MisquotedTeabag

Interesting posts that I can relate with in some way or another. I've been doing most of what you've suggested at different periods of time and I've always enjoyed, as jujimufu suggested to 'transcribe' piano pieces, one part at a time. Although I'm an amateur pianist at best I get some sort of sick satisfaction in perfectly transcribing 'inner voices', regardless of their relative simplicity or complexity. As to following a score; again I've tried it and admitting though the habit never did stick, which is quite unfortunate. As to what Bolanos about perceiving 'block' harmonies and what Gardner implied as having a knowledge of musical syntax certainly helps. I mean, most classical and Romantic pieces adhere to the same notion of a functional harmony in varying levels of complexity in their chromatic divergences and thus provide the listener with an understanding of what he is about to listen to. And yes, I can, although not too well, break down a Symphonic piece to 'blocks' of harmony and then construct the composers voice leading to a certain extend but this all relies on a understanding between composer and listener. A person who might be well adopt at transcribing purely tonal works, no matter how complex they maybe, might have a huge predicament when tackling an atonal or polytonal piece, which in my opinion requires a more bestial or childlike mode of perception. Do you see where I'm heading? My question is simple. Is it possible to train yourself to perceive music, without any understanding of tonality or harmony, completely with every little harmonic filler intact? I can achieve this to a certain extend, I know. When I was a complete novice to the concept of polytonality for quite a long time I was a complete alien to that sort of harmonic syntax and I started listening to music, not as a student of music, but as a student of sound. The same was I use to hear and listen to harmonics without any understanding of what they were. If anyone has anything to add to that I'd really appreciate it; really can you develop that sort of brutally primitive hearing? Or is that concept a paradox of its own. -shrug- And as to what Bolanos said about distinguishing between a C minor and a C major, I think it has more to do with, simply, an implied harmony; and I think all musicians are aware to a certain extend of those implied harmonies. Of course this maybe a sufficient way of audiating harmony for all intents and purposes; but can it go further? Nature? Nurture? I don't care, I'm just curious about how Mozart was said to have composed as he was taking musical dictation. Hyperbole, to a certain extend, I know; but it is certainly evidence to suggest that audiation of complex harmonies and a voice leading is a possible, atleast to a certain level. I think atonal polyphony is the key here. If anyone here is able to transcribe the full score for a poem in peirrot Lunaire after only a relatively few number of listenings to it; hats off. Again, just a thought.... For now, I'm just going to go listen to more C major triads under F sharp major triads and try and pretend I didn't know that and maybe someday I'll actually manage to develop myself a decent pair of ears.

First thread. =D!!!! This is an unusual question, I suppose but pretty simple at the same time. How does one listen to and 'be aware of' multiple 'voices' in a piece; whether it be orchestral, vocal or whatever. In other words, if you listen to a piece of music with fresh ears for the first time, say a string quartet, would you be able to sing, say the viola part or the second violin part. As listeners are we really aware of the 'harmonic fillers' or in more definite terms the alto and tenor parts, or even the bass part(in four part writing provided the melody is in the soprano).. Listening to a Mozart Horn Concerto it really isn't that difficult to sing back the melody played by the first violins or the horn, even after only one listening to the piece but what prevents a listener from being able to sing back any other part played by any other instrument playing the harmonies? Does perfect pitch have anything to do with it? Might seem a strange suggestion but I've noticed musicians with perfect pitch, when playing a piece by ear, generally tend to try and include parts played by other instruments. Now it isn't harmony in a 'blocky' sense, where one perceives a C major 7th or a B diminished 7th and then reconstruct their own version of it on their instrument. Is it possible to reconstruct, to a decent level of accuracy, the exact same sort of voice leading perceived in a piece after only one listening? Even a two voice piece? Of course this question naturally leads to my next whether it's possible to include multiple voices when 'playing' a piece of music in your head? Audiation, I think is the term. When I use the phrase 'is it possible' I'm asking you to share with me, if possible, your experiences when perceiving a piece of music with regard to my question.

^^ Don't think so. =P Close unfortunately, isn't perfect. You are bound to a hum a melody in the right key some of the time; provided you hum enough melodies. The real trick of course would be to know when you hum something in the correct key . -sigh- I do know what you mean about modulation. I remember listening to the development section of Mozart's 40th and being utterly at lost as to what key a particular portion of music was. It took me 100s of listenings to realize how simply and methodically the key changes were constructed. Embarrassing, really. And although I've improved from there when listening to say Wagner or maybe a polytonal Stravinsky, gosh I'm smack back in pacific lost and confused. =(