Why you can't play what you hear....

[princeplanet]

We can sing what we hear. If we played horn or piano, you may learn to play what you sing (even if it's just in your head). These instruments are far easier than the guitar to produce any interval at any time, some people get to the point where they can play better than they can sing what they "hear".

But not us guitar whackers, The 3 main things (for quickish lines) that preclude me from this ability are:

1. Bound by range. Very difficult to play a note I may "hear" that suddenly is not readily available to my hands position.

2. Pick direction. Yes, if we were to have several practice attempts we finally work out the ergonomics, but in the heat of battle some intervals will not be possible if the pick is out of position.

3. Fingers are caught out of position. I've just played a g with my first finger on the d string and I hear my next note as a Db on the a string, woops, I can't get to it in time.


Many other ideas can be played in time, but issues such as the above conspire to make the line sound less convincing than it did in my head.


So I just wanted to offer that the whole concept of guitarists being able to play what they hear is BS, unless you "hear" simple and/or "guitaristic" phrases (I don't always...).

If a guitarist claims to play what he/she hears, it usually means they are playing what they know...

Big difference. So to those that are currently aspiring to this on our instrument, don't beat yourself up if you fall short. Or play another instrument!

[Reg]

Some good points.... so eventually you know everything? Or do you become a better singer.

[boatheelmusic]

I have always thought the ear/hand/brain connection is why I practice scales in postions, to KNOW where the sounds are in advance without thinking.

[docbop]

Listening to a talk by one of my favorite pianist today Jean Michel-Pilc he is a self-taught classical and Jazz pianist and teaches and taught at many universities. He talking about how people learn to talk and how earlier on musicians learned to play and that is by immersion. When young we start learning to speak because we are surround by other talking all the time and we start trying to imitate the sound, and then start associating the response to the sounds. Then we go to school and they start teaching us syllables to learn the fundamental sounds to construct words and start build vocabulary. That kids learn to speak and converse way before they ever learn the rules of grammar, some never learn the rules of grammar and speak fine there whole lives. They learn the feel of the language and same goes on with music.

He saying that earlier on that how most musicians learned by immersing themselves in music and then finding the sounds on their instrument. And people learn the feeling of the music they want to play and doing so the music vocabulary from what they hear. That the music should be learn from listening and imitation, trial and error, like you did to learn to speak. That is the oral tradition of learning music, but he say today too many are trying to skip the oral tradition and read music and study music instead of spending the time listening and experiencing the feel of the music. that the oral tradition has become an after thought.

So that's 10,000 foot view of what he was talking about and I think it relate to the ear and where and how listening comes into the learning process. He says many of the students are playing by applying rules that
playing needs to be like talking. When we talk we have an idea, but we are not thinking about every word or bit of grammar that just gets filled we speak. Music needs to be the same way. I think about many of the posts here and people so into wanting to know more and more rules and not doing enough listening and just playing to see what comes out.

Okay now for some coffee.

[princeplanet]

Sure Doc, I can't disagree that Jazz is an aural tradition and that it's best learned that way. I'm just saying that our instrument is harder than others to realise (on the fly) complex and quick lines that we are truly improvising in our minds.

There are a lot of ways to argue against my point, like that some other instruments also have limitations, or that on the guitar you should be thinking "words and sentences" instead of letters at a time (so the hand and pick position is pre placed for the execution of imagined phrase) etc etc... However I stand by my point that for most of our learning curve we guitarists have a harder time of "playing what we hear".

But I'd be most interested to hear from anyone who disagrees....

[princeplanet]

Some good points.... so eventually you know everything? Or do you become a better singer.

Was hoping you could tell us! But yeah, the more you know, the more you can hear what you know?...

Perhaps after a while you stop hearing things you know you can't possible play. Some people may hear simple things and have no trouble expressing them on the instrument. But because I listen to guys like Eric Dolphy or McCoy, I'm naturally hearing things that are permutations of these styles sometimes. If I can
freeze" what I'm hearing I can eventually work it out as well as I can play it, but I'm realising I will NEVER be able to play much of what I like to hear in my head, spontaneously.

I, and I suspect many guitarists, are forced to settle for something a little less ideal. Perhaps limiting what we hear (drag) or relying on pre fab material and make the linking of said material the improvisational bit....

[Hep To The Jive]

Hmm, you mentioned piano as an easy instrument to play what you hear. Thats not my experience, I always found guitar is easier to play something on the spot. On guitar, if I hear a melody in my head, my fingers know what to play before I even realize, but at the same token I might have harder time on piano.

As far as jazz, I absolutely play what I already know and therefore hear, with some variations. I more concern with quality delivery of the little that I know, then trying to break new grounds and experiment with unknown. In that regard, I dont see the problem with the guitar.

[targuit]

I have held back from responding here, but if mild dissent is tolerated, here goes. I play guitar and piano.

Obviously the two instruments are diverse, piano with 88 keys and guitar with its three plus octave range. Piano is percussive. One cannot bend the note. Guitar has its own characteristics in terms of sustain and the ability to slur and bend notes with an impressive tonal variation. But in the end, your ability to "play what you hear" depends on your musicianship primarily and secondarily your instrument. In general terms again, each instrument has its own strengths and limitations. It is difficult if not impossible to play as legato a phrase on guitar as on violin, for example. And one cannot imitate the sound of bowing on the guitar unless you consider the E-bow as one of your tools for expression.

Frankly, from an epistemological point of view, I don't understand how one can listen to sophisticated jazz standards well rendered and think "those guys really cannot play what they hear..." - if they could not, you would not recognize the song standard as such. What I find true is often the opposite proposition - it is hard to play discordant music purposely unless one is just flailing randomly at the fret board.

Or have I misunderstood the point? I'm working currently on a solo guitar and vocal version of the ballad Laura. I'm experimenting with different keys to find the best vocal range and solo guitar "arrangement". When I just play the melody lines in different keys, I'm pretty accurate on the fly, though not "mistake-proof". And that melody is one that I would consider more challenging to "hear" and replicate perfectly. That too can be a characteristic of certain jazz tunes - some melodies are much easier and less angular with fewer chromatics than others.

[christianm77]

I'm starting to realise that for me playing what I hear is not the especially difficult thing (although there is great room for improvement.) the difficulty lies in really hearing something to start with.

Now that's something I'm interested in finding out more about. How do we practice that?

[targuit]

I just tried a little experiment here at the computer with my guitar and synth on hand - recording with a Tascam DR 05 me singing just the melody a cappella, then with the guitar, lastly the piano. No marked problem with intonation or finding the note. Of course, it is at ballad tempo.

Things that I find helpful. I play often with my eyes closed which seems to put me in touch with the sound. Perhaps there is an element of "pre-hearing" when I sing, but I don't think about it so much as focus on the sound I emit - listening.

With the guitar I first played the melody alone, then as an improvised solo chord melody style on my classical guitar. What I notice is that it is easier to play the melody in context within the chord progression concept than by itself and that the rhythm is very important in this regard. In other words, the melody falls within the chord progression easier.


And finally I improvised over the melody as I played the 'arrangement'. And of course, I won't claim it was mistake proof. I put arrangement in quotes because I literally have an arrangement of the song in my Sibelius library that I use to generate paper copies, so I do know this beautiful song, though it is one of the more difficult vocal and instrumental jazz tunes to play well in my opinion. For this experiment, however, I did not have any sheet music in front of me. And for me I consider this a "work in progress" stage.

In each case in my understanding of the terms I was "playing what I hear". In order to play what you hear, you have to listen well. Perhaps Prince Planet you intend something else more relating to the inability to "realize" some sounds and audio effects on the guitar.

[pingu]

I'd like to disagree here too...

But i do think that on guitar one needs
to move the left hand around a lot
(like pat metheny does or Reg does too) between the positions.... to get the various
licks and intervals of a jazz type line out
and phrased nicely

if what princep says is correct ...
a bass would be even worse to play what
you hear ... they seem to manage ok

[christianm77]

I love to play with my eyes closed. Unfortunately, people are often trying to give me cues in bands. But in a perfect world of improvisation, yes why not?

I think everyone should shift around loads. It makes the guitar sound like a voice. When I play phrases by ear - from records etc I always end up shifting more.

[Reg]

This is always a great discussion... really it not only brings us back to the music... but gets rid of a lot of the what's the right way to perform etc...

I can't remember... I know as a kid, when I had to sing in bands... I could sing what i played, I dug doing the Benson thing. But I don't believe it is a note per note thing. It's easy to play slow note per note examples. I can sing any note I hear... I can't really trick my self... as long as I have a reference... I can play it. I generally can also play what others are playing. It gets tricky when tempos get up and the clarity of what I think I'm hearing.

I do come from a performance background... had performances since I was 5 or 6. And have played night after night etc...

But personally I can generally write out something I hear or someone else performs pretty easily. Part of that is just I generally understand what I'm hearing... I can mechanically fill in the dots. I easily hear the basic reference and usually the relationship... the lick and style etc... which basically fills in the dots.

When i back up vocalist or soloist who wants arrangements and generally want a rehearsal... I just make quick charts... usually help them get their book together... so i won't have to next time. This is basically the same thing I'm just playing what they hear... and instead of playing my instrument, I'm playing notation paper. Not good analogy but the point is... I really don't hear everything... I hear the tonally important notes and fill in mechanically.

I would hate to have to sing what I play sometimes... I just don't think I physically could... But I can easily hear what I play even at fast tempos...

I play trombone... not great, but I can read and cover parts. I can hear fast complex parts on the trombone... but I sure cant perform them... same with cello or piano. I just don't have the technical skills. I can't realize them in time... but I've composed complex music for them all. Again just don't have the skills.

Personally... I think piano is easier... Most horns only have 2 and 1/2 octave range so there just isn't that much to hear, and maybe there is something to the breathing thing, different physical relationship.... haven't noticed.

[targuit]

True, and let's remember that intervals above an octave like 9ths, 11ths, etc. are just extensions of the same twelve note Western scale.

Btw, I made reference to working on Laura very early this morning. I had an absolute revelation about the song and its structure this morning after I wrote the posts above. Just playing solo guitar and singing I found the key of E to be perfect for guitar and my tenor voice. As I was playing, the song arrangement just fell into place as I ran through the changes. Suddenly, it was easy and just lay under the fingers. I'm referring to melody, bass, and inner voices. Like a veil was lifted. I had been playing this tune in G. For a solo arrangement approach, the key of E just works like a charm. The range is from the first position through the twelfth fret and perhaps beyond in some improvisations. I don't always play solo arrangements in the "guitar-friendly" keys, often favoring flat keys, but this song just works perfectly in terms of fingering possibilities in E.

The tonal quality of a nylon string classical guitar just works beautifully with this tune. But to return to the issue of playing what you hear. I find the essential thing is listening to the voices that derive from the melody and bass and the interplay of the inner voices just happen. And the harmonic context is everything. The fact that this can happen and the arrangement evolve so essentially and quickly tells me that yes we do play what we hear in the best of circumstances.

[Reg]

Hey Jay... here's a vid I made back in 2011... don't remember why.. probable a request to play through. It's interesting... not really good or that cool. But it's fun to hear old performances. I never really work tunes out even when I didn't know them... anyway... check it out... I liked the end

[targuit]

Beautiful playing, Reg! Are you "playing what you hear"? (Laughing...of course you are!)

My approach is similar, though doing it fingerstyle I range from first position up to above the twelfth fret and I try to throw some harmonics in there in spots. I like the voice leading in your version starting up around the seventh fret with the F#m9. I think I hear you playing the B7b9 sounding the C natural bass at the eighth fret. Funny thing - I recall seeing a video of Joe Pass talking about the b9 chords suggesting you should never play the b9 as the bass note, a notion with which I disagree. In any case it sounds great. I like your reaction at the end. It is a compelling tune.

A couple of observations and questions - I forgot what guitar you are playing. Kind of looks like a lovely blond Guild to me, but I love the tone. Are you recording direct or with an amp? And are you using a camcorder? You get a nice frame of your hands and the guitar.

[christianm77]

I think it's really worth pointing out that a lotof singing in jazz isn't necessarily to do with pitch but phrasing and rhythm. I certainly see it that way - a lot of the time the rhythm helps with the notes. You can be as flat as a pancake and get the gist across.... Just don't do it on everyone's solos like Lee Konitz

[targuit]

Singing flat hurts the ears. But I do agree that phrasing and especially rhythm make things better. I find that the rhythm helps me "hear" the notes. But much as I like John Pizzarelli, I'm not a great fan of his singing.

If you do sing decently, isn't amazing how your vocal cords find the notes? And the tie in with scatting? I think it helps a great deal in improvising on the guitar.

[Jonah]

I think it's over-emphasized. It's just practice. Can you imagine a painter who says he cannot paint what he sees in his imaginary view? Or a poet who cannot pronounce the lines he hears in his head? It's practicing the apparatus... speaking words is instintive because we learnt as kids and ity's used not only in arts but also in daily communication... well music is more special but still it's just a matter of practice: coordination, organization, understanding of relations... it'pretty basic skill of musicianship imho ... usually the problem that comes out that often those who say they can't play what they hear... it turns out that they actually do not hear any thing certain... just kind of 'something'... (I don't mean anyone here of course)

[matt.guitarteacher]

I think it's really worth pointing out that a lotof singing in jazz isn't necessarily to do with pitch but phrasing and rhythm. I certainly see it that way - a lot of the time the rhythm helps with the notes. You can be as flat as a pancake and get the gist across.... Just don't do it on everyone's solos like Lee Konitz

This. Absolutely. I'm a singer mostly in my day job ( though not a jazz singer), and I've found that working on jazz phrasing on the GUITAR , especially polyrhythmic play, has done more to help my singing than just about anything I've done as a singer in recent years.

Better phrasing, in and of itself, is pretty valuable, but it affects everything: better tone - when you have the time and flexibility to phrase things in a way which serves the melody, the lyric, the vowel, or the phrase itself...

I find I'm not as much of a fascist with accompanists on tempo and things, because I can sing more laid back or ahead, just within the phrasing itself. provides a lot of flexibility, and you don't feel like you're having to "cram all the notes in" a bar.

Understanding what's going on with rhythm and especially polyrhythms, also gave me an understanding and vocabulary to better communicate with other players. I had one lady, a volunteer, who was slowing down and speeding up to try to keep up with what was going on with other players and myself, as a singer. I explained to her that she didn't have to stay right with vocals or what the drummer is doing, that what she was hearing was not "the beat" changing or slowing down/speeding up and that we're all playing somewhat "around the beat" in parts, she was able to keep things more steady, and everything just locked, even with this player who is somewhat limited in her hearing and understanding. Her time wasn't as bad as I had always thought, she just didn't know what she was hearing.

[christianm77]

Singing flat hurts the ears. But I do agree that phrasing and especially rhythm make things better. I find that the rhythm helps me "hear" the notes. But much as I like John Pizzarelli, I'm not a great fan of his singing.

If you do sing decently, isn't amazing how your vocal cords find the notes? And the tie in with scatting? I think it helps a great deal in improvising on the guitar.

You must hate Sinatra then ;-) imo better flat then sharp. Flat can have great style...

But singing in this context is not about performance it's about communicating an idea.

[Reg]

Yea.. Jonah... without the skills, there just isn't that much.

Thanks Jay... yea Guild artist, in just my office amp . Recorded with Kodak Z18 cheap... I just read through the tune... I probable just looked at the road map and recorded. If I did it again now.... who know, would be different. I don't really know the tune... I know it's a standard... just one I haven't covered that much. I generally always play what I hear... especially when ssssslllooowwww. At up tempos... I do have fun and just dive into patterns, both melodically and rhythmically. I don't try to prehear... I just try and react....I'm trying to crash and burn. Get on the edge...Create excitement for performance... audiences usually enjoy...

Yea bad intonation, oooooh sharp. I'm cringing already. That why I don't sing.... and I go where ever the vocalist goes. How many time has a vocalist gone into a tune in a different key because of longer intro. It happens.

[docbop]

Interesting I was on one of Steve Coleman's conference calls yesterday and topic of ear training came up. Steve was talking developing absolute pitch and how over a few months absolute be developed. Starting with learning one note, then the scale notes relative to it and so on. He was say all the people he's worked with have developed absolute pitch.
Also someone brought up hearing in live is different and Steve saying that part of the importance of playing with others in learning to play. So it was an interest part of the call.

[targuit]

I have very good relative pitch, but would not absolute pitch drive you crazy if the acoustic piano was off a few cents? I know it drives me batty on YT when someone speeds up a tempo rendering the song off 440.

[christianm77]

Interesting I was on one of Steve Coleman's conference calls yesterday and topic of ear training came up. Steve was talking developing absolute pitch and how over a few months absolute be developed. Starting with learning one note, then the scale notes relative to it and so on. He was say all the people he's worked with have developed absolute pitch.
Also someone brought up hearing in live is different and Steve saying that part of the importance of playing with others in learning to play. So it was an interest part of the call.

I know a PhD student (in that field) who would say that's impossible. Insomuch as that's the way that scientific research points. Don't know myself.

Would be interested to find out more. Bruce arnold (naturally!) also has a course on that....