What is the point of memorizing?

[thaicheow]

Hi,
This question has been with me for long.

According to american pedagogue, Francis Clark, memorizing the score should be part of the learning process of a song. Moreover, this should be kept as a habit. And I find that most conservatiores will require their students to memorize the pieces they perform.

I found that kids, the younger they are, the easier they memorize a piece. But for myself, most of the time I do not memorize. Though current I try to memorize the repertoires for my LTCL examination. I always fell into dilemma when they want to memorize the pieces during their exam. Can I just trust their memory? What if the glitch during exam??

Memorizing is tedious and time consuming. Moreover it is extremely unreliable, especially during exam or performance when one gets nervous. Pianist Ritcher was against this practice. And some well known pianists didn't even memorize.

So, what is the point of memorizing? Does memorizing actually enhance one's playing? If so, how does it enhance the performance??

Thanks.

[m19834]

The main point of memorizing pieces is so that, if you are in the middle of a concert and you forget the piece you are playing, you have a repertoire of other ones in your memory banks and can just start playing another one without skipping a beat.  hee hee ... that's a joke.

Anyway, music only makes sense to us as music if we have a musical memory of what came before it.  Kind of like hearing a joke -- if you forget everything that came before the punch line, the punch line won't mean much when it (finally  ) comes along !  I think that having a musical memory is more important than being able to play a piece of music from memory in concert, though obviously if you have a keen musical memory, playing from memory could follow suit.  The point of memory though, is to establish a musical context for what is happening in the present, thereby giving the present more meaning.

Currently, I am more interested in training my musical memory than in whether or not I can play a concert from memory -- as in, training my musical memory is the actual goal of my current work, rather than my aim being to sit up on stage, trying to get through a piece from "memory."

I think it's fair to ask :  What, exactly, is memory ? 

I think students can spend a lot of time not knowing what memory really even is, and that is why they are not sure how to actually go about acquiring it, and these are reasons it is unreliable then in situations where it really counts !

[omei]

I think it is worthwhile trying. Do it by heart, so the music comes from your heart.

[Bob]

It's worthwhile.  Really engrains the piece at a different level.

And there are plenty of ideas for dealing with glitches during performances.  It can be overcome.

[Bob]

Oh yes.  If you do that regularly, memorize things, then it's just another tool and part of prepping up the piece.  Not a big deal. 

I had a professor that made us play these little pieces each week.  By memory.  After awhile of that, it was a big deal.

There are lots of threads on this site about memory topics.

[thierry13]

Hi,
This question has been with me for long.

According to american pedagogue, Francis Clark, memorizing the score should be part of the learning process of a song. Moreover, this should be kept as a habit. And I find that most conservatiores will require their students to memorize the pieces they perform.

I found that kids, the younger they are, the easier they memorize a piece. But for myself, most of the time I do not memorize. Though current I try to memorize the repertoires for my LTCL examination. I always fell into dilemma when they want to memorize the pieces during their exam. Can I just trust their memory? What if the glitch during exam??

Memorizing is tedious and time consuming. Moreover it is extremely unreliable, especially during exam or performance when one gets nervous. Pianist Ritcher was against this practice. And some well known pianists didn't even memorize.

So, what is the point of memorizing? Does memorizing actually enhance one's playing? If so, how does it enhance the performance??

Thanks.

Memorizing does enhance your playing, your comprehension what you're playing and your capacity to learn new music. If it's tedious and time consumming, you should forget a career as a pianist, because it should NOT be. I mean, you should be able to memorize the work by the time you get it performance ready, just by working on the details of the music. If you have to work the music and then completly memorize after, there is something lacking in your work of the pieces, or you have a serious memory problem. I'm not trying to be harsh, it's just reality.

Now, it is REALLY frustrating to see somebody use Richter's weakness in his old age to back up his pointless points. It is not "most conservatories" who make their students memorize music. It is any music school that does. Any solo piano performance should be by memory. Playing with sheet music would simply not be as great a musical experience as a true performance. Now for the case of Richter. what, just a big what. Richter against playing by memory ? Are you F*****G kidding me? He played HIS WHOLE LIFE by memory, but in his old age, did not have memory problems as most people said, but his perfect pitch got lower. He heard things one-tone low or even lower than that. He had to play with sheet music and not look at his hands, because he could have played whole pieces in the wrong tonality if he didn't have sheet music. I ask you, please, to remove those sentences from your post : "Pianist Ritcher was against this practice. And some well known pianists didn't even memorize." That's not an order, this is a request, just please. It is plainly wrong and it is insulting to the memory of the great Richter. I explored the piano litterature and repertoire as well as it's interprets, I guess I heard every great known and a bit lesser known ones, and I NEVER, NEVER ever heard of or saw ANY decent pianist not memorize music. <- Richter STILL HAD pieces he played with sheet music in memory, he simply was affraid to present them in wrong tonality.

[dora96]

When I was young, most my teachers didn't encourage or even made memorization compulsory.
Most the music I learned it and passed it and learned something else.  Now I realized that how
stupid that I didn't make extra effort to memorize them. Because it is hard to play without the
music. Especially, when I am in public place, friends or students  always request that " can you play some music ?" How embarrassing, I can't because I don't have the music with me. As a pianist should have a set of repertoires, and should be able demonstrate and perform in  any time.  Of course, the memory is much better and easy when I was kid. The older I get, it is hard
to make it happened not because I don't want to. So many things in my life, my commitment to
work, family and kids become part of my distraction to learn music and memorize them. When I
were young, I didn't really l have lots of burden in life. It can be very big advantage to
concentrate and focus the learning. Unfortunately, I didn't realize it is important to memorize.
Most pianists, they practice 8 hours a day for many and many years even life time. Of course, they
can remember. Honestly, ordinary people who have the time and resource to do it ?  When I look
at Lang Lang. He is amazing, he performs so many concerts all over the world, his confidence
and memorization was very strict and firm practice and memorize everything he has learned when he was
young.

V. Horowitz said that he can remember everything. I truly 1% is inspiration 99% is perspiration. I
admire these pianists, real artist and amazing human being.  I do believe that it is not too late to
memorize as much as I can, once I start using my brain. It is amazing what the brain can do?

[dan101]

Try picking up a piece a few years after you had initially learned it. If the piece was memorized when first studied, then relearning the work is a much quicker process. Also, there's something very impressive about playing from memory, from an audience point of view.

[hyrst]

I always used to lack confidence with memorising - even believed it was not possible for me, although I have a brilliant memory for written words (photographic images of book pages I have read).  I was just intimidated and my early teacher never required it of me - she just accepted that I "couldn't memorise" (she was a beginners' teacher really).

Anyway, somehow I managed to scam my way through years of playing very little without books - I am a great sight reader and so if someone asked me to play something I would ask them what they had that they would like to hear, but it was nevertheless embarrassing  even when they thought I was really good (like Dora said).

What I hadn't realised was that I never had pieces really to an accomplished standard.  I could read and play pretty much anything to diploma level, reasonably accurately and with the basics of style and dynamics.  Most people thought I was good.  I have realised I was capable of far more. 

My current teacher occassionally asks if I have committed my pieces to memory yet - enough to keep me accountable.  Also, I have been much inspired by a student on this board and my own students (I can't expect them to value something I am not committed to myself).  So, I have begun to put proper work into my pieces - which includese memorising them.

What I have learnt over the last couple of years has totally changed my perspective and values.  I still don't find it easy to recall pieces (the nerves seriously get in the way and my mind and 'ears' go blank).  I am learning, though - and now I understand that I will never play a piece as well as I am capable of until I have memorised it, even if I perform it with the music in front of me and keep the reading and the memory functioning for certain pieces.

Memorising changes how I view a piece.   I stop concentrating on 'notes' and listen to sounds, harmonies, qualities and context.  I find that pieces that seemed hard or fast are actaully pretty simple - mostly looking or becoming keenly aware of chordal structure and form.  Notes no longer have individual qulities alone, but relate to those around.  Pieces become so much easier and I am freed to really hear them and to concetrate on the technqiue that will produce the best possible sounds.

It is hard to clearly explain what I have discovered - it is a mental revolution.  It must be experienced, stepping form one camp of avoidance and fear into that of revelation and inspiration.  All I can say is take the courage to really try and find out for yourself!  It is an awesome experience and well worth the work.

[omei]

Considering “What’s the point of memorizing a piece?,  I find that,  playing by memory is similar to driving without looking at the map. You are familiar with the route, so you know where to turn and when to stop. Then, you will start to pay attention to the scenery along the way, since you can drive with ease. By and by, you will begin to appreciate what you see. You will absorb the beauty of the scenery, and eventually it will become part of you!  This will happen, when you have learned the music by heart.

[gerry]

Aside from the obvious benefits to the performer of memorization, consider the audience. As a concert-goer, I've been to concerts where performers have used music - not just for one piece, but for almost all, Chopin Nocturnes included (I cite these because they are not among the more difficult to memorize). I find it hard to really trust that the performer has indeed mastered the piece and it detracts from my confidence in them and their performance and just appears amateur. My advice is guarded in that as I get older it becomes increasingly difficult to memorize, but I'm determined to do it. It just creates a wonderful degree of freedom to your playing to be free of the music. If you give up early-on and decide it's not worth it, then you will never cultivate the unique methods required to memorize should you want to in the future.

[nyonyo]

I personally do not put any effort to memorize a piece, once I can play a piece, I automatically memorize that piece.

I am surprised that one needs to make an effort to memorize a piece. 

[gerry]

Well bully for you

[thierry13]

I personally do not put any effort to memorize a piece, once I can play a piece, I automatically memorize that piece.

I am surprised that one needs to make an effort to memorize a piece. 

Exactly.

[gyzzzmo]

Exactly.

Usually i dont have to bother about memorising either, but when a piece gets lenghty and is not that hard to play, i have to put some effort in it.

[m19834]

I personally do not put any effort to memorize a piece, once I can play a piece, I automatically memorize that piece.

I am surprised that one needs to make an effort to memorize a piece. 

Exactly.

Usually i dont have to bother about memorising either, (...)

All this really means is that your practice strategies are well suited to you.  And if you manage without glitches in performance as well, it means your practice strategies are also well suited to the piece.

[gerry]

I'm sure we're all delighted that some forum members don't have trouble memorizing; however, this thread was intended to probe the reason why it's worth whatever effort it takes (albeit more for some than others)

[m19834]

Well, I think it is actually related, gerry, at least to me.  If your practice strategies are sound, there is not really a "point" in "memorizing", it just happens.  The point of learning the piece is to know the piece, and if you really know the piece (inside and out), it will be remembered.  However, people often approach pieces as though there are two separate stages, learned vs. memorized.  And this kind of memory, even under normal circumstances, is unreliable and may seem pointless.  However, if a person's practice strategies are sound, memorization will naturally happen as a person gets to know a piece.

I don't think a person needs to wonder what is the point of knowing a piece.  However, a good question may be, how do we really get to know a piece ?

As an interesting metaphor, wouldn't it be funny if instead of people asking if you know how to ride a bike, they asked "have you memorized how to ride a bike ?" We don't really 'memorize' how to ride a bike, we learn it to the point of knowing how to ride a bike (and because we know, we never forget).  Music can be a similar thing.

[Bob]

Here's one...

Reading music is work.  Takes effort.  Brainpower.

If you don't have to read, because it's memorized, you have all that energy free to do more with the music.

[gerry]

Hi,
This question has been with me for long.

Memorizing is tedious and time consuming. Moreover it is extremely unreliable, especially during exam or performance when one gets nervous. Pianist Ritcher was against this practice. And some well known pianists didn't even memorize.

So, what is the point of memorizing? Does memorizing actually enhance one's playing? If so, how does it enhance the performance??

Thanks.

Feel free to take the topic anywhere you like, but I still feel that the one's ability to memorize was not germaine to the above question and perhaps fuel for yet another thread. Now that we've established that for some, memorization comes easy and natural, and that indeed there may be practice approaches that may make it easier, perhaps we can return to addressing the necessity of doing so. It could be an interesting discussion if we attempt to stay on topic. I attempted to do so in my previous posting by sharing a concert-going experience where music was used. It might be useful to hear from some who don't feel this is a distraction; do some pianists feel that they can play a piece just as well and effectively in concert using music? I apologize if I have misunderstood the topic.

[Bob]

Accompanists don't memorize.  There is that. 

[gerry]

Yes, interesting how they/we can get away with it but the soloists can't. For what we often get paid, I wouldn't bother. Regarding my previous post about the concert I attended, I just found it distracting to have a page turner jumping up and down during the Nocturnes, etc.

[popdog]

I think memorising is crucial.  As people have said in various different ways, having a piece memorised allows a better performance.  I agree with Bob, in that memorising frees up brain power which can be used for other things.  It just makes the pianist freer and more of a performer.  Also, audiences really dig it.  I can't tell you how many times I have received comments about my "amazing memory", although in fact my memory is not particular good. 

I agree with some others in that I don't have to actually 'memorise' a piece, it just happens when I start learning/practising it.  Yet I think that pretty much everyone could get to this stage.  Because I was always an imitator/memoriser and terrible at sight reading, I always had great confidence in my memory, and I think this is why it's been good.  A lot of people feel that they can't trust their memory and fear memory blanks etc.  I think psychologically this is in itself a major problem with memorising. 

Chang wrote a lot about memorising in his book 'Fundamentals of Piano Practice', which might be a good read.

I think memorising is definitely achievable for nearly everyone.  And believe me, if you can't memorise, then I would probably be envious of your sight reading...

popdog.

[m19834]

Feel free to take the topic anywhere you like, but I still feel that the one's ability to memorize was not germaine to the above question and perhaps fuel for yet another thread. Now that we've established that for some, memorization comes easy and natural, and that indeed there may be practice approaches that may make it easier, perhaps we can return to addressing the necessity of doing so. It could be an interesting discussion if we attempt to stay on topic. I attempted to do so in my previous posting by sharing a concert-going experience where music was used. It might be useful to hear from some who don't feel this is a distraction; do some pianists feel that they can play a piece just as well and effectively in concert using music? I apologize if I have misunderstood the topic.

Well, I am not "feeling free to take the topic anywhere" I like, actually.  I am simply adding my opinions to the conversation.  My suggestion is that if one must ask what the point of memorizing a piece is, the point of learning the piece is being missed. 

[Bob]

You don't have to memorize a piece to learn it though, do you?  Or do you?  I suppose it depends what learning means to someone.

I think there are ways of studying and learning a piece that make it easier to memorize.  Some people just recognize more at sight, understand more, so that would make it easier to memorize.


The accompanist thing is making me think though.  I find it distracting from any angle to have a page turner.  Imagine being the soloist though -- "I hope my accompanist doesn't forget their part of the piece."  The accompanist needs the music so they can catch when the soloist slips up.  Imagine trying to quickly get back in if the soloist leaves out a few notes.  That knocks the challenge level up a bit.

[Essyne]

You don't have to memorize a piece to learn it though, do you?  Or do you?  I suppose it depends what learning means to someone.

Yeah, Bob - I always get this nagging feeling when I haven't memorized a piece because I still feel dependent on the sheet music - It's like I'm still ME in my body - not the MUSIC in my body - it just isn't that impactful and I can't really concentrate/emote as well.

The accompanist thing is making me think though. I find it distracting from any angle to have a page turner. Imagine being the soloist though -- "I hope my accompanist doesn't forget their part of the piece." The accompanist needs the music so they can catch when the soloist slips up. Imagine trying to quickly get back in if the soloist leaves out a few notes. That knocks the challenge level up a bit.

I know that I would FREAK OUT if my accompanist didn't have sheet music in front of him/her. Nothing personal, but it would just add to my pressure for all of the mentioned reasons. I love my accompanists, but I'm paying them to show whomever I'm auditioning for my voices full potential. Like I said before, I feel like you truly learn a piece when memorized - but I don't want an accompanist who knows THE PIECE. I want an accompanist who knows MY INSTRUMENT. At this point and time (auditioning), the spotlight is not on his/her instrument.

[nyonyo]

Many people have played piano many years, however, they have practiced incorrectly. When you read an essay from the beginning to end without understanding the structure the essay, it will be difficult if you have to memorize the essay. You need to break the piece into smaller sections, then practice and understanding section by section. When you master each section, you will automatically remember. Make sure each section that you choose have one complete phrasing and also understand the chord progression.

If you practice from the beg to end without understanding, you will end up putting special effort to rememorzie the piece.  Bottom line, one needs to understand the piece to make the memorization process  easy. If you have problem memorizing, it means you do not understand the music  and also a clear sign that you do not have good hearing. For those who have good hearing, as long as they remember the melody line, their fingers will automatically play, because they can translate what in their brain easily.