Listening to multiple parts

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.

I think a way to do this is to just listen to music following scores. Become very familiar with a score/piece, try and follow a particular line at each time. So learn the violin lines, then learn the viola lines (and since you'll know the violin lines you'll hear them in the background and know what's coming etc, while still paying attention to the viola ones you're still learning) and so on.

I think the easiest way to do this is by learning such a piece on your own - if you play the piano or another keyboard instrument, it will greatly help to learn a Bach invention/sinfonia, or even a fugue. If you take up on a simple fugue and study it a lot (voice by voice, followed by a recording - preferably by someone like Gould or Argerich, who make the voices stand out exceptionally clearly) (in my opinion) and then learn it voice by voice on the piano, and then put everything together while still trying to maintain the voices clear, then you'll see how much easy it is to hear the different lines.

Other than that, it's all hard work and practice - the more you do it (learn pieces like that, or study music little by little and then putting it together), the better you'll become at it. I doubt anyone was born being able to dictate something they heard. Even Mozart had a very very early education in music, and was born in a musical family.

Perfect pitch might help you recognise the pitches or the melodies more easily, but mind you it's not going to make it easier for you to memorize it. Just because you can imagine a horse if I say "horse" and an alligator if I say "alligator", that doesn't make much difference on whether you'll remember a sequence of 10 animals accurately.

Search the site for other threads on developing perfect/relative pitch, if you need any help with that :)

Jujimufu and Bolanos summed it up nicely.

I think all of us here know that "hearing everything" in a piece isn't easy, and often pretty much impossible, even with a lot of training. A simple tonal melody might be easier, a bass line already harder, and even more so middle voices, freetonal voices, complex polyphonies of many voices, microtones, and so on. The learning never really ends.

It's also true that with enough training one can certainly learn to hear (and write down), say, all four voices in a string quartet. However I guess that most of those people who can seemingly play a whole orchestral piece by heart with all voices after listening to it a single time aren't actually remembering every note per se, but things like melody, harmonic progression, structural formulas, and deviations thereof. You have to keep in mind that pieces like Mozart's horn concertos aren't just random sequences of notes, but follow certain traditions and archetypes that reappear in a lot of music of the same period. Being familiar with such patterns makes it much easier for you to quickly "grasp" a piece of music, without actually having to remember every single note.

For example, in a classical piano sonata, you might recognize things like "Alberti bass, one bar in the tonic, one bar in the dominant" or "recapitulation - mostly the same as the exposition, just see how the transformation into the second theme is done and remember what else, except of tonal center of the second theme, has changed" etc. You learn such things intuitively after some time when you often try to repeat things you heard on the piano, for example. Unless it sounds really strange, there are only so many chords that can appear in a Mozart piece over a certain bass note.

As for hearing multiple voices simultaneously in your head - that is again a question of training, and again it's certainly not easy. Actually, I think most musicians rarely hear more than one or two voices accurately and really simultaneaously in their minds. It is more some sort of illusion, caused from switching between voices and other elements of the music all the time, which seemingly creates a single musical experience, but which in reality is a sequence of partial experiences. (Sort of like a movie made from single pictures that gives the illusion of one moving continuum.)

Personally, I find it extremely hard even just to listen to all voices of even a moderately complex polyphonic piece at the same time (say a 4 voice Bach fugue). I can listen to any single voice of it well, and two voices I can also still keep in mind at the same time. With three it already becomes hard, and really following four voices at the same time, without losing track of any of them at any time, is a real challenge that takes me a lot of concentration. I'm fully aware that there are many people who have much greater capabilities in this respect than myself, but we're all limited.

So train away, but don't get frustrated if you don't ever hear everything.

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.

You should listen to Explosions in the Sky. They usually have several different parts going on, and being able to hear all (usually) three of them at once may take a little work and help you a bit.

That's one of the only examples from modern pop music that I can think of, as far as a group being consistent.

It's damn difficult, but it makes you a better musician. Practice as much as you can. Start by following an easier part (like the bass or trumpets or something that sticks out) and then the harder-to-follow stuff (like the altos in a piece of choral music--let me tell you, they are THE hardest voice to follow, except for maybe second sopranos...) Hearing inner parts, just like singing/playing inner parts, develops your ear tremendously, and helps you get more out of pieces, others' and your own. I can't offer you any advice except, practice!

I appreciate this discussion, as there have been many great posts and I thank you all for the advice.

I've always wondered this, especially in dealing with choirs- how my high school director, could just tell immediately what parts needed work when it comes to tone and whatever- in the context of hearing all of the other parts. I hope one day to be as sharp when it comes to that sort of thing, and this thread touches on the subject, so I thank you guys for bringing it up!!:)