Do you play an instrument and if so how does it impact on the way you listen?.

As ever with discussions, the devil is in the detail, and in the case of this thread, I think that dissonance has occurred due to different individual’s interpretations of some key words in both the OP’s original question and the subsequent responses. Two words in particular have been central to this: “listen” and “hear”.

Considering “listen” first, my interpretation of the word in the OP’s question was in the context of ability to listen. Hence I made the comment that I am interested in the outcome from music making and not in the process of making that music; my inability to play an instrument has no impact on my ability to listen to and enjoy music.

On reflection I see that others have placed the word “listen” in the context of the manner in which listening is undertaken. On this basis I can see that study of music either in a theory or practice will provide an understanding of techniques, composition etc. which can impact on this.

Where things went even more astray I feel is when the word “hear” emerged in a number of statements:

• Playing an instrument changes everything about the way you hear music:
• What I can hear in music has expanded dramatically over the past two years, the result of recent studies.
• The more you learn about music, the more you hear.

The perceived implication in these statements is that only educated musicians can hear music properly and are therefore better placed to fully appreciate it and herein lies the heat in the reaction to these statements.

If in all these statements the concept of hearing is exchanged for the way in which listening takes place, then a different interpretation arises. In essence, it is the listening experience that is enhanced and not the ability to hear; with this understanting, the heat of misinterpretation is removed.

I would also observe that some poster’s interpretation of “music” may have been specific to a single genre, whereas others have been more generic, so influencing the context of their response. However to explore this furhter would take us into another debate, and probably best held off for another day.


Kind regards

Brad

PS

I can't play any instruments although I did try piano, oboe and euphonium some four decades ago in my youth. I found that I didn't have the manual dexterity or coordination to be successful. However singing was another thing altogether. I was involved in a number of choirs, (founder member of the British Youth Choir and Chamber Orchestra), vocal groups, folk clubs and I worked my way up to Grade 8 voice. Although much of my learing has faded and I haven't sung in a long time, I am happy to report that I can still recognise a bum note when I hear one. This probably explains why I can't abide TV talent shows and why I have an afinity for the basses in choral music. However, when it comes to listening to music on my system, I prefer to enjoy rather than analyse.

What he said! Good post, thanks.

ODBL you do have an instrument, a voice, so that part of the question you should be able to answer, does "playing an instrument alter etc...." so you have studied music and technique.

It's an old problem the difference between listening and hearing, not just in music, politics suffers a lot with it.

My points are really simple, so here are some clarifications :

1 - If you sing, your voice is your instrument. The voice is an instrument like any other.

2 - Any study of music at all will open you to hearing more of any music you listen to. This is a critical point. Some posters hint at the feeling that studying music will have no effect on how you hear music. That's simply not true. Any study will produce some benefits to the listener.

When I was a kid, I would listen to a new song over and over, till I could sing the melody and remember the lyrics. Many of my friends did the same. Now, I pull out my dictionary of themes and learn the themes, then go to the score and study what goes on around the themes, then listen with a score and finally listen without any props. The intention is the same now as it was then, to really put the music in my memory. This has provided endless entertainment for decades, and shows no signs of going stale.

Studying music is under rated, it can add a great deal to your entertainment.

quote:

I prefer to enjoy rather than analyse.

from officer DBL. This is an important point and was my concern re trying to learn an instrument. Would it kill what I liked about music, ie just enjoying what I was hearing rather than thinking about structure etc.

At this point I am just learning about basic stuff so no real technical knowledge of things like formal song structure.

quote:

Originally posted by Briz Vegas:

quote:

I prefer to enjoy rather than analyse.

from officer DBL. This is an important point and was my concern re trying to learn an instrument. Would it kill what I liked about music, ie just enjoying what I was hearing rather than thinking about structure etc.

At this point I am just learning about basic stuff so no real technical knowledge of things like formal song structure.

Don't worry, if you learn more as you go along you will have more enjoyment not less.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by winkyincanada:
[QUOTE]OK, maybe I'm being too sensitive. Maybe I'm jealous. Maybe I'm bitter. But sometimes you just come off as a pompous ass (in my opinion anyway).

QUOTE]

I said he was pompous and he put me on his ignore list. A fate worse than death.

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:
I find playing an instrument makes you accutely aware of articulation, and how different that is on each different instrument.

The way you start notes has a profound effect on the shape of a phrase. Learning to do that together with other musicians so it produces a unified whole is a big part of learning to play.

Articulation in music serves the same purpose as inflection in speech, giving an emotional depth and meaning to what you play.

So if I start to play an instrument no matter how badly I will instantly gain an acute awareness of articulation? Wow!

quote:

Originally posted by Sniper:

So if I start to play an instrument no matter how badly I will instantly gain an acute awareness of articulation? Wow!

Nothing about learning music is instant, but if you listen to yourself when you play and when you hear others play, over time your awareness increases. For a lucky few, that does happen rather quickly.

I have to say something about the accusations of pomposity that have been leveled at me.

It's not pomposity, it's sincerity.

I am approaching retirement, and have decided I wanted to conduct my musical desires in whatever way might extract hundreds of hours of pleasure from a single set of cds. A simple case of more mileage per cd, to compensate for the loss of new income.

If you have read my posts, you know what I have decided on.

For me, so far it is a tremendous success.

I hope others find it interesting.

The only fly in the ointment is the carping about my intentions. These befuddle me, as they are out of line with my intentions.

Is it so hard to imagine yourself older, with a set way of listening? Think to your own future, and let me have mine.

Meanwhile, for me it is quite exciting to hear what others think and do.

There couldn't be enough of that.

Another observation about musicians. I know a few and while one or two has high end audio (they are in the audio club) its pretty rare. Most have really basic or old(and basic) systems compared to mine.

I might be just practicing scales and getting my fingers to work independently (wonder if that will improve my touch typing - maybe I should post on the olivetti website), but what I have found is that I am still really glad I found the extra cash for a valve guitar amp. I do notice the difference between the 10 inch Jensen driver on the practice amp vs the sounds on my system, particularly its tweeters.

Dear Briz,

Up till the end of my playing my replay would generally have got big thumbs down here on the Naim forum!

After my playing ended, I went high-end Naim! I found a paradox with this set [which was at its best was, CDS2, 52, 200, SBLs] in that all studio recordings, even the best of them are a sort of idealised concept of perfect, yet strangely lacking perfection in any way. The best summon up the idea of a complete performance, almost live in impact, but never sonically perfect, and rarely musically entirely convincing, because editing for technically errors [called bum notes!] actually wrecks the continuity of tension and release. So the results may present an acceptable lithography of a performance, but it is always airbrushed, always an attempt at perfection, doomed musically and sonically to fail if the aim really is some attempt in listening is to seek a definitive and perfect rendering in replay of the composer's vision ...

I enjoy much more the truly unedited [if most often sonically poorer] live recording style ...

I have returned to a very basic replay set, and it gives as much pleasure as the big set did. Really the difference is like a photographic print at 5 by 8 inches or a print at 20 by 32. Some things are marginally better in the bigger print, but so the faults are all the also the more obvious as well. And the difference really is how closely you observe the print from! In reality it sufficiently there in most cases, whatever the scale of the presentation, if you look or listen.

So I don't want to get back into the true top line of replay, but find the minimum that get the music through! There is a level [I have found it for me] that is enough to not harm the music without also underlining the inadequacy of recordings - all recordings - that is inevitable, simply because the human ear hears things differently than any microphone picks them up. The brain is a wonderful filter for the irrelevant when it is in the same room as a great performance, given as a "live one off!"

There is a great advantage to having a replay set that is not overly "hifi" in that the sonic is not beguiling of itself, so all that is left to listen to is the music, and much better for avoiding extraneous "hifi" intrusions and interventions ...

ATB from George

Mike, I understand what you are saying completely. I believe the question posed here is whether playing an instrument changes the way one listens. Many of the responses (especially the negative ones) seemed to miss the point altogether and amounted more to a vindictive opinion than an informed view. In my estimation, the question isn’t making a value judgment either (ie. implying that non-musicians cannot listen to and enjoy music).

Everyone on this forum presumably can read and write in English. Yet, by many of the responses, one clearly gets the sense that this is a separate skill apart from levels of understanding and intelligence. Some can do it quite well; others not so well. Yet everyone claims they are reading and writing. The same inference can be drawn when one talks about listening as a skill. Everyone who has ears can “listen” but how preposterous is it to propose that “just” listening somehow allows one to be as informed and knowledgeable as someone who has spent considerable time being trained how to listen.

Again, I wish to make it clear that it is a person’s choice as to where they are on the scale between little knowledge and maximum knowledge. If one is comfortable where they are at then that is all that needs to be said. I not arguing that one needs to be here or there. I personally would respect anyone for who they are so long as they are respectful of others. And I wished everyone felt that way.

So why would someone get offended at someone else for having more or perhaps, just different ambitions? For example, I can look at the dark grey clouds overhead and predict that it will probably rain today but that does not qualify me to be a meteorologist. I would have to study hard to reach that same level of understanding. Should I be angry and bitter with a meteorologist simply because he has a more sophisticated understanding in regards to the science of the weather? I’m perfectly happy doing eyewitness weather but at the same time I also have the highest admiration for those who have reached a higher level. Why can’t this analogy apply to listening too?

I happen to be someone who plays an instrument. I cannot really remember a time in my life where I was not playing an instrument. Remembering that one size does not fit all and I do not want to generalize or oversimplify the question but if one replies in a strict literal and objective way to whether a musician listens differently compared to a layman or anyone else for that matter then the answer must be YES. (ie.the answer must be either yes or no, and not maybe so!). The caveat is that differently does not necessarily imply better. Clearly, the difference lies within the individual but the odds are that most trained musicians will certainly listen differently.

My main instrument is the piano. I can tell you from experience that sitting in a chair and listening to music is an entirely different ball game than sitting at a piano and playing the same piece. That is clue number one. Listening to someone playing a Prelude and Fugue of Bach is not the same listening that is required to physically learn and play this music. I'm not sure how one can even accomplish this by just listening. In my experience, this requires different skills and they aren't really transferrable. You have to physically do it to see the difference.

Years ago I wrote a paper on the effects of music on the brain for a school project. I don’t recall all the details at the moment but can summarize a little of what I found. Numerous studies have been done over the years that prove that the brains of children who do not listen to music compared to those who do are physically different. Furthermore, the brain of a child who plays a musical instrument has yet again developed different centers in the brain and is different from the child who simply listens but does not play. This is clear from already only 1-2 years of actively playing. This has nothing to do with how well one plays. The evidence itself suggests that doing certain activities physically changes us. Therefore, from this alone we must understand that a musician will surely listen “differently” than a non-player (again, not a value judgement but merely an objective deduction). I would argue that even when compared within the ranks of musicians that a singer, say, would listen differently compared to a pianist or violinist. This is the point. If I don’t lift weights I will not develop muscles simply by looking at the them. Doing different exercise strengthens different sets of muscles.

Another way to look at this is to remember that music is really a language. Learning a language takes time. You have to listen and repeatedly try to speak until neural pathways are permanently formed. Then what was foreign to you previously will eventually become meaningful and effortless. If someone listens to music repeatedly, while searching for meaning (harmony (patterns & structure), melody, rhythm, etc) this requires attention, memory, and purpose. In addition to this a musician must use their body to create the music (both physically and practically). Again, this is what develops and strengthens certain areas of the brain, such as the auditory cortex. You cannot produce the same effect on the brain by merely listening passively. Listening to yourself play an instrument certainly also has importance and requires a certain amount of skill in order to react and interpret feedback quickly.

This is just a few reasons why I believe it is possible to know that everyone will listen differently and especially this is connected to whether we actively or passively experience music.

What bothers me is how our modern society seems to place such little importance on the value of learning to play an instrument (or even singing as was mentioned above). One hundred to three hundred years ago this was something that seemed to be cherished. As people played less and less through time so to did great composers and compositions disappear and become largely extinct? House music was the form of entertainment that engaged people in the past since they didn’t have so many meaningless distractions such as TV, radio, computers, phones etc. Now we do very little but seem to know everything. Today, many who cannot play consider it a skill to be able to point out a wrong note and listen only to “note perfect” recordings (that have been massively edited to sell in a competitive market). This is an artificial world of music. Part of the skill of listening also is related to the activity of being able to be creative (ie. learning how to do it rather than relying on someone else to do it for us). This makes a difference and this, herein, lies the real joy of listening.

Best regards,
Doug

Interesting posts guys. I know live recordings are rarely pristine but I often prefer live sounds to overproduced music. One of the things I like about vocals is those little mistakes that make it human and give vocals individual character.

I am pretty sure that everyone, musician or not, listens or hears or appreciates music in his own way.

The problem is when people start saying that their way of listening etc. is better because they play or sing, or because of what studies they have made or what qualifications they have attained.

Enjoy music how you want, it is not a competition...

quote:

Originally posted by Derry:
I am pretty sure that everyone, musician or not, listens or hears or appreciates music in his own way.

The problem is when people start saying that their way of listening etc. is better because they play or sing, or because of what studies they have made or what qualifications they have attained.

Enjoy music how you want, it is not a competition...

Point well taken Derry. But to be honest, I haven't seen anyone on this thread say the way they listen is better.

I think each of us comes at music in a different way, and that it is quite interesting, these differences.

I am also certain that for each individual, any study of music improves the listening experience.

If you love jazz, and spend some time learning the ins and outs of a tune you love in a fake book, that will illuminate the tune for you.

Or just listening closer without props to aid you.

At any rate, this is a fun thread.

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:

Point well taken Derry. But to be honest, I haven't seen anyone on this thread say the way they listen is better...I am also certain that for each individual, any study of music improves the listening experience.

You contradict yourself in a few lines.

That's two different things Derry.

On the one hand, if you listen to music and enjoy it, that's fine.

On the other hand, if curiosity compels you to study some aspects of music, that will improve the experience for you.

If not, so it goes.

The fundamental element is, do you have an itch that needs to be scratched?

If not, study of music might only engender frustration.

So I did misstate myself. The chemistry happens when you get that itch scratched. Others need not apply.

I brought up the topic of scratching a musical itch, and being in such a mood feel the urge to explain what I mean by that.

Every now and then, a tune will just smack you. On first hearing it might have snapped you out of where you were, and put you into a different place you felt an immediate empathy for.

For most of us, that would be a tune that got revisited soon and often. For some of us, that tune would make you want to go deeper into it, to become more intimate with it.

One person might decide to learn the lyrics and melody through repeated listens, then to belt it out in the morning shower.

Another might express himself by playing the tune, possibly for an audience.

Between those two poles, a variety of self expression is possible.

At any rate, I think when this happens, I feel I have been given a gift of rare quality if I get any bit of it, if I witness it.

It's easy to fall in love with music, and it presents itself in such a wide variety, which is the hallmark of a true love.

There are a number of possible influences from being a musician, and to be honest I did not even think of what it means if you also compose music. In theory I guess anyone can compose a song given modern technology.

The things that strike me about playing an instrument are:

• you hear a real instrument alot
• you know intimately what that instrument sounds like when it is played poorly and you spend hours upon hours trying to get it right
• you learn what is difficult to play and what is just tricky short cuts. As you get better there can be a preference for things that are played "properly" and to dismiss a simple song or dodgy musicianship
• having to repeat a song over and over, particularly as a newbie, can kill the desire to hear the song again.
• having to break music down into its component parts can impact on hearing the piece as a whole. (this could be a criticism of high end audio also)

There is definitely a similar nerdy vs cool factor that exists in both the musicians and the audiophile worlds, or maybe this is just an excuse to post two funny videos.

1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WStE470Nu4s

2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSINO6MKtco

Chaps

Five years ago I decided to retire (that lasted just 3 weeks) and decided to buy a guitar.

I bought a Lowden which is hand made in Ireland and in the right hands can sing like a bird.

In my hands it sounds like a flatulent frog.

I went to private lessons and on the 8th week the Tutor threw in the towel. He said I was the worst pupil he had ever encountered in 15 years of teaching.

The guitar now lies in a box in the spare bedroom.

Just before Christmas I treated myself to a Hanson Clarinet, again hand made in England. I haven't even blown into the thing because I know I will be useless.

Trying to play an instrument has totally shattered my confidence. Either you have got it or you ain't and I most certainly ain't got it.

Regards

Mick

Mick, I'm sorry to hear that.

Please don't give up though. Given that you have to get the embouchure right as well as co-ordinating your hands, I'd expect playing a clarinet to be more of a struggle than learning the guitar. Trouble is, a Lowden simply isn't a beginner's guitar. If I were you, I'd go to another shop, and say you want a guitar that above all, is easy to play. So long as it's fairly decent, you'll then be able to play a few chords.

You could probably walk out with a simple Yamaha acoustic for well under a couple of hundred. Just half an hour's practise every day, and you'll be strumming along to a few Brightman classics in no time.

And from the opening post...

quote:

Originally posted by Briz Vegas:
I've also invested in a few lessons (the students before and after me are about 6, I think its hilarious - and they probably think I suck - which I do but in typical mid life crisis style I will ignore that fact).

I was one of those kids one day, albeit a couple of years older, so I can't really say what impact learning an instrument has had on my listening - while I'm not classically trained, I don't really know any different.

It is not only that the talent may not have been unlocked, Mick. Sometimes the ability to play well may be taken by physical problems. Keep enjoying listen to music. Music is all about listening and enjoying. The players are the termites! The listeners are the King customers. Keep being a King customer and enjoy it without stress!

ATB from George

I know George very well,he works in a small business estate about 2 miles from me.

quote:

Originally posted by Mick Parry:
Chaps

Five years ago I decided to retire (that lasted just 3 weeks) and decided to buy a guitar.

I bought a Lowden which is hand made in Ireland and in the right hands can sing like a bird.

In my hands it sounds like a flatulent frog.

I went to private lessons and on the 8th week the Tutor threw in the towel. He said I was the worst pupil he had ever encountered in 15 years of teaching.

The guitar now lies in a box in the spare bedroom.

Just before Christmas I treated myself to a Hanson Clarinet, again hand made in England. I haven't even blown into the thing because I know I will be useless.

Trying to play an instrument has totally shattered my confidence. Either you have got it or you ain't and I most certainly ain't got it.

Regards

Mick

Maybe your forte could be percussion? Why not try a pair of maraccas (easily found when you are next in Spain). They should work for you because they do not need tuning, they only produce a single note and they do not require an embouchure. Add to this the fact that as a Naim owner you are clearly into pace, rhythm and timing, they should be right down your calle.

Cheers

Brad

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:
It is not only that the talent may not have been unlocked, Mick. Sometimes the ability to play well may be taken by physical problems. Keep enjoying listen to music. Music is all about listening and enjoying. The players are the termites! The listeners are the King customers. Keep being a King customer and enjoy it without stress!

ATB from George

Hi George

Those are good and sensible words but my ego and self esteem has gone from my usual "I can do anything better than you" down to that of abject failure.

Why is it that a mentally retarded hick from the deep south of America can play a banjo at the age of 10 and here am I still unable to strike a chord and I still don't really know what a chord is.

I have a beautiful clarinet still unopened in its box, if I fail to master the clarinet, I will be ready to jump off the Bristol Suspension Bridge.

What I cannot understand is why am I so bloody useless.

Regards

Mick