A Model of Musical Memory

Jennifer Mishra,
University of Northern Iowa

ABSTRACT PREVIEW STAGE

The process of memorization appears to comprise three stages: Practicing, whether or not the ultimate goal is memorization,
Preview, Practice, and Over-Learning (see Figure 1). These stages generally begins with a period of introduction to the music. Initially,
appear consistent with those proposed by Wicinski (1950 in musicians tend to preview an entire piece using a holistic strategy
Miklaszewski, 1989): getting to know the music, hard work on (Hallam, 1997; Miklaszewski, 1995; Nuki, 1984) to establish
technical problems, and fusion of ideas and technical skills. Imreh tempo, identify difficult passages, and get a general overview of the
& Chaffin’s (2002) model includes more detail, especially piece. The Preview Stage may consist of an Aural Overview, a
concerning the transitional stages: scouting it out, section by Notational Overview, a Performance Overview, or any
section; gray stage; putting it together; polishing; maintenance. The combination of these overviews. An Aural Overview consists of
current model also includes a preliminary stage of Enculturation developing an auditory representation of the piece through listening.
and Experience, which may affect the memorization of music. A Notational Overview consists of analyzing the notation away
from the performance medium. Score Study can be
Each stage is subdivided: the Preview Stage is divided into theoretically-based or may be less structured. A Performance
Notational Overview, Aural Overview, and Performance Overview; Overview consists of playing or singing through the piece in its
the Practice Stage is divided into Notational Practice and Conscious entirety. The Performance Overview is distinct from sight reading
Memorization; and the Over-Learning Stage is divided into as the latter implies only the initial performance of a piece while
Re-Learning, Automatization and Maintenance Rehearsal. The multiple performances may be required to form a holistic
amount of time and effort expended during each stage is a matter of impression of the music.
individual preferences, performance goals, task difficulty, training,
and ability. Further, the stages and the subdivisions are flexible and A performer may favor one or any combination of these discrete
not necessarily sequential, or indeed compulsory, for all performers. overview methods, in any order, or affect multiple overviews
A performer may choose to omit or return to stages or subdivisions simultaneously. For instance, notation may be studied cognitively
during the course of preparing a piece for performance. without physical reproductions of the music, and listening to a
recording can be accomplished with, or without notation. Listening
ENCULTURATION AND EXPERIENCE can precede or follow a Performance Overview as can a Notational
Overview. A Performance Overview can be combined with an
Musicians bring a great deal of knowledge to the task of Aural Overview and a Notational Overview to concurrently form
memorization. This knowledge will influence memorization an aural, physical, and cognitive map of the piece.
behaviors and efficiency. Expert memory for digits and chess
positions, as well as musical tones, is well documented; experts are The use of any overview method is optional and may be omitted
able to remember more domain-specific material than novices (e.g., from the Preview. The Performance Overview appears to be the
Ericsson & Lehman, 1996). However, exceptional memory favored method and thus, less likely to omitted. A Notational
demonstrated by experts is domain-specific and deteriorates when Overview would be omitted when a piece is to be learned using a
stimuli is randomly ordered, rather than in commonly-encountered rote method. Even the Preview Stage itself, may be omitted if a
patterns (e.g., Halpern & Bower, 1982; Sloboda, 1976). performer elects to start with technical practice; allowing the
structure to emerge gradually. The amount of time devoted to the
Evidence from memorization studies using both tonal and atonal Preview Stage is a matter of individual preferences, difficulty of the
music has highlighted the importance of enculturation. Almost task, performance goals, training, and ability.
without exception, researchers have found that tonal music is easier
to memorize than atonal (Nuki, 1984; Sloboda, Hermelin, & It is too early to determine which preview methods, or combination
O’Connor, 1985) or modal music (Oura & Hatano, 1988). Patterns of methods, are favored and how frequently the Preview Stage is
in an unfamiliar piece of tonal music may be easier to identify due omitted from practice; however there have been some attempts to
to previous experience with tonal music. Limited experience with determine whether one discrete overview method is superior.
atonal or modal music may make the patterns more difficult to Analytical study of the notation has been found to aid
identify and thus requires more time to memorize (Miklaszewski, memorization (Rubin-Rabson, 1940a & 1941b), but has also been
1995; Nuki, 1984). Expert performance of a given piece of music is found to have no effect on memorization (Jones, 1990; Shockley,
the result of the interaction of specific knowledge of particular 1980). Listening to the piece, whether alone or in combination with
piece with general knowledge acquired over a wide range of score analysis, has not been found to improve memorization
musical experiences (Sloboda, 1985). Previous learning can be (Rubin-Rabson, 1937; Schlabach, 1975).
applied to the task of memorization.

ISBN 1-876346-50-7 © 2004 ICMPC 231

ICMPC8, Evanston, IL, USA August 3-7, 2004

PRACTICE STAGE It is by no means certain whether this comprises an exhaustive list

of possible processing strategies, or whether one procedure
Practice is divided into Notation-Based Practice (Incidental surpasses the others in memorization efficiency and/or accuracy.
Memory) and Conscious Memorization Practice. Notation-Based Each method is effective in that it can result in a memorized
Practice relies on memory cues provided by the printed music. The performance (Mishra, 2003). Training in memorization strategies
primary purpose of this stage is often technical and perhaps may have the greatest influence on the procedural choice; however,
interpretive; focusing on accurately performing the printed score. the difficulty and length of the task may necessitate changes in
Training, ability, task difficulty, performance goals, and familiarity practice. For instance, a Holistic Processing Strategy may be used
with the piece will interact to determine the import of notational for short, uncomplicated music, while longer, technically difficult
cues and amount of time devoted to this stage. If the piece is not pieces, or more difficult sections within a piece, may require the
technically challenging or is learned by rote, this stage may be isolation and dedicated attention of the Segmented Processing
omitted entirely. A concerted effort may also be made to condense Strategy. Segment size may also be related to task difficulty. More
this stage if performance goals require a memorized performance. difficult sections may require practice on smaller segments, while
During Notation-Based Practice, regardless of whether notational less challenging sections may be longer (Chaffin, Imreh, &
cues are utilized continuously or sparingly, incidental memory for Crawford, 2002; Miklaszewski, 1989; Nielsen, 1999a).
the piece, as well as for unrelated stimuli, will develop.
Procedures may also be alternated to achieve optimal results. A
Once the piece can be performed using the notation, the period of Holistic practice may be inserted into primarily
performer’s attention may shift to the conscious memorization of Segmented practice. This alternating between intensive sectional
the piece. This shift is by no means abrupt. Memory begins to work (Segmented) and run-throughs (Holistic) is frequently
automatically develop during the process of learning the technical reported (Chaffin, Imreh, & Crawford, 2002; Hallam 1997;
aspects of a piece in both novices and experts. Evidence in the form Miklaszewski, 1989 & 1995; Williamon, 1999).
of self-reports, verbal comments, and performances indicates that
memorization of music begins early in the learning process, even in By far, the Segmented (Part) and Holistic (Whole) Processing
cases where memorization is not the primary goal. Lehmann and Strategies have received the most research attention with mixed
Ericsson (1996) have documented this incidental memorization by results. The Segmented (or Part) strategy appears to be favored
masking notation. Between 30 and 88 % of the missing notes could among advanced and expert performers (Gruson, 1988;
be recalled after just four performances. Miklaszewski (1989 & Miklaszewski & Sawicki, 1992; Miklaszewski, 1989 & 1995;
1995) deduced the amount of memorization by observing Nielsen, 1999a & 1999b; Oura & Hatano, 1988; Williamon &
page-turning behaviors. Incidental memory is evidenced especially Valentine, 2002). However, there is debate whether one or the other
in pieces, which are relatively short and simple. Longer, more strategy results in a more effective or efficient memory.
complex pieces of music require a focused analytical strategy Complicating research findings is an ambiguous definition of what
beyond automatic memorization (Hallam, 1997). constitutes a whole unit; as few as eight measures can constitute a
whole unit in experimental research (segmented into 2 or 4 bar
If incidental memory does not develop sufficiently during units). In the context of a piece of concert music, an eight bar unit
Notation-Based Practice to allow for a complete memorized would constitute a very small segment. Further, as segments are
performance, the focus must shift from technical considerations to linked together, the longer sections will begin to resemble an
conscious memorization. Conscious memorization is not required undivided performance (Miklaszewski, 1995). In the most literal
in every situation and may be omitted or condensed depending on definition, Holistic Processing Strategy consists of rehearsing the
performance goals and task difficulty. Both Notation-Based piece completely, always pushing to the end. This definition,
Practice and Conscious Memorization can include a multitude of however, may be modified to include rehearsal of complete
practice procedures and techniques. sections of a larger work.

Processing Strategies Additive and Serial Processing Strategies have received little
research attention. These two strategies are similar in that the music
The way in which a performer approaches a piece of music is is initially sectionalized. The difference lies in how the sections are
determined by training, experience and task difficulty. Four combined. Sections are systematically lengthened when the
processing strategies have been identified to-date (Mishra, 2003): Additive Processing Strategy is utilized, but in the Segmented
Segmented, Holistic, Serial, and Additive. Isolating portions of the Processing Strategy, sections are discrete. It is possible that the
piece for practice is the primary characteristic of both the Additive Processing Strategy may be a sub-set or variation on the
Segmented and Additive Processing Strategies. Where these Segmented strategy, but preliminary evidence suggests disparate
procedures differ is in how new material is added to a fragment. outcomes for the two strategies (Mishra, 2003). Sequential
Practicing discrete fragments separately, then as a unit processing was found to interact with phrase structures as memory
demonstrates the use of a Segmented Processing Strategy; while was highest at the start of each phrase and declined towards the end.
continually adding material, thus lengthening a segment constitutes
the Additive Procedure. When utilizing a Holistic Processing Each of the four processing strategies can be successfully utilized
Strategy, the piece is repeatedly performed in its entirety, allowing in the memorization of music (Mishra, 2003). It remains to be seen
for minor regressions if errors or memory lapses occur. However, whether the use of one strategy, or combination of strategies,
when errors or memory lapses result in a repeated return to the results in a more efficient, effective, or secure memory. Regardless
beginning of the piece rather than a concerted push through to the of the approach to memorization, various sensory and analytical
end, the procedure is termed Serial. learning styles are also available to the performer. For the purposes

232
ICMPC8, Evanston, IL, USA August 3-7, 2004

of this model, the four most commonly discussed memorization independently of a structural representation of the piece. For
strategies (Aural, Visual, Kinesthetic, and Analytical) have been example, segments may be based on the physical features of the
divided and grouped into Sensory Learning Styles (consisting of printed page. Even experienced performers may organize practice
Aural, Visual, and Kinesthetic Memories) and an Analytical segments based on page breaks rather than musical structure
Learning Style and will be discussed separately. While these four (Chaffin, Imreh, & Crawford, 2002).
types of memory are generally discussed together, the Analytical
Strategy appears to function discretely; influenced by the training Various techniques are commonly used when memorizing music:
and ability of the performer. Further, preliminary evidence suggests playing hands separately and blocking chords (on a keyboard
that the use of Aural, Visual, and Kinesthetic Strategies may be instrument), rehearsing under-tempo, and rehearsing segments of
related to personal learning styles (Svard & Mack, 2002). the piece in reverse order. These techniques may emphasize or
promote the use of the Analytical Learning Style, generally in
Sensory Learning Styles conjunction with one or more of the Sensory Learning Styles;
allowing the perception of patterns and associations, which would
Aural Memory is the ability to hear the notes of a piece of music in otherwise be obscured. Performing at tempos slower than the
the proper order without relying on a sound source or notational performance tempo, especially for difficult pieces or sections of
cues. The ability to recognize a performed passage as correct or pieces, may serve to focus cognitive attention and increase
incorrect may also rely upon Aural Memory. Visual Memory is the concentration (Lehmann & Ericsson, 1998). As kinesthetic
ability to recall a mental picture of musical notation, as a whole or memory may develop more rapidly and without conscious thought
in parts, or visualize finger patterns or hand positions on an during Notation-Based Practice, it is possible that reducing
instrument. Retention of the muscular movements involved in rehearsal tempi reduces the automaticity of the physical motions
performing a piece of music is termed Kinesthetic Memory. and allows slower cognitive associations to develop. Performing
Though much discussion of these strategies exists in the hands separately on a keyboard instrument may serve a similar
pedagogical literature, it is unclear whether one or another is function. Attention is divided when both left and right hands are
superior. It is generally accepted that these strategies interact to simultaneously performing. By rehearsing hands separately,
various degrees and a combination of strategies will result in a more patterns may be identified that would otherwise be over-looked.
secure memory. Blocking chords, allows for dynamic kinesthetic movements to be
observed concurrently. Linking segments in reverse order, or in fact
Individual learning preferences or the type of musical material may any order other than starting at the first segment of the piece, forces
influence the choice of learning style. Preliminary evidence the performer to create a new beginning to the piece; negating serial
suggests that sensory strategies may be based on an individual’s effects. The value of these techniques appears to be in focusing
learning style. Preferred learning styles were determined by a attention and encouraging cognitive analysis.
published measurement and correlated with memorization
techniques determined through interviews. Musicians utilizing The above Processing Strategies and Learning Styles can all be
visual strategies to memorize music (e.g., visualizing the page, used in various combinations and possibly to a differing degree of
recognizing visual patterns, watching hands) were generally efficiency, to achieve a memorized performance. A complete
classified as visual learners. Aural learners generally reported memorized performance, which defines the end of the Conscious
listening to the piece to recognize auditory patterns, hearing Memorization Stage, is defined as performing the piece, near or at
harmonic progressions, and awareness of variations in the melody. concert tempo, without reference to notational cues. Imreh was able
Kinesthetic learners relied on muscle memory and physical to achieve her first, halting memorization attempts during her
sensations (Svard & Mack, 2002). eighth practice session, but it was not until her seventeenth session
that she was able to fluently perform the piece (Chaffin, Imreh, &
Analytical Learning Style Crawford, 2002). The result of Conscious Memorization Practice is
a complete memorized performance, but rarely is one successful
Analytical Memory requires the cognitive interpretation of patterns memorized performance sufficient for a musician outside
and repetitions in a musical work. The focus is on forming experimental research studies.
relationships and finding familiar patterns. An Analytical Learning
Style may be utilized in practice as early as the Preview Stage, OVER-LEARNING STAGE
forming a mental representation of the form, harmony, and texture
of the piece. While analysis of the piece may be informal, not Performing musicians generally continue to rehearse even after a
requiring theoretical terminology, training and education in formal piece can be performed from memory. This final stage of
and harmonic analyses may inform the use of Analytical Strategies. Over-learning has received very little research attention primarily
Experts and advanced performers appear to utilize Analytical due to research protocols in which the ultimate goal is not a concert
Strategies frequently while inexperienced performers do not performance, but memorization itself. Naturalistic studies such as
(Hallam, 1997; Nuki, 1984; Williamon & Valentine, 2002). that conducted by Chaffin and Imreh highlight the importance of
practicing beyond the point when the piece has been memorized.
Analytical Strategies are most frequently discussed in reference to Imreh was able to perform the piece from memory during her
a Segmented Processing Strategy, utilizing structural features of the seventeenth practice session; however, she did not feel the piece
piece to define practice segments (Chaffin, Imreh, & Crawford, was sufficiently learned at that point and continued practicing for
2002; Gruson, 1988; Hallam, 1997; Miklaszewski & Sawicki, 1992; an additional 27 sessions before performing the piece sans notation
Miklaszewski 1983, 1989 & 1995; Williamon & Valentine, 2002). (Chaffin, Imreh, & Crawford, 2002).
However, it is possible to utilize a Segmented Processing Strategy

233
ICMPC8, Evanston, IL, USA August 3-7, 2004

While this stage may be very important in preparing a piece for highlight a difference between over-learning and over-playing. It
performance, the amount of over-learning necessary to prepare a remains to be seen whether thoughtless repetition beyond the point
piece for a concert performance has not been systematically of memorization is beneficial to retention or if conscious
investigated, nor have the motivations underpinning this stage of re-organization of the musical material is necessary.
rehearsal. Further, it is unclear to what extent the procedures
adopted by the performer during this stage are efficient and/or CONCLUSION
necessary. Three prospective subdivisions of the Over-Learning
Stage will be discussed: Re-Learning, Automatization, and The purpose of this article was to clarify the complex process of
Maintenance Rehearsal. memorization by creating a structure on which to connect disparate
research findings. Based on the literature to-date, the memorization
The musical information is cognitively reorganized during the of music appears to comprise three stages: Preview, Practice, and
Re-Learning stage. Alternate learning strategies and procedures Over-Learning. Previous experience and enculturation are also
may be utilized to strengthen memory and provide additional or very important in informing the memorization process. Allowing
alternative retrieval cues. Retrieval cues, as discussed by Chaffin for individual differences and preferences has been the greatest
and Imreh (2002) and Williamon and Valentine (2002), serve to challenge in constructing this model. Further, the process of
activate musical material, bringing the information from long-term memorization appears to be dynamic; changing as practice
into working memory. Retrieval cues may be refined during this progresses towards the ultimate goal of a concert performance.
stage and practice may shift from detailed, phrase-by-phrase Though the model has a great deal of flexibility built-in, it is
memory cues to more general, formal cues (see Williamon & anticipated that as the research into memorization continues to
Valentine, 2002 for a discussion of hierarchical memory cues). grow, the model will adapt and change to allow for new answers as
Retrieval cues developed Conscious Memorization may be tested well as new questions about how musicians memorize and what
to determine whether they are efficient and effective. Superfluous constitute the most efficient and effective memorization strategies.
or unstable cues may be replaced or eliminated; reducing the
number of retrieval cues to only those that are absolutely necessary. REFERENCES
Automatization is the extended and consistent repetition of a 1. Chaffin, R., Imreh, G., & Crawford, M. Practicing perfection:
behavioral sequence, which results in a routinized, stereotyped, Piano performance as expert memory, Lawrence Erlbaum
inflexible performance; completed automatically with no conscious Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 2002.
control. This theory of automatization as described by Shiffrin and
Schneider (Schneider & Shiffrin, 1977) may or may not accurately 2. Ericsson, K. A., & Lehmann, A. C. “Expert and exceptional
reflect what musicians seek to accomplish by continuing to performance: Evidence of maximal adaptation to task
rehearse past the point of initial memorization. While it is by no constraints”, Annual Rev. Psy., Vol. 47, 1996, pp 273-305.
means clear whether musicians are attempting to standardize the
3. Gruson, L. M. Rehearsal skill and musical competence: Does
performance in the Over-learning Stage, it is possible that
practice make perfect? In J. A. Sloboda (Ed.)., Generative
over-learning serves to automate the physical motions and/or the
Processes in Music: The Psychology of Performance,
retrieval cues. This would allow conscious thought to be redirected
Improvisation and Composition. Oxford University Press,
during a performance to musical or interpretative, rather than
London, 1988.
physical, concerns.
4. Hallam, S. “The development of memorization strategies in
Maintenance Rehearsal is the periodic performance of a piece to
musicians: Implications for education”, Br. J. of Mus. Ed., Vol.
keep the information active in memory over a long period of time.
14(1), 1997, pp 87-97.
This stage does not necessarily require additional learning, but is
the practice of retrieving the information. Maintenance Rehearsal is 5. Halpern, A. R., & Bower, G. H. “Musical expertise and
only necessary when a piece must be retained over a long period of melodic structure in memory for musical notation”, Am. J. Psy.,
time. Vol. 95(1), 1982, pp 31-50.
The Over-learning Stage may provide the opportunity to practice 6. Lehmann, A. C., & Ericsson, K. A. “Performance without
the performance, anticipating memory lapses that might occur. preparation: Structure and acquisition of expert sight-reading
Experienced musicians may purposely practice for memory lapses and accompanying performance”, Psychomusicology, Vol. 15,
in performance. Imreh reported purposefully trying to deliberately 1996, pp 1-29.
disrupt performance and add discomfort to check her memory
back-up systems (Chaffin, Imreh, & Crawford, 2002). Distributing 7. Lehmann, A. C., & Ericsson, K. A. “Preparation of a public
practice and practicing in alternate internal and external contexts piano performance: The relation between practice and
may strengthen memory and reduce the risks of memory lapses in a performance”, Musicae Scientiae, Vol. 2, 1998, pp 67-94.
performance. 8. Miklaszewski, K. “A case study of a pianist preparing a musical
The only experimental research study specifically concerned with performance”, Psy. of Mus., Vol. 17, 1989, pp 95-109.
the over-learning process found that playing beyond the 9. Miklaszewski, K. Individual differences in preparing a musical
memorization point did not result in superior retention of the piece composition for public performance. In M. Manturzewska, K.
(Rubin-Rabson, 1941d). While this may be a by-product of Miklaszewski, & A. Bialkowski (Eds.). Psychology of Music
experimental research using very short excerpts, it may also Today. Warsaw: Fryderyk Chopin Academy of Music, 1995.

234
ICMPC8, Evanston, IL, USA August 3-7, 2004

10. Miklaszewski, K., & Sawicki, L. Segmentation of music 26. Svard, L., & Mack, A. (2002, September). Playing by ear or is
introduced by practicing pianists preparing compositions for it by sight or feel: Learning styles and musicians. Paper
public performance. In R. Dalmonte and M. Baroni (Eds.), presented at the 45th Annual Conference of the College Music
Secondo Conegno Europedi Analisi Musicale (pp. 113-121). Society, Kansas City, MO.
Trento, Italy: Dipartimento di storia della civiltá europea,
Universitá degli studi di Trento, 1992. 27. Williamon, A. “The value of performing by memory”, Psy. of
Mus., Vol. 27, 1999, pp 84-95.
11. Mishra, J. “A qualitative analysis of strategies employed in
efficient and inefficient memorization”, Bul. Council Res. in 28. Williamon, A., & Valentine, E. “The role of retrieval structures
Mus. Ed., Vol. 152, 2003, pp 74-86. in memorizing music”, Cog. Psy., Vol. 44, 2002, pp 1-32.

12. Nielsen, S. “Regulation of learning strategies: A case study of a

single church organ student preparing a particular work for a
concert performance”, Psy. of Mus., Vol. 27(2), 1999a, pp
218-229.

13. Nielsen, S. “Learning strategies in instrumental music practice”,

Br. J. Mus. Ed., Vol. 16(3), 1999b, pp 275-291.

14. Nuki, M. “Memorization of piano music”, Psychologia: Intl. J.

of Psy. in the Orient, Vol. 27(3), 1984, pp 157-163.

15. Oura, Y., & Hatano, G. “Memory for melodies among subjects
differing in age and experience in music”, Psy. of Mus., Vol. 16,
1988, pp 91-109.

16. Rubin-Rabson, G. “The influence of analytical pre-study in

memorizing piano music”, Archives of Psy. Vol. 31(220), 1937,
pp 7-53.

17. Rubin-Rabson, G. “Studies in the psychology of memorizing

piano music: A comparison of massed and distributed practice”,
J. Ed. Psy., Vol. 31(4), 1940a, pp 270-284.
18. Rubin-Rabson, G. “Studies in the psychology of memorizing
piano music: A comparison of pre-study periods of varied
length”, J. of Ed. Psy., Vol. 32, 1941b, pp 593-602.

19. Rubin-Rabson, G. “Studies in the psychology of memorizing

piano music: A comparison of three degrees of overlearning”, J.
of Ed. Psy., Vol. 32, 1941d, pp 688-696.

20. Schlabach, E. L. The role of auditory memory in memorization

at the piano. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. 1975.

21. Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. “Controlled and automatic

human information processing: Detection, search, and
attention”, Psychological Rev., Vol. 84(1), 1977, pp 1-66.

22. Shockley, R. P. An experimental approach to the memorization

of piano music with implications for music reading.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado,
Boulder, 1980.

23. Sloboda, J. A. “Visual perception of musical notation:

Registering pitch symbols in memory.” Quarterly J. Exp. Psy.,
Vol. 28, 1976, pp 1-26.

24. Sloboda, J. A. The musical mind: The cognitive psychology of

music. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1985.

25. Sloboda, J. A., Hermelin, B., & O’Connor, N. “An exceptional

musical memory”, Music Perception, Vol. 3(2), 1985, pp
155-170.

235
ICMPC8, Evanston, IL, USA August 3-7, 2004

Enculturation/Experience

Preview

Performance Overview Notational Overview Aural Overview

Notation-based Practice Conscious Memorization

incidental memorization

Analytical Learning Style Sensory Learning Styles Processing Strategies

Aural Visual Segmented Serial

Kinesthetic Holistic Additive

Overlearning

Re-Learning Automatization Maintenance

Figure 1: A model of how music is memorized for performance.

236