Why the Progress You Make in the Practice Room Seems to Disappear Overnight

Why the Progress You Make in the Practice Room Seems to Disappear Overnight

Have you ever been frustrated by the fact that you can take a difficult passage, work on it for a bit, get it sounding pretty good, but return to the practice room the next day to discover that you’re back at square 1? That nothing has really changed? And despite how good it sounded yesterday, now it sounds just as bad as it did before you worked on it?

Most of us can live with “two steps forward, one step back.” It’s the “two steps forward, two steps back” that makes us want to tear our hair out.

So what are we to do?

Are we just supposed to keep at it and learn how to be more patient? Or is there a different way to practice that can make these improvements more permanent?

Enter Christine Carter

Dr. Christine Carter is a clarinetist who teaches at the Manhattan School of Music, and did her dissertation on the contextual interference effect – a phenomenon that can help you make your daily progress in the practice room actually stick. In this post, she shares a few suggestions on how we can make the most of our practice time.

Take it away, Christine!

Making the most of your hours in the practice room:

One simple change that could drastically increase your productivity

When it comes to practicing, we often think in terms of time: How many hours are necessary to achieve optimal progress? While this is a valid concern, a more important question is how we can make each hour count. What is the most efficient way to work so that what is practiced today actually sticks tomorrow? There is nothing more frustrating than spending a day hard at work only to return the next day at the starting line. Unfortunately, our current practice model is setting us up for this daily disappointment.

Repetition, babies, and brain scans

Early on in our musical training, we are taught the importance of repetition. How often have we been told to “play each passage ten times perfectly before moving on”? The challenge with this well-intentioned advice is that it is not in line with the way our brains work. We are hardwired to pay attention to change, not repetition. This hardwiring can already be observed in preverbal infants. Show a baby the same object over and over again and they will gradually stop paying attention through a process called habituation. Change the object, and the attention returns full force. The same goes for adults. Functional magnetic resonance imaging has demonstrated that there is progressively less brain activation when stimuli are repeated. The fact is, repeated information does not receive the same amount of processing as new information. And on some level, we all know this. Constant repetition is boring and our boredom is telling us that our brains are not engaged. But instead of listening to this instinctive voice of reason, we blame ourselves for our lack of attention and yell at ourselves to “focus!” Luckily, there is an alternative.

Blocked practice schedules

In the field of sport psychology, the continuous repetition discussed above is called blocked practice. In a blocked practice schedule, all repetitions of one activity are completed before moving on to a second activity. For example, a baseball player who must hit fifteen fastballs, fifteen curve balls, and fifteen change-up pitches in practice would complete all of the fastballs before moving on to the curve balls and so on. This most resembles the way the majority of musicians practice, especially when it comes to challenging passages. We work on one excerpt for a given amount of time and then move on to the next excerpt until all tasks for the day are complete. A blocked approach seems logical.  Muscle memory requires repetition and why wouldn’t we do all of the repetitions in a row? After all, if we are working on a difficult passage, it feels a lot more comfortable 10 minutes into practice than at the beginning. It is precisely this feeling of comfort and improvement that reinforces our reliance on blocked practice. The problem with this kind of practicing, however, is that the positive results we feel in the practice room today do not lead to the best long-term learning tomorrow. Practicing in a way that optimizes performance in the practice room does not optimize learning.

Random practice schedules

What if we took the blocks of practice on particular tasks and broke them down into smaller segments on each task? In the baseball example above, the players could hit the three different types of pitches in an alternating fashion, instead of doing all of one kind in a row. Two breakdown options are a repeating order (e.g., abc abc abc…) or an arbitrary order (e.g., acb cba bca…). In either, the net result will still be 15 practice hits of each of the three types of pitches, exactly the same as the net result in the blocked practice schedule. The only variable that changes is the order in which the pitches are practiced. This type of interspersed schedule is called a random practice schedule (also known as an interleaved practice schedule).

In a random practice schedule, the performer must keep restarting different tasks. Because beginnings are always the hardest part, it will not feel as comfortable as practicing the same thing over and over again. But this challenge lies at the heart of why random practice schedules are more effective. When we come back to a task after an intervening task, our brain must reconstruct the action plan for what we are about to do. And it is at this moment of reconstruction that our brains are the most active. More mental activity leads to greater long-term learning. In the blocked schedule above, the baseball players must only construct the action plan for each type of pitch once, at the beginning of each block. In the random schedule, they must construct and later reconstruct an action plan fifteen times for each pitch. Although a blocked schedule may produce superior performance during practice, study after study has shown that a random practice schedule consistently produces superior retention following practice a day or more later (i.e., the amount actually learned). This phenomenon is called the contextual interference effect.

How much better is a random practice schedule?

It turns out that the hypothetical baseball example used above is not hypothetical.  In a 1994 study by Hall, Domingues, and Cavazos, elite baseball players were assigned to either the blocked or random practice schedules discussed above. After twelve practice sessions, the baseball players in the random practice schedule hit 57% more of the pitches than when they started. The blocked group only hit 25% more of the pitches, meaning that the random practice schedule was almost twice as effective, even though the two groups hit the same number of practice pitches. Similar results have been found across a wide variety of fields. Most pertinent to our interests as musicians, my preliminary research at the Brain and Mind Institute in Canada provides empirical support for the use of a random practice schedule in music. Not only does this research suggest that a random practice schedule is more effective than a blocked schedule for practicing musical passages, participant interviews also reveal that random practice has positive effects on factors such as goal setting and focus.

How to use a random schedule in the practice room

Rather than spending long uninterrupted periods of time woodshedding each excerpt or section of a piece, pick a few passages you would like to work on and alternate between them. If you want to spend a total of 30 minutes on a particular excerpt, practice in shorter segments, continually returning to this excerpt until you have achieved your 30-minute goal. Experiment with lengths of time. If you are practicing excerpts that are very short, you may be able to switch between them at a faster pace than would be required for longer sections. You can use a small alarm clock to time specific intervals or switch after each repetition. At its most basic level, random practice might look like this:

Length

Material to Practice

3 minutes Excerpt A
3 minutes Excerpt B
3 minutes Excerpt C
3 minutes Excerpt A
3 minutes Excerpt B
3 minutes Excerpt C
Etc.

 

Practicing passages in different rhythmic variations is a great way of introducing contextual interference on a smaller scale. But instead of doing all rhythmic variations on a single excerpt before moving onto the next, do one variation on excerpt A, one on excerpt B and then return to excerpt A for a second variation etc. Technique can also be interspersed into the random schedule, instead of doing all of it in one long block. An example of a more complicated random practice session might look something like the following:

Length

Material to Practice

2 minutes Long tone, scale, long tone, scale…
3 minutes Excerpt A (using first rhythmic variation)
2 minutes Third progression, arpeggio, third progression, arpeggio…
3 minutes Excerpt B (using first rhythmic variation)
2 minutes Long tone, scale, long tone, scale…
3 minutes Excerpt A (using second rhythmic variation)
2 minutes Third progression, arpeggio, third progression, arpeggio…
3 minutes Excerpt B (using second rhythmic variation)
Etc.

 

The permutations are endless and the exact division of time is not important. What is crucial is that you are keeping your brain engaged by varying the material. More engagement means you will be less bored, more goal-oriented (you have to be if you only have 3 minutes to accomplish something), and substantially more productive. Most importantly, when you return to the practice room the next day, you can start from where you left off. This type of practice sticks.

Additional resources

Dr. Robert Bjork on the benefits of interleaving practice @ Go Cognitive (6-minute video)

About Dr. Christine Carter

christine carter clarinetDr. Christine Carter is interested in how musicians can be more effective on stage and in the practice room. She has conducted research at a number of brain imaging and music psychology labs and is currently a visiting scholar at Western University’s Brain and Mind Institute.

Christine is also an active clarinetist. Performances have taken her around the globe, including venues as diverse as Carnegie Hall, the ancient cloisters in Avignon France, the Sydney Opera House, the Heritage Theatre in rural Newfoundland, and a Baroque Palace in the South of Germany. She completed her Doctor of Musical Arts at Manhattan School of Music, where she now teaches the Woodwind Lab.

photo credit: fmgbain via photopin cc

Comments

      • says

        How interesting. I am very busy and take my classical guitar everywhere I go. Even if I have 5 minutes to wait in a doctor’s office, I pull it out and play. I do the same, having guitars strategically placed in my office and home, so I can play something quickly. I think this equates to random practice like you’ve mentioned and it works really well. I loved your article. Thank you.

  1. says

    How wonderful to see positive findings on the Random Method of Practice. I’ve used it for many years on myself and have noticed how well it works for my students. In fact many of the practice games on my site are based on this principal. I just go one step further and include activities to wake up the whole mind, so that the major subconscious part is being used as well.

  2. Rebecca Kite says

    Very interesting theory. I would like to mention a few things that I think are very important about the repetitive practicing that you are discouraging. I didn’t see any mention about the element of training your mind to focus intently on what you are practicing when you become bored by the repetition. For me (lifelong professional musician, soloist, and teacher), when I spend time practicing something I want to take to a higher level and use strict repetition, it does not get easier with each repetition. It gets harder because it gets harder to concentrate. This training is very important – that is – training both the mind to concentrate and the body to play correctly. The results of this practice show up for me on the next day. Of course, it is also important to mix up your practice methods and this is just one tool in the tool box.

    Perhaps it is more useful to describe many practice tools instead of setting up a false dichotomy.

    • Hunter says

      If it works better than the previously hailed methods, why would you not use it consistently? As a professional you should know that you don’t use a student instrument one day and a professional instrument the next day to “mix up your practice methods”. That is called stupidity. You use the best method every single time because if you’re not, someone is, and they are 100% for sure getting better than you.

      • Janis says

        The study left a lot of things unsaid — the whole assumption underlying it is that random practice between three tasks works once you know the basic technique of doing the three tasks. In order to get to the point where random practice is useful however, you will probably need to take techniques 1, 2, and 3 to the woodshed separately and clean them up. Then, and only then, once you know you can do them reliably well, do you start to randomize things.

        Mixing up practice methods isn’t stupidity. It’s an acknowledgement that all methods accomplish different things and most studies are limited. No one practice method addresses ALL practice issues. Method 1 addresses a set of issues, method 2 addresses another non-overlapping set. Realizing this is sensible, not stupid. As I said in the above example, repetitive practice builds a general awareness of the basics of a technique, whereas random practice helps burn it in in realistic situations … but only after the initial repetitions have been completed.

        In other words, the definition of “best method” changes depending on your situation and level of attainment. This may be frustrating, but it’s also life. Get used to it.

        • says

          Thank you for your comment, Janis. You touch an a very interesting point regarding when heightened contextual interference should be used. The literature is somewhat mixed. There is significant evidence that the use of a random practice schedule at the very beginning of skill acquisition is effective. Many of the contextual interference studies specifically looked at novel tasks, unfamiliar to the subjects, and consistently found practice under high levels of contextual interference to be more conducive to long-term learning than straight repetition. For example, refer to the motor learning tasks studied by Shea and Morgan (1979) and Maslovat, Chua, Lee, and Franks (2004), the badminton study by Wrisberg (1991), or the music study by Stambaugh (2009). Jared Porter has looked at the use of random schedules in novice golfers. One study compared three different schedules along the contextual interference continuum and found that the highest level produced the best retention (2007). Another found that systematically increasing contextual interference produced better results than either extreme of the spectrum (2010). Still another study of golf by Guadagnoli, Holcomb, and Weber (1999) found that a random practice schedule was better for experienced golfers, while blocked produced better retention for novice performers. While the majority of studies support the use of random practice, the question of when, where, and with who is definitely worthy of continued research.

    • Maestro says

      I do agree with what you’re saying about the repetition being useful in certain contexts, however I think the article is very concisely addressing age old uncreative practise structures which we invariably apply to every aspect of music making and which quickly become redundant. Your comment about being a lifelong performer just reinforces this idea that “it works for me and I’ve done ok” and with the greatest of respect this is an unhelpful attitude which sadly dominates instrumental instruction at all levels from pre school to conservatoire.

      If I’m practising a slow/controlled solo which takes place at the beginning of a programme there is very little point in practising it over and over again-my embouchore will become tired because of the control needed and in the end it leaves you focusing too much on the physical act of keeping going instead of on the musical issues which are of far greater importance. Am I doing something wrong? Of course not. In this context, it’s obvious that repetition is not fit for purpose and massively inappropriate. However, perhaps the opposite could be argued if the solo takes place at the end of the piece, or halfway through a long piece. Equally, if you’re practising a difficult bravura passage why should repetition of the passage in an identical way be needed at all if you build it up from a slower tempo over an extended period of practise? If you can play something correctly, why torture yourself playing it over and over again at that same tempo? You’re not “reinforcing” anything, apart from building up tension at specific points through an over reliance on muscle memory.

      Technical consistency should not be the ability to recreate something in exactly the same way every time with no variation, it’s the ability to respond creatively to a different environment, a different reed, a different string, a different acoustic and make the piece function in the way it needs to.

      • Paul Lindemeyer says

        I believe strict practice methods persist not because of
        practical concerns, but because “this is the way it has always been
        done” assumes the importance of an ethos or a code of the craft. We
        all know it takes great sacrifice to become a musician. This is a
        way of teaching the young player to accept it without questioning,
        and a way of reassuring the more senior player that dues are still
        being paid.

    • Laura says

      I had the same thought as I was reading this! I cannot remember becoming bored through repetition because I do not do blind repetition. Each set focuses on a specific part (intonation, articulation, alternates. musicality, breathing, etc). If one becomes bored than perhaps they have stopped engaging their mind and have not found new perspectives to think about while practicing.

      In this random schedule its seems like it would be very difficult to work on the finite details of passages. Perhaps this would be more geared towards a piece that has been well learned and is ready to be performed.

      Regardless I am willing to give it a shot and see what happens. Perhaps the two paired would be a much healthier and productive ay of practicing.

    • Kalanit says

      I disagree that interleaving doesn’t train for focus. I think this passage speaks directly to training for focus. “When we come back to a task after an intervening task, our brain must reconstruct the action plan for what we are about to do. And it is at this moment of reconstruction that our brains are the most active. More mental activity leads to greater long-term learning.”

    • says

      I agree with you 100%! It is more useful to describe more practice tools that to just favour just one, if you can’t practice repetition with 100% concentration you should strive to be better on it, not avoid it. Same as when doing random practice, you should also still be 100% focused otherwise you’re just wasting your time.

      I’m familiar with that neuroscience research that’s mentioned in this article, but the test subjects there are normal people, I’m pretty sure that when they test professional classical musicians there’ll be different results.

      It’s really a narrow minded thinking and counter-productive to say that there’s only one practicing approach that will work for everybody, the argument to just practice one way is not really that strong anyway.

      • Jon says

        The neurological principles hold true for both expert and beginning musicians. The benefits of randomness will apply to both, but each will need to practice material that is optimal for his or her level.

        We are all different, but generally not THAT different. It has nothing to do with being open minded or not.

  3. Joe Percival says

    For beginners, or anyone taking on a piece that is challenging in many (most? all?) areas, if you practice randomly, and never get it right, aren’t you learning to do it wrong?
    To follow the baseball analogy, can you apply the same training strategy that is effective with professional baseball players to a 9 yr old first year little league player who has never thrown a hardball?

    • Janis says

      This is exactly what I said above in response to Hunter. You repeat to learn the basics of a given task. Once you have hit an intermediate level, then you can start to benefit from randomizing, but until then, it’s got to be 15 fastballs, 15 curves, and 15 sliders in a row.

      Anyhow, IAWTC. :-)

      • Steve Freides says

        I think Janis hits the nail on the head. What’s appropriate for one level of player may not be appropriate for another. There is a wonderful Bruce Lee quote which addresses this:

        “Before I learned the art, a punch was just a punch, and a kick, just a kick.
        After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch, a kick, no longer a kick.
        Now that I understand the art, a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick.”
        I’ve read it before but just found it here:

        My own practice typically mixes both approaches, e.g., I’m working now on a longish (10 minute) piece with several difficult passages for me. I first “chunk” each difficulty passage by itself, repeating it over and over until it gets to where it needs to be. Then I work on getting the first pass at the difficult passage to be better and better by starting further and further back towards the beginning of the piece, effectively introducing the variety being recommended here. I’ve found that, if a passage is near my technical limits, just paying attention to it in the context of a varied practice session results in repeating my mistakes over and over with no improvement.

    • Mate says

      If you never get it right, than you have chosen the wrong practice. That has nothing to do with the randomization strategy working or not. I don’t see why it wouldn’t work with beginners doing simpler tasks.

    • says

      Good question, Joe. Many studies of the contextual interference effect suggest that random practice schedules are indeed effective for beginners. For example, this has been observed for novice golf (Porter et al., 2007), novice snowboarding (Smith, 2002), novice badminton (Wrisberg, 1991), as well as tasks such as art identification (Kornell et al., 2008), handwriting acquisition (Ste-Marie et al., 2004), and, most importantly, beginner music learning (Stambaugh, 2009). You can also see my earlier reply to Janis about this.

      It is important to differentiate between the the structure of practice and the more micro-level practice techniques utilized. Switching back and forth between two or more passages does not necessitate repeated inaccuracy. If a musician is experiencing difficulty with a passage in a blocked practice schedule, they may practice slowly, with different rhythms, singing, clapping, or with any other number of practice techniques to address the challenge. These same techniques can be used in a random schedule, the only difference being how the time on each passage is divided (e.g., 20 minutes all at once or 4 minutes x 5).

  4. says

    I gotta disagree with a large portion of this article – We’re creatures of habit. Our brains don’t desire change, they desire habits. Hence, the reason humans are referred to as “creatures of habit” – If a child performs an action with desired results, ie. If a child makes someone laugh with an action, that child will repeat that action over and over to achieve the same desired result. The child can do it 200 times without receiving the desired result, but once someone laughs, the behavior returns to full force. (Ever seen the experiment where they put drugs into the mouse’s water bottle? – The mouse licks and licks with no results – just off of the pure chance that the desired result connected to the behavior will return.) – We as humans do not desire change. We desire habits and repetiveness. If you’re in a practice room, and you play a passage 25 times, and you finally get it right on the 25th time, your brain has been supplied with positive reinforcement – Giving you the desired effect – you will then repeat the action over and over and over to achieve the same result. — having said all of that, If the end result is not appealing or rewarding enough to the musician, then the work isn’t worth the trouble, and can quickly become boring or just a pure hassle. This can be compared to working at a lumber yard for minimum wage – It’s just not worth the work – That’s the reason that you’re making no progress. You have no interest in what you’re exercising. Pick pieces that truly hold your interest… Play music that you care about, and you’ll be truly amazed at the rate at which you progress…

    • Phil says

      “I gotta disagree with a large portion of this article – We’re creatures of habit. Our brains don’t desire change, they desire habits.”

      The point of the article wasnt about what we like or desire, but what produced the best results. From the article:
      “After twelve practice sessions, the baseball players in the random practice schedule hit 57% more of the pitches than when they started. The blocked group only hit 25% more of the pitches, meaning that the random practice schedule was almost twice as effective, even though the two groups hit the same number of practice pitches.”

    • Kalanit says

      I hear what you’re saying, but where’s your evidence that we crave habit and that the 25th (and only correct) repetition is the one that provides critical positive feedback and enhances learning? Sounds like opinion to me.

      Watch the video and listen carefully to what he has to say about how the block practicers felt about their mastery versus how the interleaving practicers felt. It’s very instructive. Their subjective impressions didn’t match the objective measured results. That result right there tells us how important it is to constantly question our assumptions.

    • Florian says

      If you practice something 25 times and only get it right the 25th time you will have practiced it wrong 24 times and that’s what will stick. If you read some literature that looks at what exactly happens in the brain when you learn something (This is Your Brain on Music by Daniel Levitin or The Talent Code by Daniel Coyle) you will learn that for any action you perform the brain will reinforce neural circuits with each repetition – no matter what the action is. So if you practice something and need 24 failed attempts to get it right you will have reinforced the wrong neural circuits 24 times.

      With a random practice schedule you train yourself to get things right on the very first attempt. And that’s a habit you really want to get into because it’s exactly what you need on the bandstand.

      • John Cobb says

        Thanks for your valuable comment, Florian, and also for mentioning the two books. Practicing is a complex combination of skills, principal amonth which is the principle that you stated. Why don’t my students perform as well as I do? Because they make mistakes in their practicing, and these mistakes will resurface in lessons and performances. You can bet on it! Getting them to follow my model of virtually no errors – ever – in practice is a whole different issue. It seems only the most advanced and professional level students can translate that concept into action, even when I explain and demonstrate. Strange!

    • says

      I think you are completely correct in a sense that we are creatures of habit. When it comes to an instrument, first we have to find what we are doing wrong. Within the discovery of this area of improvement, we then must identify what we can change to make this blemish disappear. Through vigorously analyzing our technique via repetition do we smooth out our rough spots and create the habit. A habit isn’t instantaneous. I believe the practice method mentioned above is a good way to expose your weak points in passages in order to identify and make it clear where you still need improvement. As soon as you are relaxed with one passage, you move to the next. That switching of the passages takes you out of your comfort zone. The better habits you create through analysis, the less uncomfortable it will be. Etc.

      I am new to the violin but have almost 7 years experience in flute. I know that, for being a beginner violin student, I need to pay attention to many details and repeat methods until I find the one that works the best. Then, after that becomes evident and is most efficient, will I add it as much as possibly into my repertoire until it becomes second nature. I wish forming a habit could be that easy. I’d be finished all my books by now lol

      And as always, articles like this aren’t meant for everyone. We all know everyone works on different levels.

  5. says

    For me, random practice seems a bit diffuse. A practicer who comes back to a passage the next day only to find it worse is likely dealing with an issue that won’t improve by simply “mixing it up,” IMHO.

    I wish I had learned far earlier in my career the amount of depth and interest that one can place in even a simple passage. Simple rhythmic variation is only a start; I’ve created dozens of routines that fall into several large categories. Follow such an approach in the proper state of mind and I guarantee that almost any passage can be cracked, assuming your basic technique and mechanics are sound.

    It’s a truism that we often practice in the wrong state of mind, and that for some crazy reason we hold our analytical, problem solving mind in reserve until it’s time to mount the performance stage. It’s the exact WRONG approach. It’s a constant burden even for my own practice, even though I know better.

    In any event, randomness sounds like an interesting tactic, but the basic tools of practice are the deeper strategies used, and your ability to deploy them with skill. I try to build that into my teaching, even for the youngest of students.

    I’ve learned that great practice is the solution to almost any musical or psychological challenge, yet its the least developed area of pedagogy for so many musicians. That perhaps is a reflection of a larger cultural bias: Western culture treats the word “practice” as a verb. “Get in that room and get to work!” But think of practice in the Eastern sense of “being” instead of “doing” and it takes on a whole new meaning.

    Some people call it “talent,” but I see it differently. At the heart of any great musical performance is a musician who is adept at the strategies of practice.

    • says

      Thanks for your message, Bill. I completely agree with you. Random practice is not going to solve anything if the practice itself is not effective (e.g., mindlessly playing through passages back and forth). Random practice is a structural tool to get a larger impact out of the other practice strategies being utilized.

    • Kalanit says

      By all means, watch the video. He makes a fascinating point that the block practicers felt more confident of their mastery while the interleavers, who felt less confident, nevertheless demonstrated more mastery by objective measurement. That finding right there is reason enough to experiment myself for the next week.

  6. Katie says

    This technique has been tested and proven effective in a lab, and in several tests in different fields of study. If it doesn’t appeal to you, or doesn’t work for you, fine. I think the author explained very effectively the reasons it does work, and does make sense. It makes sense to me. I think any tool that can help break the monotony of repetitive practice and actually help you retain progress and learning is fabulous, thanks for sharing! I know I won’t be the only one who will be helped by this!

  7. says

    Noa, I really appreciate that you introduce us to such a wide range of experts on this blog. Christine’s post is really useful. Also, I read this post as a mom practicing with kids and I realize that you can make this type of practice a game:

    Write what you want to practice on a tiny piece of paper. Ten times. Do that for each thing you want to practice. Then the child can pick something out of a hat each time to determine what they practice.

    Penelope

    • says

      This is a great idea, Penelope, thank you for sharing. I’ve also found that students enjoy mixing theory and ear-training into their practice, rather than doing all of the theoretical material in a chunk at the beginning or end of their session.

  8. says

    While I am a strong advocate for extensive repetition in practice, it needs to be tightly controlled so it doesn’t become mind-numbing. I use the “Technique of a Hundred Beans” for that. The randomizing approach you discuss here is extremely effective and useful; I recommend using the technique called “Index Cards” for that purpose.

    Both are discussed in more detail here: http://www.warrensenders.com/journal/?p=695

    Thanks for a very useful and important post!

  9. Hugh says

    Its funny, I have been using this technique with my students for a long time. Some of them have such little time to practice I tell them to break it up into smaller segments and alternate between what they work on. After reading this I will fine tune my approach now. Good to know it actually has a scientific name. Thank you.

  10. Victoria says

    Two things: 1) Quick playing makes poor muscle-memory and mere habituation (so do less reps, but more slowly, especially when coming back to a piece), and
    2) If you over-practice until you are exhausted, your mind will commence your next practice session with the same state, so you fall into a vortex of “diminshing returns” (so part of the discipline of practicing is to learn one’s own best tolerance of individual practice times, feeling states, health, etc., as this does change over short and long periods).
    This was taught to me by my piano teacher of many years, who passed away as a very senior person in the mid ’70’s (he had taught generations of my Family), and so was way ahead of his time. The best part is that it taught me to be aware and learn my limitations in all parts of my life. Very Zen, as it requires one to be exquisitely “mindful”, and adaptive. And interestingly, as these things go, he did not profess any “zen” philosphically at all, which also shows the universality of wisdom.

  11. Alex says

    With all due respect. Applying different rhythms should only be done if a player happens to be playing unevenly, adding false articulations or has poor coordination. From a string player’s perspective, the act of introducing any kind of muscle reflexes other then the ones required for the correct execution of the passage, etc…in question, only serves to disturb the organic timing necessary. As a descendent of the Heifetz lineage, I was instructed that one should never/ever practice in a manner that one would not eventualy be required to play – it only wastes time and provides possibilities for an eventual slip of mind and coordination, since once a new possibility is introduced, the brain may recall it when one least needs it! At one point, either the fingers or bow arm may actually enter a ‘confused state’ and not truly know what to do…possibly leading to a dystonia.

    I tell all my students: practise so slowly that you can think, and allow time for your muscles and senses to feel what is necessary for proper execution; then speed it up, always under control. All playing must be deliberate and not by chance.
    There is no substitute for active memory = intelligence, and good muscle memory = learned reflexes. What one needs is a proper effective routine of practice habits, conditioning and well learned technique; since technique is what happens before the sound!
    Just wish that playing the violin was like riding a bicycle or swimming; once learned, one never forgets!

    • Janis says

      Quick reply: That’s not the case on playing different rhythms. One of the best reasons to play with different rhythms is to get used to being flexible in execution, to being able to not feel lost or disoriented if things go one millimeter out of spec. I still remember a comment by Joyce DiDonato where she remarked that she changes up rhythms all the time. The way she put it is that, if she’s inspired to do something even minutely different in one given performance, she want her voice “to be able to respond no matter what.”

      If that’s not the case, and you are inspired whether suddenly or not to change things a bit, your response will be fear. Fear is not the way you want to react to a moment of inspiration; you want to be able to take it and see where it leads, not freeze up and think, “Ohmigod, things are going out of compliance from the way I learned them! Reel it back, reel it back!” If you fear inspiration as a performer, you are in a sad situation.

      The Heifetz model, at least the way your describing it, is that there is ONE right way to play a piece and only one. Any other way is wrong. Any deviation from the exact predestined performance is automatically bad. Not only does this attitude produce a brittle performance mentality where any deviation from what’s been predetermined is a four-alarm emergency, but I highly doubt Heifetz himself really had that attitude.

    • Ben says

      Rhythmic variations also allow you to break down mental speed barriers, especially when attempting to notch up the metronome into the red zone.

  12. Enabler says

    Couldn’t agree more with this!! It is what I recommend to all my students, as well as colleagues I try to encourage (it’s never a good idea to hoard knowledge :) If you think about it, muscle fibers should theoretically respond the same with increased attention span. That is of course why circuit-training sessions are more productive in addition to intervals. In different words, I heard both of these translated to fit the musical experience of productive practicing. I knew I couldn’t have been wrong all this time!

    • Al says

      excellent point linking this to Interval/circuit training.
      I think it also reinforces the importance of warm-ups on the day of a concert or audition — while the comfortable facility achieved by block practice may dissipate after a few days, it does get you “in the groove” for the near term.

  13. Alex says

    I’m amazed by some of the comments here and the apparent resistance to this idea. As a professional performing musician who is also taking auditions I feel a real need for mixing things up and will certainly try this method. I’ve been playing the same excerpts for 15 years and it takes very little time for my brain to switch off and feel like I’m just going through the motions. If I want to get physically fit it is more effective to do interval training than run 10 miles and so I see this practice method as no different. Thank you Noah and Christine for sharing these ideas and helping us to always question what we are doing.

  14. David B Teague says

    I have a teacher who iterates:
    “Practice does not make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect. Imperfect practice makes errors permanent.”
    Dr Suzuki said that children can learn by repeating 10 or a 100 times but an adult may take 10,000 times. In that respect I’m surely an adult.
    I shall have to add this practice technique to my arsenal.

  15. Regina says

    I like seeing new ideas about how to practice, but I also think correct and relaxed repetition is key to making things few natural. I also agree that the “how to” practice depends on the level of student and type of literature. Some things I’ve given names to used w/many levels of players (beginners through college seniors) are:
    Me Play, You Play
    Finger and Say
    Incremental Sequencing
    Add-A (note, measure, phase, section forward or backward) or chunking
    Identify & Isolate to Conquer
    Rhythm Alone
    Pitch or Notes Alone
    Rhythmic Displacement (differing rhythmic patterns)
    Articulated Vocalization
    Slow Practice
    Symmetrical To & Fro
    Endurance Practice

    The point w/students and myself is that we need to be systematic and creative.

  16. Chris Carrillo says

    This looks like a great article on the application of this research to music practice. There was a 2001 replication study of the 1994 article mentioned above titled: Consistent and Variable Practice Conditions: Effects on Relative and Absolute Timing from the Journal of Motor Behavior, 2001, Vol. 33, No. 2 pgs. 139-152 written by Charles Shea, et al.

    The research results in Shea’s article confirm and really dig into the nuts and bolts of how we develop relative and absolute motor memory. Fascinating stuff and lots of applications to how humans learn any motor activity plus it explains the conditions of how the research was conducted.

    If this post really makes you think, dig into Shea’s replication study and take a look at the references at the end of the article. There has been such extensive research on generalized motor program (GMP) and I just love research that flies in the face of what we “think” is most effective.

  17. marilyn says

    This is interesting. Let me tell you what works for me. I am a professional violist (now retired.) Like most violists I started on violin and only switched to viola after college. I had never studied Stamitz and managed to avoid it like the plague.

    But there came a time when I was ready for the challenge. I was a new mother and I put
    my baby in her rocking chair and would practise two hours on the first page. Then . she would have enough. Every day it seemed like I had never seen the piece before and I had to start at the beginning. After a LONG time, I thought “what is going on here? If there is a passage in the orchestra that is tricky, I run through it silently (just fingers) while the conductor is talking to the clarinets. And I conquor the thing in 30 seconds!

    I thought perhaps time was the clue. So I got a timer and set it for a half hour. At the end of that time i went to the next page and got the whole 4 pages practised in 2 hours! And, it stuck! So I tried 15 minutes, and I accomplished as much on 15 minutes as I had in a half hour! Eventually, I found that choosing a spot and limitimg it to 5 minutes was the most effective! (Many years later I made an “arrangement” of the Stamitz for you tube. If any violists want a laugh, go to maribone2002 on you tube. Ifwant a laugh, lo
    of of thof that time Ivwent to

  18. Paul Lindemeyer says

    With respect to Dr. Carter, practice is NOT just practical. It is part of our ethic and identity as musicians. And sometimes that means working harder, not smarter – cultivating things like toughness, the willingness to pay dues, and the ability to (yes) yell at yourself.

    There aren’t going to be a lot of voiced objections to the kind of rethinking Dr. Carter is doing, but the bang-your-head approach will still be supreme for many who came up with music as trade, man’s work, passed down from masters, through tradition.

        • Paul Lindemeyer says

          I was perhaps hasty in using the term man’s work. I didn’t mean it is intrinsically – only that it carries many of the same associations and connotations.

          Consider what I say above substituting “blue collar work” for man’s work. Is it more relevant?

    • Kalanit says

      Nope, blue-collar work doesn’t work for me either. We musicians work hard, undeniably, but my cousins, uncles, and aunts who work in the lumber mills or running line for the county or farming or on commercial fishing vessels already think I have an unbelievably cushy work life. They’re polite enough not to say so at the family reunion.

      I wouldn’t dream of comparing my work to theirs when the closest I’ve come to exposure to a toxic substance in the workplace is the suspect intonation emanating from a certain section in the orchestra, and certain gentlemen in tuxes who take the Allspice commercials to heart and apply liberally.

      I have one colleague who frequently declares musicians are prostitutes. Wonder what the sex workers would have to say about that!

      • Paul Lindemeyer says

        I’ll drop the metaphors, since they only hang folks up.
        I’ll just say that punishing, bang-your-head practice methods are
        deeply ingrained into the tradition, status, and craft ethic of
        what it means to be a musician. And at least for the foreseeable
        future, that false ethic, which makes things far more difficult
        than they already are, is not going away. Those who teach in a
        different way will be up against it as much as those who
        learn.

  19. Sreevilasan says

    I feel random practice sessions are more effective and easier to learn. The boredom in practice sessions vanish when we practice different items in random sessions. Moreover, it will help to reproduce the whatever learned at any time or even after many days.

  20. says

    Hello! Interesting article. I am troubled by the baseball analogy in that hitters have to hit unpredictable types of pitches, so varying the type of pitch you hit is helpful. You have to be able to hit a different pitch every time you go to the plate. However, in music we have to hit the same “pitch” (passage). You need to practice a predictable sequence at some point. I do believe in engaged practicing, but also wonder at what point one should practice for endurance and long-term focus. I am also curious as to how this relates to the creation of myelin in the brain as published by Daniel Coyle in the “Talent Code.” When you switch passages is more myelin produced ? Thank you for your articles!

  21. Mark says

    In my opinion, one must begin practice with enough time for the body, hands and brain to truly accept the information. If you have to learn something overnight, no process will produce stellar results. However given a reasonable amount of time to prepare, Dr. Carter’s process is superb.

    I don’t know many people who love to practice. Rather they need to practice in order to achieve the pleasure they are able to realize in the final product (the successful concert, the low-scoring golf game, the personal-best marathon time, etc…). In marathon training, there are “muscle mix-up” training methods as well as speed training exercises that are similar. It is apparent to me that Dr. Christine Carter is simply offering us a technique to beat the inevitable boredom that are brains begin to sense after numerous repetitions of the same passage. We all are slightly different in the way we receive information and her technique allows us to stay engaged. But as someone who has won several auditions and also teaches at the collegiate level, this is a technique that will keep the advanced musician who has already performed and auditioned with the same solos and excerpts numerous times, engaged allowing for an opportunity to reach a new and higher level. I also agree with Florian, and I quote because it is worth repeating… “So if you practice something and need 24 failed attempts to get it right you will have reinforced the wrong neural circuits 24 times.” (by Florian). Kudos to Dr. Carter for offering a method that will improve our performance quality and help us to justify why we spend those valuable hours in a practice room.

  22. says

    Part of the problem is that we continue to use the word Practice.
    By definition it is telling us to do the wrong thing.
    —–perform (an activity) or exercise (a skill) repeatedly or regularly in order to improve or maintain one’s proficiency.

    I use the words Rehearse Play Review and avoid the word practice as much as possible. It is so loaded and toxic in my opinion.

    • Paul Lindemeyer says

      It’s a good word because to get better, we have to confront negatives and negativity daily, head on, and maintain a positive attitude.

    • Érico Schmitt says

      In brazilian portuguese, we use the word “study” instead of “practice/rehearsal”.

      I try to make it reflect on my way to practice too, by exploring something from many perspectives. I often spend 100% of my study time exploring a passage in every conceivable way. All but the original. Then I do the intended for the first time on a lesson, or rehearsal, and I’ve even done that on concert. It worked.

      My parents often referred to my study as rehearsal, and I insisted that they used the correct word: study.
      I replied that “Rehearsal is what i do with the orchestra. Practice or training is what I’m doing anytime I play. At home I study”.

  23. says

    Take one idea or technique and apply it to a real song

    Don’t dwell on being the master of all.

    Or u will
    Be the master of
    None

    Don’t memorize by hand. Memorize by ear and your hand will eventually follow.

    Spend 10mins in technique and 45 on application and be the master of one

  24. Dannene Drummond says

    From what I’m seeing in research articles (in just a brief search), this is highly theoretical and there is no consensus on whether it is beneficial or generalizable to all forms of learning. I think it would be very difficult to show that this method is any more valuable than repetitive practice. How could it even be studied in the musical realm? First you would have to pick 2 equally difficult passages to learn (how could one say this passage is the same difficulty as another passage?) Then you would have to have the person learn each passage in the 2 different methods. Finally, you would have to measure the progress of one passage vs. the other passage. Too many confounding variables. Everyone learns differently and to say this method is better than the other is nonsense. It should be portrayed as another way to practice, not a better way to practice. There are some great comments on here. I hope that after reading the article, people read the comments too.

  25. Becky says

    This was very informative and now has my curiosity juices flowing. I’ve given piano lessons for 35 years and teach at a nearby college, but have never heard of the random method, however, I find I do use it myself to a limited extent. Never knew there was science behind it. I am anxious to dig into it deeper and see how I could incorporate it into my piano students’ learning processes. Thank you for the great article!

  26. Paul Rak says

    Both my 7.5 year old daughter and I are in our 3rd year of Suzuki violin and I will be trying this alternate method…ie Random Schedule. With my 7.5 year old it would definitely help engage her more as she has little love for doing 10 of this or 10 of that in terms of repetitions. Therefore by intelligently adding variety or mixing up the repetitions even if the total amount of repetitions for the daily lesson still add up to the same numbers, it will definitely help her find the practice times more enjoyable and less tedious.
    Plus as an adult and learning in tandem with my daughter I find it does take me 3-4 times more practice than her to “get it”, it will be interesting to see how this affects my long term retention and muscle memory.

    Great article Noa. Thanks for giving the music community such great and thought provoking articles!

  27. Paul says

    I like Dr. Carter’s approach for a few reasons. One reason is that the old school thought of practice making permanent still applies. Not only do you repeat the practice of a particular skill for certain periods of time, you repeat the practice of more than one skill several times in varying order. The research has shown that it is easier for many people to focus when there’s variance as opposed to monotony. Sure, if one wishes to exercise their brain power to help them overcome the challenge of monotony, so be it. The research did not indicate that 100% of people who use Dr. Carter’s approach would benefit. But I think for those who benefit from Dr. Carter’s approach, they would feel that the lack of monotony keeps them interested, more easily focused, and increase their chances of success.

  28. #Reedproblems says

    As a woodwind player, I completely agree with Maestro:

    “Technical consistency should not be the ability to recreate something in exactly the same way every time with no variation, it’s the ability to respond creatively to a different environment, a different reed, a different string, a different acoustic and make the piece function in the way it needs to.”

    I feel this circuit training approach develops flexibility, so when you perform you don’t have to rely on perfect conditions.

  29. Jennifer says

    This post has a few errors.

    What you are mostly describing is serial practice, not random practice. A,B,C, A,B,C is a serial sequence, not a random one. Randomizing this sequence would be throwing two A’s, two B’s and two C’s in the air and playing whatever order they land in.

    Second, the field is motor learning, not sports psychology. Motor learning studies learning retention of motor skills. When there is too much repetition, muscles tire. When muscles tire, they recruit less efficient muscles fibers to do the same work. Result=sloppy technique. Practice variability aims at reducing this.

    Third, this research has been around for decades. There are textbooks on motor learning teaching this. Here’s one:
    http://www.amazon.com/Motor-Learning-Performance-Study-Guide/dp/073606964X

    As one comment said, this is one way, not the only way. True! There are many many many theories of practice coming from motor learning and the work is to learn a lot of them, then figure out what works when.

    I’m sorry to gripe about this – but this is what I teach! Can’t let it slide.

    This article addresses the issues with more accuracy: http://mpr-online.net/Issues/Volume%202%202008/Wulf%20and%20Mornell.pdf

    Also, I LOVE the comments of teacher’s who have intuited this all along! George Garzone is one of them. If you’re bored and want a challenge, try this: http://simonpurcell.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/george-garzone-concept-worksheet1.pdf

    It’s improvisatory but forcing recall at the same time. And who doesn’t like the term “randomnivity?

  30. acemi says

    So many leaps of logic. What is that saying: A little bit of knowledge… ?

    “The challenge with this well-intentioned advice is that it is not in line with the way our brains work. We are hardwired to pay attention to change, not repetition. This hardwiring can already be observed in preverbal infants. Show a baby the same object over and over again and they will gradually stop paying attention through a process called habituation. Change the object, and the attention returns full force.”

    The function of the brain directing an infant’s attention to something that has changed is very different from playing a musical instrument or playing baseball. One is merely directing attentional focus temporarily to a change in the environment, the other is performing a sustained physical activity. They each rely on different areas of the brain.

    “The same goes for adults. Functional magnetic resonance imaging has demonstrated that there is progressively less brain activation when stimuli are repeated. The fact is, repeated information does not receive the same amount of processing as new information.”
    It is erroneous to conclude that ‘less processing’ as presumed by the data from fMRI = less useful. In neuropsychology the conclusion drawn is that there is less activity because of the learning process: the brain is more efficient at creating the result. As something is more practiced then fewer neural resources are necessary to perform that task. Less active attention or a different kind of attention is utilized for tasks that are more automatic. That does not mean that repetition in blocks is not a productive or effective way to train. The fewer attentional resources required to perform the basic task and the greater skill and control one has of the basic task, the more one has available to attend to other aspects and is physically capable of adapting or changing finer qualities of the task.

    The study mentioned was on elite players – they have gone through the multiple repetitions training to develop their skills long before the study. Is there a study that compares the two methodologies in a double-blind, randomized, controlled design with beginners as the subjects?

    I am not discounting the ‘random’ schedule [it is really a misnomer] as an effective component of a balanced practice or training schedule. I am just saying that it is a huge leap of logic to take the results from that study to say that what you call the block method of training is not useful.

  31. Drew says

    This sounds great, but I have a question. If I need to work the speed up from 60-120, how does this process fit in? If my brain is “relearning” or “reconstructing” the method to play the excerpt over each time I play excerpt A, play excerpt B, and then come back to A, how will the speed ever increase? The speed would be at about 60 the entire first day, right? The next time I play these excerpts on another day, should I start off at a higher tempo? What’s the process for working up speed with this strategy? Thanks for the article!

    • luc says

      playing staccato at a very slow tempo helps tremediously to work up your speed.
      let’s say the piece is 8th notes at 120 bpm. then practicing at 60 bpm and playing 16th note – rest- 16th note – rest – 16th note – rest … etc… is a very powerfull method. You are then making the notes sound like they have to sound on a high tempo in a slow tempo but with a lil’ space between them. Once you get that down crank up the metroneme, you’ll suprise yourself! take it frase per frase (as suggested in the above post)
      I’m a bassplayer and I got this method from a pianist, it works wonderfully well :-)

  32. says

    Well, I feel better about my haphazard practicing now. I never did the whole “X minutes of this, X repetitions of that”. I got bored. And I have ADHD, so boredom can be disastrous. It was more like, “do this until I get annoyed with it, move on to something completely different, doesn’t matter what.” :-)

    On the other hand, I have found that when I’m trying to learn a new piece – especially a new choral piece with difficult rhythms/harmonies – it works to listen to the piece once a day without paying much attention to it. As though my subconscious logs the flow of the piece and becomes used to it. Then the hard parts – the weird intervals, the complex time signatures – feel natural.

    • David B Teague says

      Andrea, your reaction to this piece is also my reaction. I have not been diagnosed, but have concluded that I have ADHD too. I practice much as you describe. Listening works wonders, but it takes me many times listening. Thanks.

      • Paul Lindemeyer says

        I too have ADHD, and I am very mindful that there was a
        time, not all that long ago, when musicians with our condition were
        considered unteachable, and their talent could be freely
        discouraged and squandered. They simply did not have “what it
        took.”

  33. Jon says

    A random schedule will work for acquiring or maintaining a limited number of skills–like learning to hit four pitches, or preparing a piece for performance.

    However, a random schedule is inefficient for maintaining a continually growing body of skills or knowledge. In a random schedule all skills are given equal attention, whether they are easy or difficult, well rehearsed or unfamiliar. This defies the axiom “practice what is hard”.

    To maintain an ever expanding body of skills or knowledge, you are best off with a spaced repetition schedule.

  34. says

    In teaching some of my students, particularly in sight reading, by accident I told them to just read and not stop if they made a mistake but to just press on without repeating the bars where they screwed up. They made very good progress. When they got tired of that I advised them to go on to something else, either improve or classical, then the next day to start in the book where they stopped the previous day..
    I wish I had listened to my own advice since the basic desire is to play it correctly.

  35. says

    This is a long and interesting thread. I think, however,
    that the examples used for the method described have a basic flaw.
    That is that sports, both in performance and in practice happen in
    real time. There is no way that the baseball batter could slow down
    his life to 1/10 of real time so he could address the ball just SO
    and hit it out of the park. And then repeat the process at
    increasing velocities until he reaches and exceeds reality. We can.
    Let me start my comments by quoting Stevens Hewitt, former
    associate Principal Oboe in Philadelphia, from his book, ‘Method
    for Oboe” (which reads like ‘Zen and the art of Oboe Playing’ and
    should be read by all musicians…): “To know what you are going to
    do before you do it is to be a great musician”. A simple statement
    but it embodies the goal of those of us who perform. The way I was
    taught to practice (I’m an oboist) by Jean-Louis LeRoux, then the
    principal oboe in San Francisco and a Paris Conservatory
    prizewinning graduate, addressed that goal wonderfully. First,
    understand that the mournful, lyrical solo is not our problem.
    That’s a musical problem which has no technical challenges. What we
    want to address is the difficult technical passage. (And scales,
    and…) What I was taught was to play the passage with the
    metronome at a ridiculously slow tempo and to play it absolutely
    correctly in rhythm and in inflection. Then turn up the metronome
    ONE click and repeat. And so on… The first dozen and a half
    repetitions are about truly defining what our intentions are – if
    you can’t play it slowly, you sure can’t play it fast – the middle
    repetitions are about shortening up the time frame in which you
    place those intentions, and the last few – before you fall off of
    the horse, focus your concentration intensely on the physical
    demands of the passage. When you reach the peak of your abilities
    in this sequence, do not flail to succeed, but say, ‘OK, that’s
    it.” and set your metronome 5 or 6 clicks less and play it one more
    time correctly, then put it away. If you are desperate to learn
    something right now, you can repeat this sequence starting a few
    clicks faster, but it is important that you start very slowly again
    so that you are focusing , in the beginning, on your intentions,
    not your fingers. Tomorrow, start 3 or 4 clicks faster, have the
    patience to step through the metronome Repeat this in subsequent
    practice sessions and you will be amazed at how quickly you learn
    difficult passages and how well those practice sessions stick. This
    method combines, in my mind, the best of the repetitive practice
    features with the concept you describe of change. Although the
    change happens slowly at first, it is highly concentrated in the
    last couple of repetitions and the focused memory is well retained.
    And, as you pointed out, it works for me. And my students… I have
    played in the San Francisco Bay Area since 1958, and studied at the
    San Francisco Conservatory of Music with Raymond Dusté, Jean-Louis
    LeRough and Marc Lifschey. I played in the San Jose Symphony
    Orchestra, the San Francisco Opera Orchestra, Oakland Symphony,
    Carmel Bach Festival, founded and played in the Midsummer Mozart
    Festival and teach privately and in the Music Department at
    Stanford University.

  36. Tom Booth says

    Thank you for sharing this – I’ve done something like this
    where I found that studying and memorizing while watching tv,
    reading the paper, looking through magazines, straightening the
    apartment, having something cooking in the kitchen, would help me
    learn and retain at least three times faster than sitting down
    focusing and concentrating for a couple of hours of study and
    memorizing by itself. So the concept is worth considering and
    applying.

  37. says

    Wonderful article and great citations. Certainly gives real
    weight to the claims you presented and assurance for people like
    me. I’m trying to figure out something that I think may be a minor
    detail but seems like it could be a more important distinction:
    What constitutes something that will fall into an intervalled
    practice time? Is it an entire piece with all of it’s many
    sections? Or is it only the sections themselves that must be
    randomized? For instance, should it be: Length / Material to
    Practice 3 minutes Piece 1; working from beginning 3 minutes Piece
    2; working from beginning 3 minutes Piece 3; working from beginning
    3 minutes Piece 1; working from where you left off 3 minutes Piece
    2; working from where you left off 3 minutes Piece 3; working from
    where you left off or is it closer to this: Length / Material to
    Practice 3 minutes Piece 1; excerpt 1 3 minutes Piece 1; excerpt 2
    3 minutes Piece 1; excerpt 3 3 minutes Piece 1; excerpt 1 3 minutes
    Piece 1; excerpt 2 3 minutes Piece 1; excerpt 3 If you have a goal
    in mind while you are practicing these different things, I guess
    that’s the key, but using the baseball analogy, is this something
    that should be broken down hierarchically? Batting practice:
    fastballs, curveballs, change-ups or Practice: batting, field work,
    pitching, etc. With so many pieces I need to practice, this seems
    much more difficult to break down into simply practicing between 4
    excerpts or sections. Thanks again for your article and for your
    help.

    • says

      This is an excellent question, Milo. The main principle behind the contextual interference effect is that practicing varied material leads to better retention than continuously repeating the same material. Alternating between sections of the same piece/movement or between sections of different pieces/movements both provide variety and should provide a level of contextual interference. They need not follow a strict a-b-c-d order. The important point is that you are keeping your brain active by changing up the material, regardless of how you change it up. To keep it simple, pick a couple of challenging passages and have them spread out on one or two stands so that you can easily alternate between them (using your usual toolbox of practice techniques while working on each one). Once you have alternated practice between the selections a few times, pick out a few new passages. This is especially effective for learning challenging material where a lot of woodshedding is necessary.

      Research in other fields indicates that greater results are achieved when different motor programs are being used (e.g., overhand, underhand, and sidearm ball throwing patterns) versus the same motor program (e.g., throwing the ball overhand at different speeds – see Magill and Hall, 1990). This suggests that alternating between dissimilar passages would be more effective than similar passages, although more research is needed to confirm this in the field of music. Consider alternating between passages that differ signifcantly in rhythm, meter, key signatures, and/or articulation patterns, etc., whether from within the same piece or across different pieces.

  38. says

    In my case, it’s because I have had a heart attack, where I was pronounced dead for a few minutes, before I was brought back to life. It has affected my memory (due to lack of oxygen). Ever since I have a hard time memorizing a piece of music. No matter how hard I try, it won’t stick. I should be happy to be alive. Am grateful every day. Aimee Krol

  39. Jon Lords says

    Thanks for this post. Spaced repetition learning psychology is spot on. I first read about it in the book ‘Learning Strategies for Musical Success’ (by Michael Griffin) and your post supports this beautifully. -Jon

  40. Edward says

    Hello Dr. Kageyama I am still confused. I am a clarinetist and pianist. You say to break up the work, but how would I do that? I work out of the Baermann, Kroepsch, and Rose; I am also learning the Weber Concertino. Baermann and Kroepsch both have exercises. So would I go like this?

    2 min: Scales, Chromatic, Scales, Chromatic, etc.
    3 min: Weber
    2: Baermann (Exr 1), Kroepsch (Exr 1), Baermann (Exr 1), Kroepsch (Exr 1), etc.
    3 min: Rose Etude
    2 min: Scales, Chromatic, Scales, Chromatic, etc.
    3 min: Weber
    2: Baermann (Exr 1), Kroepsch (Exr 1), Baermann (Exr 1), Kroepsch (Exr 1), etc.

    Like that? Please help.

    • says

      Hi Edward,

      Not to complicate things further, but sometimes you may need time to work through, experiment with, and puzzle through a specific technical problem that might take 5-10-15 (or more) minutes. Other times, you might need to experiment with different ways of playing a phrase to get a clearer concept of what you want it to sound like, and to make clearer decisions about shaping, articulation, etc. And then there are times when you will want to practice running a piece in its entirety to practice the performance aspect of the piece.

      All that to say that I don’t think you have to feel obligated to do all of your practicing in interleaved chunks, but perhaps utilize it strategically when you are working on specific pieces or passages, where the strategy fits what you are trying to accomplish?

      As in, do your scales, arpeggios, warmup, etc. first. Then alternate between the different etude books. Then in a subsequent session you might alternate between movements or sections of the Weber.

        • says

          Thanks for the information from the other teachers.
          I do practice my scales, chromatic and others. Also I repeat difficult passages 3 times. Then I go over the whole piece.
          Sometimes not playing it at all for a couple of days, but only in my mind, and then returning to it, seems that I have learned more than I thought. Thanks Aimee Marie Krol.

  41. David B Teague says

    This is essentially what the author recommends, with small embellishment.. I find this much more effective than my former routine, beating the dead horse.
    I set the cooking timer for 5 minutes, do bowing warm up, then the vomit exercise.
    Next practice the scales and modes in the key of today’s piece for 5 minutes. Reset the timer, practice arpeggii in this key for 5 minutes.
    Reset timer. Select a lick from repertoire. Set the metronome to, say, eighth note = 40 Play two measures of the lick repeatedly for 3 minutes. Rest 1 minute, Practice the next 2 measures, rest 1 minute, then the two measures together. etc.
    Sometime you have to speed things up, but you must be able to play the lick perfectly at some slow tempo before speeding things up.
    I find that ENOUGH slow practice enables playing at the lick nearly full tempo sooner than what everyone recommend, namely, sliding the tempo up gradually.

    • aimee marie krol says

      I pretty much do the same thing as David does. But remembering a piece a still very difficult for me. I know that just repetition is not engaging the mind. The mind needs change. So I for example change the tempo, or the rhythm of a piece, measure by measure. Best Aimee Marie Krol

      • David Teague says

        Exactly. I assert that repetition, if perfect in every respect, will nail the piece.
        BUT … you are exactly correct: If the mind is not engaged, you cannot know that the repetitions are perfect.
        Thoughtful, careful, slow practice, for limited time, then something else then back to thoughtful slow careful practice is where “It is at.”

  42. Anna Seda says

    I was feeling sluggish and hopeless despite putting in good daily practice. After a few days of trying the abc, abc, abc, and such variants things are sticking and getting more and more secure. I feel so mentally fresh and can put the cello down and spend time on more diverse activities. I’m interested in learning more about Dr. Carter’s research, maybe to whet my creative imagination for my own thesis.
    <3 <3 <3!

Trackbacks

  1. […] Hopefully, through these different vantages, I’ll be able to gain the type of learning I crave and keep myself accountable. I learn best with a lot of practice, and I know that within training, I’ll need to keep myself varied in my approaches to material. I’ll be trying the “random” schedule as opposed to a “block” schedule  to increase my retention. […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>