Ear training

[jlmap]

Hi! I'm 43 years old, and an amateur pianist. I never took proper classes, but I can play some quite advanced works, like Chopin's Ballade in G minor, Sonata in Bb Minor (all 4 movements), Revolutionary Etude, Scherzo in B flat minor, Beethoven moonlight sonata (all 3 movements), the first fugue of the WTC, book 1, etc. For about one year I discovered that I had to study scales, arpeggios, theory and ear-training. Indeed, I made an enormous progress since I began to study these topics. They are all more or less the same thing. I can see that theory is about what you should be able to listen to, ear training is the actual ability to listen to these things, and scales are the physical space where these things happen. But, specifically about ear-training, I'm a bit ansious. I can identify all intervals within an octave, the main types of chords (including major 7th, minor seventh, half-diminished, etc), 5 notes melodies, and I get about 60% of four triads chord progressions in my cellphone app (I'm just working on the major modes now). It made a huge difference in the way I play. I can listen to an incredible amount of things that I didn't imagine were part of the music I play. But I can listen to it just as I study the score. I can't listen to these things in recordings from works I did not study.
The progress with chord progressions is being very slow. Is it normal? How long does it take to be decent in aural skills? For example, to be able to listen to chord progressions in real music recordings? Is it ok to just stay with the cellphone app? How much ear-training do I have to learn to be a decent pianist?

[j_tour]

The progress with chord progressions is being very slow. Is it normal?

Yes.  It took me years, even beginning at a young age learning isolated intervals and the basic triad qualities.

Is it ok to just stay with the cellphone app?

No, probably not.  There are textbooks, such as Modus vetus, which I just learned about from another thread here, and there's always practicing.  Maybe your mobile phone can merge with your brain and impart knowledge, but I wouldn't think so. 

How much ear-training do I have to learn to be a decent pianist?

There are plenty of decent pianists or other technicians who have no ear-training.

But to be a good musician, you'll need all of the ear-training. 

So, you'll have to practice, and start transcribing, with a pencil and paper, every day.

But that's only if you want to be a musician, and not just a pianist.

FTR I'm about your age, and can similarly play some fancy stuff, but most of my adult life was spent on pianos and the Hammond organ doing rock and roll, jazz, and so forth.  Yeah, I would say it's a long-term committment to being adept as a musician, instead of just a player.

One thing you might consider is using a second instrument — a guitar, or something — to develop your skills.  That's in addition to the pencil and paper and vocalizing you'll do while doing solfège.  Another layer of abstraction.  Technical ability means nothing when it comes to your ability to hear and articulate common practice period harmony, for example.

[jlmap]

Thank you! It was very helpful!

[perfect_pitch]

Try some of the purple ear-training exercises at the bottom of the page.

https://www.musictheory.net/exercises

If you like it, it's worth getting the app. I use it on my students all the time.

[jlmap]

Thank you! So you think apps can take you far?

[perfect_pitch]

It can definitely help in the beginning for sure. Understanding by ear the basic chords & intervals are the building blocks. Once you have a better ability to pick them easily and quickly, then you can try transcribing harder works of music.

[volcanoadam]

I use that page for ear training:
https://pitchimprover.com/index.php?type=Chords
You probably already know that singing is absolutely essential in aural training, so try to sing every exercise you do. Progress is slow, but after some time you start recognizing notes, intervals or cords the same way you recognize words. It just requires plenty of time and practise.
Learn all intervals before you move to cords, there's no point in trying to recognize cords if you can't recognize the individual intervals they're build on. When learning cords try to recognize/sing all single tones of the cords, so solfege is very helpful.

[jlmap]

Thank you! It was helpful! I can already identify intervals within an octave and all main chords (including main seventh chords). I can confidently  identify aleatory chord progressions using just I, IV and V on the app. I'm trying to learn to identify aleatory chord progressions using triads from I to viio. I'm working on this in the app for about 4 months, every da, about 40 minutes per day. I was planning to learn it by the end of the year. Is this an irrealistic goal?

[jlmap]

By the way, I got the book "Motus vetus" suggested above! Very interesting!

[quantum]

As others have pointed out above singing is an essential part of learning ear training. 

Take the melodies in your Modus Vetus book and sing them using solfege.  At  first you may want to play along at the piano.  However, your aim should be to sing the melodies without any aid of another instrument.  What you want to be able to do is to take a melody you have not previously seen or heard before and sing it, without hearing it played on an instrument.  Instead of imitating pitches you hear from an instrument, you will be developing the ability to internally generate pitches. 

What does singing have to do with ear training?  If you can internally generate pitches, it is much easier to recognize them when other instruments are producing them.

[perfect_pitch]

However, your aim should be to sing the melodies without any aid of another instrument.  What you want to be able to do is to take a melody you have not previously seen or heard before and sing it, without hearing it played on an instrument.  Instead of imitating pitches you hear from an instrument, you will be developing the ability to internally generate pitches. 

What does singing have to do with ear training?  If you can internally generate pitches, it is much easier to recognize them when other instruments are producing them.

Can't disagree with a single word of it. It's absolutely true.

[jlmap]

Yes, I quickly noted that I had to sing everything. When practicing intervals, I noted that if you solphege the harmonic interval that you hear, when you hear it again, you sing it before you even recognize consciously the notes. And when practicing recognizing chords, I noted that it was easier if I sing the usual notes that follow the notes I'm hearing in order to form a IV-V-I cadence, or a ii-V-I cadence. For example: the major seventh is usualy the IV7, so, when I hear "mi", I know this is it, and I sing in my head "mi-re-do", that is the usual movement this "mi" makes in order to go to I. Or when I listen to a first inversion major chord, I sing the "mi" in the base, followed by "fa-sol-do", that is the expected movement of the bass for a I-IV-V candence.

My question is about how long does it usually take to learn to hear chord progressions. Is it a reasonable goal to be able to identify 4 chord progressions with chords I to viio in about 8 months?

Another question: Should I have a teacher in aural perpception? Or can I go by myself until I'm able to do all the exercises of the cellphone app?

[perfect_pitch]

My question is about how long does it usually take to learn to hear chord progressions. Is it a reasonable goal to be able to identify 4 chord progressions with chords I to viio in about 8 months?

Sadly enough, I can't really help answer that. I was born with perfect pitch so I don't know how long it takes the average human to develop these skills.

[doug123]

I wanted to reply as this has become a passion of mine. When I was in University I was horrible at "ear training". In particular the singing. I was so bad no one in the class could keep from laughing. In fact I would hear whispers like "alight....here we go" after I go called on. As you can imagine I did not do well, and hated it! 

But I was still stuck.  Over the last 10 years I have made so much progress I have become a "convert".  If you would have told me 10 years ago I could transcribe what I can easily do now I would have been thrilled. 

Now, no short cuts, or snake oil.  Yes, transcribing daily is going to produce the best results, and "sing, sing, sing".  You can add on transposing, improvisation, and sight reading as being helpful too.

If you are really, really serious about wanting to have a breakthrough in "ear training" than
I cannot recommend highly enough the work of Marianne Ploger.

https://www.theplogermethod.com/the-ploger-method

In my opinion it is like learning to play piano. Yes, you can progress, but having a great teacher makes the world of difference. You will save so much time, and avoid fooling yourself.  I spent three weeks with her doing ear training for 8 hours a day. Boy, what an experience. 

I am not affiliated in any way. She is the head of ear training at Vanderbilt University (which is widely respected).  This is NOT snake oil. She was a student of Nadia Boulanger and you will get taught in a similar style.

Expect lots of rhythmic training, as well as singing modes, and reading in 7 clefs.

To directly answer some of your questions:

Absolutely begin learning some pieces by ear alone. If you can stand them, Bartok's Micokosmos (spelling?) is wonderful to begin transcribing away from the instrument. All of book 1 moves only by step.

Otherwise pick some music you want to play and notate them out.

A possible analogy with learning ear training for those of us without perfect pitch, is like learning sight reading. You begin to hear larger patterns, and this depends on the style and your knowledge of it. Use your whole brain.(Theory helps)  So for example when you ask about harmonic progressions Bach is a wonderful foundation. However the problem with "random progressions" is you don't get the syntax or the "meaning" of music. Things that don't "mean" anything are not likely to stay in your memory for long.  Imagine learning English by a bunch of random sentences. Of course it's all random at first, but your brain will categorise the meaning.

What helped me enormously was to spend an hour on "exercises", and then everyday working on a larger transcription project that was a real goal of mine.

I would either spend 10 minutes on each of the following (or 3 groups of 20 minutes, and alternate each day; like going to the gym and doing upper body one day, lower body the other)

1. Rhythm study: Sight singing only Rhythms
2. Solfeggi of 7 modes each starting on the same pitch
3. Solfeggi of notated examples (like the Modus Vetus, and Modus Novous) in 7 clefs.
    Bach Chorales: Both open score and closed versions.
4. Improvisation
5. Sight reading (anything)
6. Transposing music.  This included lots of mode mixture. For example I would take a Bach work for solo violin, and read it say in tenor clef.  Of course lots of direct transpositions too. (so if the piece was in A minor next play in F# minor)


Anyhow, I hope that helped.  I have sort of made peace now with my abilities to hear music. Remember we all hear music in our own way too, and be careful of too much homogenised study.

If you would like I can post examples of what I have transcribed. 

I am telling you the Ploger Training method is the best I have ever done in this area, and so glad I took the leap.

[j_tour]

Now, no short cuts, or snake oil.  Yes, transcribing daily is going to produce the best results, and "sing, sing, sing".  You can add on transposing, improvisation, and sight reading as being helpful too.

I thought your experience, as written, had quite a bit to relate to most everybody.

As a point of interest or inquiry, I've always found it interesting that textbooks in ear training seem to spend a good bit of time working on reading rhythms off the page.

I would assume any instrumentalist can do that aspect with no problem.

I suppose it should be covered in a beginning or elsewhere textbook, but besides people who are poor sight-readers to begin with, I've never found that to be a problem.

No, it's not a criticism, just I always wonder why textbook authors belabor the point.

You yourself hit it straight on:  sing, sight-sing, transcribe.  Every single day.

Although, many things as I've transcribed off (primarily jazz) records, I'd still stick with the real method:  sing it, off the page.  And vice versa.

Good post, so thanks.