Am I understanding Chang correctly?

[RappinPhil]

Ok, so after reading his section on memorization (and his example of the Bach Inventions), I think I get what Chang is saying, but I'm not 100% sure. So let me give it a stab and have you guys let me know if I understand him correctly.

Basically, in order to memorize a piece according to him (which he touts is hyper effecient)...

1) Learn the phrases of said peice HS, starting with the most difficult hand first, overlapping the phrases to ensure a smooth transition.

2) Increase the speed of which you play the peice HS up to 1.5x, but also slow it down to ensure you keep it memorized at all speeds.

3) Once HS is perfect at speeds higher then performed at (to ensure a "reserve" when actuallly performing), attempt to play hands HT.

4) During all of this, he says to have multiple pieces going to avoid senseless repetition.

5) Also, he points out that you'll "forget" HS, but relearning it, which will be quicker then first having learnt it, will stick in your memory better and better.

SO BASICALLY....
Play a piece HS, when you have it perfect at 1.5-2x faster HS, start adding HT. (This is where I get confused)....all the while, Chang stresses having multiple pieces going so to play HS and later HT on.

Do I have it right? And could someone please clarify what the deal is with HT? Obviously, HT is MUCH harder than HS. With that in mind, do you just apply the same rules you do for HS when learning a piece, that being, the ability to play a phrase HT perfecty at playable speeds? <---- Once that has been done, or esentially, the entire piece HT perfectly, attacking each phrase overlappinng...you have done it the Chang way?

Oh yes, and what does he mean when he says "parallel sets'. I feel that this is an intergal party of this thesis, but I do not understand it.

Thanks for reading this. It's kinda late and I'm tired and frustrated from not understanding Chang 100% (but I'm like that way with everything). So yeah...thanks!

[xvimbi]

And could someone please clarify what the deal is with HT? Obviously, HT is MUCH harder than HS. With that in mind, do you just apply the same rules you do for HS when learning a piece, that being, the ability to play a phrase HT perfecty at playable speeds? <---- Once that has been done, or esentially, the entire piece HT perfectly, attacking each phrase overlappinng...you have done it the Chang way?

Because HT is more difficult (and usually slower) than HS, HS is perfected to higher speed than the final speed. The idea is that then one may be able to play HT at final speed.

Oh yes, and what does he mean when he says "parallel sets'. I feel that this is an intergal party of this thesis, but I do not understand it.

Parallel sets are groups of notes that can be played together, i.e. chords, ideally by simply dropping the hand. In this case, the delay between the individual notes is zero. CC uses the unfortunate term "phase angle" to describe the delay. This reflects his background in physics, but is a bit confusing to the non-physicist. A phase angle of zero denotes the highest speed possible. After perfecting this (in order to work out where the most appropriate hand position is and what the fingering should be), one starts slowing down by adding delays between the notes. This method is in stark contrast to the "other" method, where one first learns to play a passage slowly and then ramps up the speed.

[noelle]

This probably sounds like a silly question ... but what are HS and HT?

[xvimbi]

This probably sounds like a silly question ... but what are HS and HT?

HS = hands separate
HT = hands together

[richard w]

I've been trying out Chang's memorization techniques, starting with Bach's two-part invention no.2 in C minor. Technically, this piece is well within my ability, but I've not really been a confident memorizer, and Bach especially can be quite difficult to memorize. As such, I've found the memorization quite time-consuming.

I started by mastering hands separate, generally taking half bars (ie 9 semiquavers). Such sections were very easy to absorb into short-term memory, and as soon as I had played them through two or three times I avoided looking at the music to repeat them. I then build the half bars into whole bars, and so on. If I thought I was doing something wrong, be it fingering or notes, I didn't hesitate to look back at the music, but generally I tried to build up the HS play with minimal reference to the music.

I then repeated the process HT, once both hands were memorized, again referring to the music, but only to speed up getting both hands going. Once the half bars were working I looked away again.

Then, and this bit I should probably have done earlier, I analysed the construction of the piece in order to rationalise it as more than just a continuous stream of semiquavers in two hands. With the structure in mind, I then learned to start from the beginning of every other bar - which I can do, but I do have to think about what each hand should start with.

Even so, I cannot reliably perform the whole thing from memory without lapses, that is until this morning when I guess the PPI had done its business and first time I got a blemish-free rendition. Even so, I don't feel completely confident just yet. Maybe more work and more slow practise will yield results. I'll go and run it through now.

Parallel sets are groups of notes that can be played together, i.e. chords, ideally by simply dropping the hand. In this case, the delay between the individual notes is zero. CC uses the unfortunate term "phase angle" to describe the delay. This reflects his background in physics, but is a bit confusing to the non-physicist. A phase angle of zero denotes the highest speed possible. After perfecting this (in order to work out where the most appropriate hand position is and what the fingering should be), one starts slowing down by adding delays between the notes. This method is in stark contrast to the "other" method, where one first learns to play a passage slowly and then ramps up the speed.

Thank you xvimbi, the term 'phase angle' was confusing me a little.

[noelle]

HS = hands separate
HT = hands together

Oh; duh.  Thanks

[RappinPhil]

So, Richard, how would you say your memorization has been affected as a result of using the Chang method?

[richard w]

I suppose I'd have to learn another Invention in the old way, and then compare the results. But, I suppose an early indication to my sentiments so far would be that I don't feel all that inclined to bother doing that comparison.

As Chang emphasises, you can't really separate the technical from the musical or the memorization. I feel that one of the advantages of this process has been that my fingering, technique and accuracy (if those things aren't the same thing - ie my 'playing') is rather better sooner than it would have been if I'd attempted to learn this piece HT slowly (at first) in larger sections.

I may not feel I've memorized this piece flawlessly just yet, but maybe in a few days time I will have. But there have been definite benefits in other respects.

I'm going to keep persevering with the method. I'm trying it out on some Beethoven next. I have been looking at some Chopin too, but I think I need to address my little finger problem (see my thread on the performance board) before I continue with the Op.44, and possibly the Op.61.




Richard.