Consciousness is too resource hungry, therefore it's also too slow. Muscle memory, aural memory and even, to an extent, visual memory are accessed much quicker by the non-conscious - teach it to carry out your wishes. To do that you've got to discover how it learns. Sadly, it's the elephant comme servant in the room we all try to ignore.

So, how does it learn?

It learns while we sleep. So, get lot's of sleep after your evening practice and you will notice post-practice-improvement in the morning.

It learns loads while we're asleep because our consciousness isn't interfering. It also learns as we do tasks as long as we perceive them in a way that is convergent with how it operates and, I shudder to say, how it thinks - to answer your question Phlebas.

I don't believe that's accurate. Is that a hypothesis or it based on something? I think it learns while you sleep because neural pathways take time to develop (a night's sleep ensuring plenty of time is taken)- and because your body regenerates best in the hours while you sleep. Apparently there's actually some kind of a physical element to the way these pathways are strengthened. I'm not aware of any reason why conscious thought might prevent such regeneration when awake. Unless I'm mistaken, I believe that the subconscious also makes progress while you are awake (although perhaps not at quite the same rate as during sleep). Work on something in the morning and it would almost certainly have had enough time for the benefits to be on display by the evening.

I don't know a whole lot about the fine details, but I've heard it suggested that it's vital not to finish a session of slow practise with a run-through. You need to leave it time to settle in. Go fast in the same session and you undo the memory of the good practise. Try it out the next time, and it may well go considerably better than you would ever have expected (even if you were not aware of having made any progress during the slow work). If this is accurate, the last rendition is most important to what settles in. Ideally if everythhing is accurate, the programming is flawless. That's why it's better to do a small amount perfectly, than to repeat endlessly with different errors.

I believe that any improvement as you're doing a task is primarily down to added conscious awareness. You have to walk away and leave it, before the subconscious has a chance to set in. Instant improvements and genuinely subconscious ones are very different issues- so it's important to aim for accuracy at all times, but not to worry about speed before that accuracy has already set in (from a different practice session). I think this is single most important thing to know about the subconscious. Good quality practise may not seem to show any discernable progress at the time- but if you can bring yourself leave it at that, the progress can come over the following few hours (or certainly by the next day).

When you talk of how it 'thinks' I believe you're confusing it. Unless I'm much mistaken 'muscle memory' (which is to do with nerves and the brain, rather than the muscles actually 'memorising' for themselves) is a very different kind of subconscious than repressed memories etc. I don't believe it has much to do with Freud style subconscious thought, but merely the ability to reproduces particular combinations of movements at will without great conscious will- once they have been done consciously enough times. Unless I'm vastly mistaken, I think you're perhaps confusing different elements of what the word 'subconscious' can mean. There may be some degree of cross-over, but I believe it's largely quite a separate issue from actual subconcious thought.

*** I am ignoring the above user ***

Technically speaking, making a point of responding to my post to say that you're 'ignoring' me does not count as 'ignoring' me.

If you are indeed interested in neural pathways, I'd take heed of those points about practising. Apparently these principles are vital towards how we can make progress.

Sheesh, some people just don't get the message.

Is it actually possible to ignore users on this forum? I never found the option for it

That's not 'ignoring' either. If you want to do it properly, please don't let me stop you.

Click on their name and choose 'view profile' and 'ignore this user'. Just a shame it doesn't wipe them entirely!

keyboardklutz,

Are you looking for the "unconscious" whatever that may be, or a non-conscious neurological process?

As I understand it, current research is that the process of correct process engages our neurons in specific ways to trigger the generation of further myelin around the neurons that are used during the practice. Adding myelin takes time and I believe that it occurs mostly (or possibly fastest?) during sleep. The effect of this myelin sheath is that this particular neural pathway is faster and more secure due to the increase velocity of signals and capacitance.

Rich

"The effect of this myelin sheath is that this particular neural pathway is faster and more secure due to the increase velocity of signals and capacitance."

Is it possible that the magic is called repetition? [or am I the only one that needs repetition?]

rada

That is how it was explained. How one practices, especially repitition, become triggers that myelin is needed which makes practicing that task more efficient.

Rich

Don't we have to put something into our consciousness first before it can later become sub-conscious, ie, beneath the consciousness level. To me, this means lots of time and experience at the instrument with much repertoire, styles, moods, rhythms, key signatures, all the basic things that give us something to think and do at the piano keyboard. Reading from the music and applying it to the piano keyboard is the game - through our accurate physical processing. In the beginning it is quite complex to get anything right and there are many approximates without there being precision. Only with regimen and discipline do we have something musical to retrieve.

Quietness of the mind, keeping thinking simple, repetition, listening, touching, sensing, experiencing music builds our abilities of technique and artistry. Time and effort in a neutral mind set is the best situation to build our musicianship.

It's the quiet mind that is so valuable that also sleeps so well.

I think "baklava" and "minestone soup" when thinking about what the brain does with our thoughts. Our brains are hungry to store knowledge and to retrieve it for our enjoyment. If we would only take the attitude and learning steps to "feed" it what it needs.

This is how I see it, so please take it as a grain of sand if you happen to disagree. It is just one person's opinion or maybe, it's fantasy. Maybe it's to be ignored.

I had a slight car accident 20 years ago. I was driving along in the rain and it was too wet to break quick enough not to slide into this guy. I only realized yesterday what happened - I saw a stopped car at a roundabout, assumed it was about to go as the way forward was clear, checked it and moved on to something else on the road. All this was done non-consciously; I predicted the situation, as we do as we drive, with no conscious involvement. Consciousness got involved as I looked at where the car had been, and found it was still there!

It's not myelin. Here's part of a correspondence I had with a concert pianist and myelin researcher:

Thanks for the advice, and sorry for being so off-topic!

No, most of our learning goes straight into the non-conscious. What I am saying is try and look through the lens of the non-conscious, see how it sees the world, to be better able to present material for learning in an efficacious way. The learning styles idea is an example but it's not just sensual prejudice that effects learning; I think the non-conscious is often more logical, but it's a logic that can be hard to understand or accept.

If you weren't ignoring my posts, you my might have heard the bit where I explained what a load of hogwash is being stated there as if it were incontrovertible scientific fact. Who do you think you are, to 'correct' such a simple statement with pure nonsense?

We certainly do have to execute a movement or make an association via the immediate conscious for it to become subconsciously learned. Those who are good sight-readers etc. have ALREADY put substantial workings into their subconscious, through repetition. There's a reason why even a genius cannot sit and give a flawless performance of a Chopin Etude, if he has never played the piano before (regardless of how much time he might have spent studying the score or watching others doing it).

As for the idea that the subconscious is more logical, how about Freud and the notions of secretly wanting to sleep with your mother and kill your father etc? Logical? I'm not sure if the fact that you made a false conrrection implies that you think you're in command of scientific principles here, but the rest of that comment reads more like som kind of a zany new-age mantra. Logic is absolute. The subconscious is driven by hormones and countless other erratic factors. Certainly not logic. Some dispute Freud's specifics, but I have never heard anyone claim the gut instincts of for human behaviour are more 'logical' than those that are rationally and consciously thought out. In any case, as I pointed out earlier, the subconscious of the mind and the subconscious ability to execute a series of learned movements would appear to be vastly different issues. Unless I'm hugely mistaken, there's very little direct cross-over. What we talk about in terms of 'subconsciously' ingrained procedures have little to do with anything that might described as 'thought' (especially if you're talking in reference to learning). I believe that you are simply making assumptions based on the different contexts in which the single word 'subconscious' is typically used.

*** ignoring the above user and user's post below*** (he just won't go away!)

Seeing as he's as blissfully ignorant of my posts as of the various factual errors in his own, would someone like to point out the inherent contradiction in stepping forth to proclaim that you are 'ignoring' someone, every time they make a post (and then updating to ensure that people are aware that you have supposedly 'ignored' another post)? This is as tiresome as it is hypocritical.

Apologies for having to join in such a stupid game of 'tell him that...', but if he's not reading my posts, he won't see this one telling him to stop wasting everybody's time.

A good example is playing the same passage at a different octave. To the conscious mind it looks similar, in fact the keyboard was designed by a conscious brain. To the non-conscious it's a very different coordination needing a very different orientation of muscles and vision. Perspective, in this instance, just gets in the way - if you try to play what consciousness sees you'll be interfering.

What are you trying to say? First you say how different the coordination is in the "non-conscious". Then you say that using conscious thought would be 'interfering'? So what are you supposed to rely on, if the 'non-conscious' actions would be different, but conscious thought would be interfering? The power of God? Where on earth are you trying to lead with these rambling, contradictory thoughts?

If you initially allow the subconscious to kick in at once, the slightly differing angle of the arm may mess things up at once. If there's no conscious thought, you will not succeed in making the adjustments that are required, from that which has been learned in a different octave. Nothing less than conscious thought about doing the same notes in a different position (with feedback from the nervous system- to tell you what feels the same and what feels different) can ensure that subconscious habits can form strongly enough, so as to permit you to reach a stage where you can play in any octave. Fortunately, the skills are transferable, so experienced pianists are no longer greatly aware of any adjusments, regardless of which octave something needs to be played in.

This is a very interesting area to consider, but I'm really not seeing what these various contradictory thoughts are supposed to suggest to anyone. The implications of the subconscious processes are actually quite simple and very rational- practise slowly, aiming to get thing perfectly accurate from the earliest stage. Fix any wrong notes instantly- by going back a few notes before, to set the flow of movements that will always need to lead into those notes. Once you've done it flawlessly a few times, walk away. These are the single most important things to know about the subconscious learning process. Even among those who do the best slow practise, you rarely encounter anyone with the patience to leave it be (in order to let the benefits set in), rather than spoil the hardwork by going faster right after- hence undoing all the good work and finishing with the internal 'memory' of inaccurate movements. Sadly, most learners don't even have the patience to correct most of the errors (within even slower work) properly in the first place- nevermind to allow slow work to settle in before they test themselves.

EDIT I think I've now realise what you were trying to say, but to say that conscious thought would be interfering is totally missing the point. When trying to analyse such internal processes, it's essential to be very careful with use of terminology. The conscious thought that says 'This must be exactly the same feel because the notes are same' might cause problems. That's because it would be a naive conscious thought. To follow through by saying that 'conscious' thought would be an interference is as logical as suggesting that using a calculator is a poor way to solve a sum- because, if you forget to key in one of the numbers, you do not get a correct answer.

The only process that achieves the adjustment would be a conscious thought that says 'This is basically the same, but let's take it nice and slow (rather than rely solely on a prelearned series of motions) because my arm is going to be in a rather different position'. If you think such a conscious process (coupled with conscious sensory awareness throughout the process) would be classed as 'interfering' then I'm really not sure what you think the alternative might be. Every movement in piano needs to eithe be learned consciously (or at least, by a teacher persistently manipulating your body in such a way as to teach you a physical sensation).

keyboardklutz first said:Then he said:
I don't remember how or when I discovered this web site, Musical Fossils. There is some great information about what I think this thread is saying and some suggestions on how to turn on, let me call it, the "non-thinking" or "non-analytical" part of our brain. I hesitate to use 'unconscious' or 'pre-conscious' because of the myriad of connotations these terms have. My teacher has said, "Don't try to play it perfectly. Just play it! Speak the language of music."

Yes, there must be, as Betty said, an introduction. I'm not minimizing the role of repetition, hands separately, playing pendantically slow. When I'm "in the zone" I can internalize the notes (memorize?) and when that happens, I really love my music. The introduction can be shear drudgery, but I think that's the discipline.

We westerners with our finely honed sense of cause and effect can, I think, get lost in the analysis and pre-judge what sounds good and bad. Then we try to perform to that standard. It's almost "brute force." But the "letting go," however that works in our brain to fingers to keys endeavors, is what IMO makes the music.

A data point for me on the viability of this concept comes in an experience I had last spring. There's a young clerk at the store where I have my lessons. We struck up an acquaintance and talked about our music. She sings--BEAUTIFUL voice--but doesn't like to sing alone for people. I, at the time, was hesitant to play for people--it wasn't perfect. One day she asked me to play for her. We went into the "grand" sales floor and I played the first movement of Mozart's sonata in A minor (K310). I just played it and, when I finished, she was just staring at me and said, "Dan, I didn't know until just now that Mozart could reach out and grab your heart so tightly." Wow! What a compliment! Now she sings for me. And all I did was just speak the language of music.

As we get to know a passage, as it moves from conscious to non-conscious, do we resist the change in how we perceive it? Is the conscious reluctant to give up its false view? Stubborn? Now you can see the wood are you still hankering for the trees?

These see Thee, and revere
In sudden-stricken fear;
Yea! the Worlds,- seeing Thee with form stupendous,
With faces manifold,
With eyes which all behold,
Unnumbered eyes, vast arms, members tremendous,

My sense tells me there is no resistance, merely a transformation. Maybe to the conscious music is merely black markings on paper that when associated with finger movement produce tones of a certain frequency and a certain rhythm. Maybe to the unconscious music is a language that does not speak to the ears, but to the heart. To continue your analogy, you forget the trees knowing that the grain is beautiful.

The grain's at its most beautiful as a piece of furniture.

And the more you nurture that furniture, the more beautiful the grain and its patina.