out on whether or not it can be learned. I have read that in populations of children who are taught music early with a method like Suzuki, perfect pitch occurs more often than in the general population. Is that because parents are taking musical kids to those kinds of lessons? Is it because parents who are musical themselves value music education so they are kids with a genetic predisposition to perfect pitch? Or it is because the early training "teaches" perfect pitch?

I don't think that perfect pitch has anything to do with being able to transcribe songs to different keys either. Maybe it would be called playing by ear? Hearing the intervals and just being able to play them.

[JeanM]

Hmmm... it's gotta be more than that, though, in order to surprise a seasoned Suzuki teacher, right? I mean, this teacher was raised a Suzuki kid, is Julliard-trained, and has taught hundreds of kids using the Suzuki method. She was surprised. Maybe dd just "plays by ear" a little better than she expected? I have no idea. I just noticed the reaction and wanted more info. I *could* ask the teacher, but she does lessons back-to-back and there really isn't time before/after. And... I don't want to ask her in the lesson in front of dd.

I don't think it's perfect pitch. But I had wondered what perfect pitch IS, exactly. And what exactly does it mean to have good relative pitch? Is that just recognizing intervals? Does it basically mean just being a little better than expected at playing by ear? You know... maybe that really is it.

I think the ability to transpose is different from having perfect pitch. One of my ds's is quite good at it, the other is not. Neither has perfect pitch.

As far as what perfect pitch is, there is quite a good explanation at

http://perfectpitch.ucsf.edu/study/

I took their test a while ago, just for fun. They define it as the ability to identify pitches. I was told, in no uncertain terms, by one of my ear training professors in college, that it didn't "count" as perfect pitch, unless you could accurately produce any note when asked, even if woken up in the middle of the night. So if someone woke a person with perfect pitch and said, "Sing a B-flat," they could accurately sing a B-flat.

[JennW in SoCal]

I've really enjoyed this thread and have learned some things along the way.

Music is something that does require certain innate gifts, but many shortcomings can be overcome by good teaching and lots of practice. Perfect pitch is cool, but not a litmus test for figuring out who will become a great musician. There is so much more to it -- rhythm, blending, sight reading. But, to me, the bottom line is a pure love of making music. It scratches an itch deep in my soul. The only reason to practice, for me, is so I can play with others, whether it is string quartets, pit orchestras in community theater, contemporary music groups, or like I did tonight, sight reading Christmas carols as part of a mixed quartet providing entertainment at a holiday gathering. We had a blast!

I am writing this just to connect with the other musicians here who no doubt love to play as much as I do, and to encourage the parents of budding musicians that if your child loves music, he or she will stick with it. My oldest son quit piano but kept with singing, has a beautiful tenor voice and will no doubt sing throughout his life. My youngest son quit violin, quit choir and doesn't miss music at all. It kills me, but he just isn't wired for it. I am about to turn 50 and am the youngest member of my string quartet!! I hope I will still be playing when I'm in my 70s, as our violist is. Shoot, I played in a community orchestra back in the early 80s with a woman who was 100! She had actually met Brahms when she was a young violinist in Germany!!

[Renai]

Maybe we just lucked out then? My kids have always been very interested in trying out new sheet music. I'm sure their teachers' attitudes and the way they presented new sheet music (as exciting and as "rewards") had a lot to do with that.


I agree with you and Donna. I've played by ear most of my life, and even though I took a couple of classes and learned Every Good Boy Does Fine and FACE, sightreading is a weakness I'm trying to get better at. I was in a (church) environment where reading music just was not a high priority- a lot of play by ear and improv.

I also agree with you about the method. When I heard how Suzuki taught, I was biased against it. At first, I was skeptical of the Suzuki method because it was play-by-ear geared (it seemed to me), but over the years have found that many Suzuki-trained musicians have a good ear and sightreading technique.

[Karin]

Perfect pitch is being able to hear the note without any reference point. For example, dd can tune her violin without any reference note (from a tuner or tuning fork) and can hear that a string is out of tune, even slightly, and it really bothers her.

I don't know what it is called when they can play a song easily in another key but dd can easily change the key a tune or song is played in and often has to do this when fiddling because other fiddlers know the tune in a different key. .


I was taught different terminogy and that absolute pitch is being able to sing the note A, for example, without having had to hear any other note first, and that perfect pitch is being able to sing a note dead on when you hear it. You'd be amazed at how many people can hear a note but not sing it spot on. Most children can learn perfect pitch if they start music early enough. So, a child who can hear the pitch and tune her violin without hearing any other note has absolute pitch.

HOWEVER, apparently different people have different ideas on this terminology, since Dictionary.com has 2 entries, with 2 definitions each, and this is what they have to say:
absolute pitch
n.

The precise pitch of an isolated tone, as established by its rate of vibration measured on a standard scale.
Music The ability to identify any pitch heard or produce any pitch referred to by name. Also called perfect pitch.
Dictionary.com is an American dictionary, and I was taught my terminology in a couple of places in Canada (perhaps there's variation there, too).

Changing keys is called transposition.

Since an oboe cannot be tuned once the reed has been cut (I bought cut reeds as a kid since no one taught me to cut them, but serious oboists & professionals cut their own) that's it, orchestras generally tune to the oboe. When you see a professional first violinist tuning an orchestra, s/he has generally checked to see if they're in tune with the oboe in the back, first. That information I got second hand from a friend who has played cello in orchestras for years.

[mominsac]

As far as what perfect pitch is, there is quite a good explanation at http://perfectpitch.ucsf.edu/study/


Thanks for this link! I'm taking the research test for fun, and I found their study interesting. They say one loses perfect pitch with age, and I'm definitely one of them! I also figure it has to do with not playing much (piano) these days.

Having perfect pitch is just a small plus, (especially if you are teaching/coaching, conducting, composing) but certainly not a big advantage for performers. Nothing special, other than when you have to take those pesky music dictations tests, or correct your kids when they are practicing wrong notes - then it's a plus to be able to tell them what notes they were playing wrong and what note they should be playing.:D But seriously, having good sense of relative pitch is just as important, ie. just developing that ear is what is key for harmonization, singing, tuning etc. Good transposition skills is part of that. And you can develop all these, I believe.

As an afterthought, one thing I grew up on when I was young and used as primary method of singing was the fixed-"do" solfege. Fixed-"Do" solfege is used in many other parts of the world. Looking back, I think it was instrumental in developing my sense of pitch because what we know as "C" was a "Do" all the time, and Do-Re-Mi is a lot easier to sing musically than "CDEFGABC". In fact, when I want to recollect a pitch, I have to sing in Do-Re-Mi. In the US, they teach relative-Do solfege, which is great for building transposition skills but not for building sense of fixed pitch.

[spiderwoman]

Learn the songs that go with each interval:
http://www.people.vcu.edu/~bhammel/theory/resources/macgamut_theory/songs_interval_recognize.html (http://www.people.vcu.edu/%7Ebhammel/theory/resources/macgamut_theory/songs_interval_recognize.html)
Post the interval on a paper with the song name next to it. Each day spend five minutes playing the interval on the piano and having your son identify it by singing the interval back to you and also singing the song that goes with it. He will learn them in no time. Remember to play them in reverse order too, not just bottom note then top or whatever.
Good luck!

[Jakobsen]

There is an even longer list of songs organized by their first interval here:
http://www.earmaster.com/intervalsongs

Each song includes a link to a YouTube video and there is a tool to generate your own chart of preferred songs.

[Nan in Mass]

That is interesting about the fixed-do versus relative-do. I didn't realize anyone used fixed-do.

[zaichiki]

I was told, in no uncertain terms, by one of my ear training professors in college, that it didn't "count" as perfect pitch, unless you could accurately produce any note when asked, even if woken up in the middle of the night. So if someone woke a person with perfect pitch and said, "Sing a B-flat," they could accurately sing a B-flat.

Aha! Good explanation, thanks. :)

[zaichiki]

Having perfect pitch is just a small plus, (especially if you are teaching/coaching, conducting, composing) but certainly not a big advantage for performers. Nothing special, other than when you have to take those pesky music dictations tests, or correct your kids when they are practicing wrong notes - then it's a plus to be able to tell them what notes they were playing wrong and what note they should be playing.:D

I don't know if that's the definition of perfect pitch that I'd use... If that IS perfect pitch, then ALL of my kids' instrument teachers and conductors, AND almost every Suzuki-trained kid I've met has perfect pitch (which I don't buy 'cause I thought it was more rare than that). The teachers/conductors are ALWAYs saying something like "you need a higher second finger there" or "some of the second violins are not playing that G spot on today -- let's try it again and really hit that G."

Also, it seems to me that it's essential for strings players (violinists, cellists) to know when they're playing in/out of tune. You really can't play the instrument without being able to know if your finger is in the right place. But is perfect pitch *that* common?

I don't think it's perfect pitch to be able to tell if you're playing the right note or not (when you're playing a song). I think that's relative pitch (whether or not the note is in tune in relation to the notes around it --and even *I* can tell that to a certain degree when my kids are practicing and I know I don't have perfect pitch).

[Donna]

I don't know if that's the definition of perfect pitch that I'd use... If that IS perfect pitch, then ALL of my kids' instrument teachers and conductors, AND almost every Suzuki-trained kid I've met has perfect pitch (which I don't buy 'cause I thought it was more rare than that). The teachers/conductors are ALWAYs saying something like "you need a higher second finger there" or "some of the second violins are not playing that G spot on today -- let's try it again and really hit that G."

Also, it seems to me that it's essential for strings players (violinists, cellists) to know when they're playing in/out of tune. You really can't play the instrument without being able to know if your finger is in the right place. But is perfect pitch *that* common?

I don't think it's perfect pitch to be able to tell if you're playing the right note or not (when you're playing a song). I think that's relative pitch (whether or not the note is in tune in relation to the notes around it --and even *I* can tell that to a certain degree when my kids are practicing and I know I don't have perfect pitch).

What you are explaining is relative pitch. They have heard the song so much and for so long plus when they hear another note (a reference note) in the song, they can tell that the note in question is slightly out of tune. Someone with good relative pitch could hear an A then tune their instrument to that A or hear an A then sing a song from the reference note.

Perfect pitch or absolute pitch is being able to reproduce a note without a reference like tuning your violin without a tuner or tuning fork or singing a note when named without hearing a note to "tune" their voice to. Perfect pitch has been shown to be more common in children who are Suzuki trained from a very young age (3-4yo) than in the general population though I cannot remember where I read that bit of information.

[mominsac]

I don't know if that's the definition of perfect pitch that I'd use... If that IS perfect pitch, then ALL of my kids' instrument teachers and conductors, AND almost every Suzuki-trained kid I've met has perfect pitch (which I don't buy 'cause I thought it was more rare than that). The teachers/conductors are ALWAYs saying something like "you need a higher second finger there" or "some of the second violins are not playing that G spot on today -- let's try it again and really hit that G."

Also, it seems to me that it's essential for strings players (violinists, cellists) to know when they're playing in/out of tune. You really can't play the instrument without being able to know if your finger is in the right place. But is perfect pitch *that* common?

I don't think it's perfect pitch to be able to tell if you're playing the right note or not (when you're playing a song). I think that's relative pitch (whether or not the note is in tune in relation to the notes around it --and even *I* can tell that to a certain degree when my kids are practicing and I know I don't have perfect pitch).

Agree. One does not need perfect pitch to tell whether a note is in tune or if a note is played wrong. That's from intonation training and being familiar with the piece (visually or auditory). If you have good sense of relative pitch and are looking at the music or are given initial pitch orientation, you can probably also figure out what note it should be.

As defined by many here (with more precision), someone with perfect pitch can, without any other pitch orientation, produce a pitch and name it instantanously.

Here is an applicable situation: Say, you may be familiar with a very long piece by ear, but never seen the music (to establish any sense of relative pitch), you are in a different room, hear a note amiss (say within a very fast 16th-note passage), and without looking at the music, name the note that was played wrong, name the note that should be played, and reproduce the correct pitch, all instantaneously. (again, I suppose one can sing the correct pitch, if you knew the piece, but it may be hard to say what that note is if you've never seen the music, or were not given any pitch orientation.)

Maybe, that's common -- I don't know.

[JeanM]

That is interesting about the fixed-do versus relative-do. I didn't realize anyone used fixed-do.

I was taught both fixed-do and moveable-do. Of course that was a long time ago. I know I was taught fixed-do in the preparatory program I attended my last year of high school. I think we did fixed-do in college too, but I'm not totally sure. Sadly, my memory is no longer what it used to be.

[mominsac]

I was taught both fixed-do and moveable-do. Of course that was a long time ago. I know I was taught fixed-do in the preparatory program I attended my last year of high school. I think we did fixed-do in college too, but I'm not totally sure. Sadly, my memory is no longer what it used to be.

Yes, in some countries, they use "do-re-mi" as the actual name of the notes (vs. C-D-E etc). That would be fixed-do. I was very surprised to learn about moveable-dos in college.