Memory Wksp Ii
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Memory Wksp Ii as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 2,500
- Pages: 6
Memorization and the Performing Musician
November, 2007
Conscious memorization is the period after which piece can be played technically correct with notation, but before a piece can be performed without music.
Memorization begins before & continues after conscious memorization Three stages Preview Practice Overlearning
Memorizing music involves mindful and deliber-ate practice. Developing an understanding of the music and recognizing patterns are active processes; thoughtlessly repeating muscular movements is a passive process.
Enculturation
Can memorize piece without understanding relationships (passive) Novice musicians Mindless repetition – not efficient nor
stable
Understanding a piece requires active processing Patterns unique to individual performer Labels beneficial, but not necessary Younger students need guidance to patterns
Mishra, J. (2005). A theoretical model of musical memory. Psychomusicology, 19(1), 75-89. Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
Analytical “memory” Also termed
Analytical “memory” requires the cognitive interpretation of patterns and repetitions in a musical work. The focus is on forming relationships and finding familiar patterns.
November, 2007
Conceptual memory
Not a “memory”, but a process Meaningful understanding of the piece Need not be theoretical analysis Need not be through score study
Jennifer Mishra
Differs from sensory memorization styles influenced largely by training and ability Expert and advanced musicians use; inexperienced performers do not
University of Houston
November, 2007
Human mind designed to find patterns.
Musical pattern is any meaningful grouping of notes Learned patterns e.g., scales, arpeggios, chords Found relationships between 2+ notes Pattern processed as unit, not individual notes Patterns allow for prediction Sight reading If memory lapse occurs “Man is, perhaps above all else, a predicting animal…He must pattern the world… we must pattern the world.” Music, The Arts & Ideas Leonard Meyer (p. 227-8 )
Structural boundaries (phrase structure)
emerging as dominant in experts. Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Jennifer Mishra
Music performed serially, but understood as a web of connections
Web is unique to the piece and to the individual performer Patterns are not what composer intended, but what performer perceives Performer’s understanding of piece impacts interpretation (Consciously or unconsciously) Can find unique patterns not intended by composer. Even aleatoric music, truly random music, can have
patterns imposed upon it by performer
University of Houston
November, 2007
Labels- brings patterns to the surface, fixes in mind Isolate elements to direct attention to patterns.
Mapping is visual analysis & simplification of structure Visual icons symbolizing patterns Verbalizing or labeling patterns Attending to patterns
Similarities can be unconsciously understood, but labeling brings to forefront Need not use theoretical terms/labels
Patterns & connections can be anywhere Shockley, R. P. (2001). Mapping Music: For Faster Learning and Secure Memory. A-R Publications.
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
Jennifer Mishra | [email protected]
November, 2007
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
1
Memorization and the Performing Musician
November, 2007
Common practice techniques emphasize pattern recognition; allow obscure patterns to become clear
playing hands separately blocking chords (on keyboard) rehearsing under-tempo rehearsing the piece backwards score study away from the instrument transposing
Analysis may be visual (based on scored notation) Analysis may be aural (i.e., not notation-based) interplay between voices in a fugue
Shockley, R. P. (2001). Mapping Music: For Faster Learning and Secure Memory. A-R Publications. Jennifer Mishra University of Houston November, 2007
Analysis may be kinesthetic (e.g., blocking chords)
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
1900
Most advocate a mixture of memorization styles implying memories are equal and mutually supporting No research support Isolated usage of strategies rare (depending on study)
Not “memories”, but processing strategies
Aural “memory” is the ability to hear the notes of a piece of music in the proper order without relying on a sound source or notation.
Used primarily to monitor performance for errors Good aural memory doesn’t insure good performance
can hear the next note and not know how
to play it
Removing aural feedback doesn’t affect performance
Pianists can perform in absence of
auditory and kinesthetic feedback (Repp, 1999)
Can be used as early as sight reading Used throughout notation-based practice
Also termed
melodic memory, auditory memory, ear
memory
Four “memories” popular memorization topic Focus of 60% of 121 pedagogical articles on memory since
November, 2007
Only effect when aural feedback removed
Aural, Visual, & Kinesthetic
was pianists pedaled less (Repp, 1998)
Sensory Learning styles – rather than memory stores Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Jennifer Mishra
Also termed
University of Houston
Photographic, eye memory Visual “memory” is the ability to recall a mental picture of the musical notation, as a whole or in parts, or to visualize finger patterns or hand positions.
Not necessarily full-scale photographic memory for notation Visualize part of notation Visualize finger patterns on an instrument Isolated visual memory trainable
Used primarily as a memory cue to initiate recall beginnings of sections difficult sections
Also termed Motor, hand, tactile, muscular, finger,
Kinesthetic “memory” is the retention of muscular movements involved in performing a piece of music. Tactile memory is the memory for the feel of the instrument and is not exactly the same as kinesthetic memory.
Jennifer Mishra
Jennifer Mishra | [email protected]
November, 2007
digital memory
Most misunderstood “memory” Often confused with automated
procedural memory (more later) Not incidentally developed Not “thoughtless”
Used to assist with difficult or awkward passages
University of Houston
November, 2007
2
Memorization and the Performing Musician
Research attempt to determine usage among musicians
November, 2007
Mixed results Aural: 4 – 42% Visual: 0 – 50% Kinesthetic: 3 – 50% Mixed: 13 – 58%
Variable definitions for memory styles Question too broad “which memory style do you use?” Musical Memory Inventory (MMI) Specific questions Asked “how often”
Discrepancy - lack of standard definitions
(Analytical not considered in all studies, so omitted) Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Past experiences affect the way we learn new material Every musical experience combines into schemas Expectations formed Applied to new music
Musical Memory Inventory (MMI) results
Mishra, J. (2007). Correlating Musical Memorization Styles and Perceptual Learning Modalities. Visions of Research in Music Education, 9-10. Retrieved July 14, 2007, from www.rider.edu/~vrme/
Continually processing and storing information Learning all the time Learning without conscious study Can be problematic - CDM
Memorize, at least in part, naturally through experience and practice
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Find the error (recording
is performed as musically expected, not as notated)
Tonal music easier to memorize than atonal More experience with tonal music =
stronger expectations 20th century music often played with
notation
Structure preserving errors (“proofreader’s errors”)
Error in: Breitkopf Edition Henle Urtext Edition Peters Edition
Goldovsky’s Sightreading Experiment
Wolf, T. (1976). A cognitive model of musical sightreading. Journal Psycholinguistic Research, 5(2), 143-171. Jennifer of Mishra University of Houston
Jennifer Mishra | [email protected]
Example from Boulez Third Piano Sonata November, 2007
Brahms Capriccio Op. 76 No. 2 Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston November, 2007
3
Memorization and the Performing Musician
November, 2007
Memorization begins very early in the learning process Unconscious Even when memorization not primary goal
Sightreading study 4 playings - mask bars Between 30 and 88 % of the missing notes could be
recalled
Musicians often decide whether they are “good” or “poor” memorizers based on a handful of salient experiences or informal conversations rather than a systematic observation and comparison. There is no doubt that some musicians memorize faster than others; however even the most advanced musician requires time to memorize
Many factors potentially influence the amount of time required to memorize Characteristics of the musician Experience - Enculturation Memorization practice strategies
Characteristics of the composition
Memorization takes a long time 36-bar exercise – up to 100 minutes
Lehmann, A. C., & Ericsson, K. A. (1996). Performance without preparation: structure and acquisition of expert sight-reading and accompanying performance. Psychomusicology, 15, 1-29. Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Organizing memorization practice
Holistic (Whole) – develop concept of entire piece Segmented (Part) – break piece down into sections Additive – systematically lengthen
Holistic - most efficient Emphasizes connections throughout piece
Segmented & Serial – less efficient “section” 2-100 bars
sections Serial – play as far as possible
Other possible divisions: hands, elements Structural, but not necessarily By line – not musical structure
Mishra, J. (2002). A qualitative analysis of strategies employed in efficient and inefficient memorization. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 152, 74-86. Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Why segmented strategy might be less efficient
Jennifer Mishra
focused on discrete fragments ignoring others very short segments of 2-4 measures – not necessarily
counter productive Amount of segmentation Difficulty of piece Experience of performer (e.g., with genre) Length of piece
Boring, mindless repetition Unable to connect newly mastered segment to as
previously learned segments had been forgotten!
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
Jennifer Mishra | [email protected]
November, 2007
Evidence from expert musicians - Alternating Holistic & Segmented Musically meaningful segments
(43 consecutive times – without any discernable errors )
the discrete segments.
November, 2007
mindless sectionalizing and rigid adherence to repetition is
musically meaningful Repeat each fragment in isolation a large number of times
Additional time was wasted on practicing the connection of
University of Houston
Intersperse Holistic practice to develop an overall concept of piece
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
4
Memorization and the Performing Musician
November, 2007
Serial – inefficient strategy Beginning learned very well, but the end never played musician conceded defeat when confronted by an error or
memory lapse by returning to the beginning No attempt is made to understand why the error occurred or to place the problematic section into the context of the piece. strategy regrettably may be in common usage, especially among younger, less experienced performers
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Curve Estimation
11.14 10.33 9.53
Total Memorization Time (Hours)
5.51 4.71 3.90
4
3.10
When is a piece memorized?
Overlearning Stage - point after which a piece can be performed from memory, but before the memory is stable enough for performance. Important stage, though the purpose of extended practice
2.29
not well understood
1.49
2
November, 2007
memory
7.92 7.12 6.31
6
University of Houston
No standardized operational definition for “memorized.” The first time a piece played through by memory? Second? Musicians continue to rehearse even after piece played by
8.72
8
Number of notes single best predictor of memorization time
Jennifer Mishra
11.94
10
length of the piece (in terms of notes) harmonic complexity Tonality familiarity with the genre
Pianists more time Pianists more notes
14
12
Compositional characteristics of a piece, to a large extent, determines the amount of time required to memorize the piece
0.69
As much as 150% more practice time is needed to stabilize
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100 1200
1300
the memory
1400 1500
Number of Notes
Note: Times are only measured until 1 or 2 memorized playthroughs Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Overlearning = Testing Testing memory cues (reminders, triggers) for effectiveness
Jennifer Mishra
November, 2007
Structural boundaries as landmarks Hierarchy of retrieval Entire piece not retrieved simultaneously - lightening the
memory load
Testing cues - starting at various points throughout the
University of Houston
piece Cues not resulting in stable retrieval can be replaced Unnecessary cues removed Added cues especially in difficult sections Fewest cues possible = less to remember
Test by starting at points throughout piece Structural boundaries Not random points, cues are related to musical form
Cues may be aural, visual, kinesthetic, or analytical Attend to where the memory fails – add cue Simply circling place in music calls attention to the point visualize the circle
May not be conscious
Mishra Jennifer
University of Houston
Jennifer Mishra | [email protected]
November, 2007
Williamon, A., & Valentine, E. (2002). The role of retrieval structures in memorizing music. Cognitive Psychology, 44(1), 1-32. Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
5
Memorization and the Performing Musician
As cognitive control of actions requires time, quick physical sequences must be automated to occur without conscious control. Far from dangerous, automating movements is necessary for a musical performance both for speed of movement and redirecting precious attention to interpretative rather than technical aspects of the music.
November, 2007
Any over-learned motor sequence requires automated muscle movements
Fingers seem to move without conscious thought Repeating motor movements automates process Kinesthetic “memory” is conscious awareness
Frees attention Driving – automated series of movements allows attention to shift
Confusion between kinesthetic “memory” and automating movements
of muscle movements
Attention is a bottle neck in human processing system – can only fully attend to one thing at a time
Much to attend to in performance Automated to free attention interpretation & communication with audience Attend to demands of performance situation
Must automate to perform complex
sequences of motor movements Automated movements faster than conscious
thought
Difficult sections
Can’t generally verbalize automated procedures Tie Shoes
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Preparing for Performance
Overlearning = Re-learning Repetition is ONE way of learning
Overlearning = Preparing for Performance Not really memorizing
superficial level of processing
Confidence building
More connections = deeper processing = stronger memory Re-learn music Sensory “memories”
Superstitious behaviors Extra practice due to anxiety - especially when memorizing ▪ Performing without music increases anxiety ▪ Heightened anxiety results (sometimes) in poorer performance
Aural Visual Kinesthetic
Find additional patterns (analytical)
Craik, F. & Lockhart, R. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684. Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
Leglar, M. A. (1978). Measurement of Indicators of anxiety levels under varying conditions of musical performance. Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 1978. November, 2007
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Part 3 Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
Jennifer Mishra | [email protected]
November, 2007
6
November, 2007
Conscious memorization is the period after which piece can be played technically correct with notation, but before a piece can be performed without music.
Memorization begins before & continues after conscious memorization Three stages Preview Practice Overlearning
Memorizing music involves mindful and deliber-ate practice. Developing an understanding of the music and recognizing patterns are active processes; thoughtlessly repeating muscular movements is a passive process.
Enculturation
Can memorize piece without understanding relationships (passive) Novice musicians Mindless repetition – not efficient nor
stable
Understanding a piece requires active processing Patterns unique to individual performer Labels beneficial, but not necessary Younger students need guidance to patterns
Mishra, J. (2005). A theoretical model of musical memory. Psychomusicology, 19(1), 75-89. Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
Analytical “memory” Also termed
Analytical “memory” requires the cognitive interpretation of patterns and repetitions in a musical work. The focus is on forming relationships and finding familiar patterns.
November, 2007
Conceptual memory
Not a “memory”, but a process Meaningful understanding of the piece Need not be theoretical analysis Need not be through score study
Jennifer Mishra
Differs from sensory memorization styles influenced largely by training and ability Expert and advanced musicians use; inexperienced performers do not
University of Houston
November, 2007
Human mind designed to find patterns.
Musical pattern is any meaningful grouping of notes Learned patterns e.g., scales, arpeggios, chords Found relationships between 2+ notes Pattern processed as unit, not individual notes Patterns allow for prediction Sight reading If memory lapse occurs “Man is, perhaps above all else, a predicting animal…He must pattern the world… we must pattern the world.” Music, The Arts & Ideas Leonard Meyer (p. 227-8 )
Structural boundaries (phrase structure)
emerging as dominant in experts. Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Jennifer Mishra
Music performed serially, but understood as a web of connections
Web is unique to the piece and to the individual performer Patterns are not what composer intended, but what performer perceives Performer’s understanding of piece impacts interpretation (Consciously or unconsciously) Can find unique patterns not intended by composer. Even aleatoric music, truly random music, can have
patterns imposed upon it by performer
University of Houston
November, 2007
Labels- brings patterns to the surface, fixes in mind Isolate elements to direct attention to patterns.
Mapping is visual analysis & simplification of structure Visual icons symbolizing patterns Verbalizing or labeling patterns Attending to patterns
Similarities can be unconsciously understood, but labeling brings to forefront Need not use theoretical terms/labels
Patterns & connections can be anywhere Shockley, R. P. (2001). Mapping Music: For Faster Learning and Secure Memory. A-R Publications.
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
Jennifer Mishra | [email protected]
November, 2007
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
1
Memorization and the Performing Musician
November, 2007
Common practice techniques emphasize pattern recognition; allow obscure patterns to become clear
playing hands separately blocking chords (on keyboard) rehearsing under-tempo rehearsing the piece backwards score study away from the instrument transposing
Analysis may be visual (based on scored notation) Analysis may be aural (i.e., not notation-based) interplay between voices in a fugue
Shockley, R. P. (2001). Mapping Music: For Faster Learning and Secure Memory. A-R Publications. Jennifer Mishra University of Houston November, 2007
Analysis may be kinesthetic (e.g., blocking chords)
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
1900
Most advocate a mixture of memorization styles implying memories are equal and mutually supporting No research support Isolated usage of strategies rare (depending on study)
Not “memories”, but processing strategies
Aural “memory” is the ability to hear the notes of a piece of music in the proper order without relying on a sound source or notation.
Used primarily to monitor performance for errors Good aural memory doesn’t insure good performance
can hear the next note and not know how
to play it
Removing aural feedback doesn’t affect performance
Pianists can perform in absence of
auditory and kinesthetic feedback (Repp, 1999)
Can be used as early as sight reading Used throughout notation-based practice
Also termed
melodic memory, auditory memory, ear
memory
Four “memories” popular memorization topic Focus of 60% of 121 pedagogical articles on memory since
November, 2007
Only effect when aural feedback removed
Aural, Visual, & Kinesthetic
was pianists pedaled less (Repp, 1998)
Sensory Learning styles – rather than memory stores Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Jennifer Mishra
Also termed
University of Houston
Photographic, eye memory Visual “memory” is the ability to recall a mental picture of the musical notation, as a whole or in parts, or to visualize finger patterns or hand positions.
Not necessarily full-scale photographic memory for notation Visualize part of notation Visualize finger patterns on an instrument Isolated visual memory trainable
Used primarily as a memory cue to initiate recall beginnings of sections difficult sections
Also termed Motor, hand, tactile, muscular, finger,
Kinesthetic “memory” is the retention of muscular movements involved in performing a piece of music. Tactile memory is the memory for the feel of the instrument and is not exactly the same as kinesthetic memory.
Jennifer Mishra
Jennifer Mishra | [email protected]
November, 2007
digital memory
Most misunderstood “memory” Often confused with automated
procedural memory (more later) Not incidentally developed Not “thoughtless”
Used to assist with difficult or awkward passages
University of Houston
November, 2007
2
Memorization and the Performing Musician
Research attempt to determine usage among musicians
November, 2007
Mixed results Aural: 4 – 42% Visual: 0 – 50% Kinesthetic: 3 – 50% Mixed: 13 – 58%
Variable definitions for memory styles Question too broad “which memory style do you use?” Musical Memory Inventory (MMI) Specific questions Asked “how often”
Discrepancy - lack of standard definitions
(Analytical not considered in all studies, so omitted) Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Past experiences affect the way we learn new material Every musical experience combines into schemas Expectations formed Applied to new music
Musical Memory Inventory (MMI) results
Mishra, J. (2007). Correlating Musical Memorization Styles and Perceptual Learning Modalities. Visions of Research in Music Education, 9-10. Retrieved July 14, 2007, from www.rider.edu/~vrme/
Continually processing and storing information Learning all the time Learning without conscious study Can be problematic - CDM
Memorize, at least in part, naturally through experience and practice
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Find the error (recording
is performed as musically expected, not as notated)
Tonal music easier to memorize than atonal More experience with tonal music =
stronger expectations 20th century music often played with
notation
Structure preserving errors (“proofreader’s errors”)
Error in: Breitkopf Edition Henle Urtext Edition Peters Edition
Goldovsky’s Sightreading Experiment
Wolf, T. (1976). A cognitive model of musical sightreading. Journal Psycholinguistic Research, 5(2), 143-171. Jennifer of Mishra University of Houston
Jennifer Mishra | [email protected]
Example from Boulez Third Piano Sonata November, 2007
Brahms Capriccio Op. 76 No. 2 Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston November, 2007
3
Memorization and the Performing Musician
November, 2007
Memorization begins very early in the learning process Unconscious Even when memorization not primary goal
Sightreading study 4 playings - mask bars Between 30 and 88 % of the missing notes could be
recalled
Musicians often decide whether they are “good” or “poor” memorizers based on a handful of salient experiences or informal conversations rather than a systematic observation and comparison. There is no doubt that some musicians memorize faster than others; however even the most advanced musician requires time to memorize
Many factors potentially influence the amount of time required to memorize Characteristics of the musician Experience - Enculturation Memorization practice strategies
Characteristics of the composition
Memorization takes a long time 36-bar exercise – up to 100 minutes
Lehmann, A. C., & Ericsson, K. A. (1996). Performance without preparation: structure and acquisition of expert sight-reading and accompanying performance. Psychomusicology, 15, 1-29. Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Organizing memorization practice
Holistic (Whole) – develop concept of entire piece Segmented (Part) – break piece down into sections Additive – systematically lengthen
Holistic - most efficient Emphasizes connections throughout piece
Segmented & Serial – less efficient “section” 2-100 bars
sections Serial – play as far as possible
Other possible divisions: hands, elements Structural, but not necessarily By line – not musical structure
Mishra, J. (2002). A qualitative analysis of strategies employed in efficient and inefficient memorization. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 152, 74-86. Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Why segmented strategy might be less efficient
Jennifer Mishra
focused on discrete fragments ignoring others very short segments of 2-4 measures – not necessarily
counter productive Amount of segmentation Difficulty of piece Experience of performer (e.g., with genre) Length of piece
Boring, mindless repetition Unable to connect newly mastered segment to as
previously learned segments had been forgotten!
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
Jennifer Mishra | [email protected]
November, 2007
Evidence from expert musicians - Alternating Holistic & Segmented Musically meaningful segments
(43 consecutive times – without any discernable errors )
the discrete segments.
November, 2007
mindless sectionalizing and rigid adherence to repetition is
musically meaningful Repeat each fragment in isolation a large number of times
Additional time was wasted on practicing the connection of
University of Houston
Intersperse Holistic practice to develop an overall concept of piece
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
4
Memorization and the Performing Musician
November, 2007
Serial – inefficient strategy Beginning learned very well, but the end never played musician conceded defeat when confronted by an error or
memory lapse by returning to the beginning No attempt is made to understand why the error occurred or to place the problematic section into the context of the piece. strategy regrettably may be in common usage, especially among younger, less experienced performers
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Curve Estimation
11.14 10.33 9.53
Total Memorization Time (Hours)
5.51 4.71 3.90
4
3.10
When is a piece memorized?
Overlearning Stage - point after which a piece can be performed from memory, but before the memory is stable enough for performance. Important stage, though the purpose of extended practice
2.29
not well understood
1.49
2
November, 2007
memory
7.92 7.12 6.31
6
University of Houston
No standardized operational definition for “memorized.” The first time a piece played through by memory? Second? Musicians continue to rehearse even after piece played by
8.72
8
Number of notes single best predictor of memorization time
Jennifer Mishra
11.94
10
length of the piece (in terms of notes) harmonic complexity Tonality familiarity with the genre
Pianists more time Pianists more notes
14
12
Compositional characteristics of a piece, to a large extent, determines the amount of time required to memorize the piece
0.69
As much as 150% more practice time is needed to stabilize
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100 1200
1300
the memory
1400 1500
Number of Notes
Note: Times are only measured until 1 or 2 memorized playthroughs Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Overlearning = Testing Testing memory cues (reminders, triggers) for effectiveness
Jennifer Mishra
November, 2007
Structural boundaries as landmarks Hierarchy of retrieval Entire piece not retrieved simultaneously - lightening the
memory load
Testing cues - starting at various points throughout the
University of Houston
piece Cues not resulting in stable retrieval can be replaced Unnecessary cues removed Added cues especially in difficult sections Fewest cues possible = less to remember
Test by starting at points throughout piece Structural boundaries Not random points, cues are related to musical form
Cues may be aural, visual, kinesthetic, or analytical Attend to where the memory fails – add cue Simply circling place in music calls attention to the point visualize the circle
May not be conscious
Mishra Jennifer
University of Houston
Jennifer Mishra | [email protected]
November, 2007
Williamon, A., & Valentine, E. (2002). The role of retrieval structures in memorizing music. Cognitive Psychology, 44(1), 1-32. Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
5
Memorization and the Performing Musician
As cognitive control of actions requires time, quick physical sequences must be automated to occur without conscious control. Far from dangerous, automating movements is necessary for a musical performance both for speed of movement and redirecting precious attention to interpretative rather than technical aspects of the music.
November, 2007
Any over-learned motor sequence requires automated muscle movements
Fingers seem to move without conscious thought Repeating motor movements automates process Kinesthetic “memory” is conscious awareness
Frees attention Driving – automated series of movements allows attention to shift
Confusion between kinesthetic “memory” and automating movements
of muscle movements
Attention is a bottle neck in human processing system – can only fully attend to one thing at a time
Much to attend to in performance Automated to free attention interpretation & communication with audience Attend to demands of performance situation
Must automate to perform complex
sequences of motor movements Automated movements faster than conscious
thought
Difficult sections
Can’t generally verbalize automated procedures Tie Shoes
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Preparing for Performance
Overlearning = Re-learning Repetition is ONE way of learning
Overlearning = Preparing for Performance Not really memorizing
superficial level of processing
Confidence building
More connections = deeper processing = stronger memory Re-learn music Sensory “memories”
Superstitious behaviors Extra practice due to anxiety - especially when memorizing ▪ Performing without music increases anxiety ▪ Heightened anxiety results (sometimes) in poorer performance
Aural Visual Kinesthetic
Find additional patterns (analytical)
Craik, F. & Lockhart, R. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684. Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
Leglar, M. A. (1978). Measurement of Indicators of anxiety levels under varying conditions of musical performance. Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 1978. November, 2007
Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
November, 2007
Part 3 Jennifer Mishra
University of Houston
Jennifer Mishra | [email protected]
November, 2007
6
Related Documents
Memory Wksp Ii
October 2019 3
Memory Wksp Iii
October 2019 8
Memory Wksp I
October 2019 11
Bmw Memory Options Ii
November 2019 9
In Memory Of Ii - Mirror
November 2019 14