Visualizing the notes you hear.

[TiUser]

"The issue, number one is you are operating under the assumption that I'm operating under your completely broad definitions of words, "
I just refer to relativity of the term "normal" and to a statistic counting method to determine, that's all. I doubt you don't understand this - just you do not want to use this definition for further conclusions. So far ok.

Green doesn't do anything. That's idiotic.
That's just using your defining syntax for defining another adjective... "normal" is and "green" is too. "normal" doesn't do anything too, it's just a property. The definition does not define "normal" - that's why I have difficulties with that from a logical standpoint. Also it's not quite the same it a bit like "all greeks are liers" said a greek... It's for sure not idiotic - I just transferred in a wicked way to show where the problem is. Even if you might say you meant a "normal" subject the definition remains meaningless - you already imply a meaning in "normal" but the definition should provide that, otherwise it's no definition for "normal".

But do not misunderstand - I indeed have an idea what you are about, it's just your definition style that makes no sense to me.

"I didn't set out to define normal per se"
If we don't know what "normal" means than anything derived from it remains vague at best. Everybody can then put his own subjective "standards" in this.

"Subliminal ratings"
I already said I am not perfect in your language and feel free to correct me if something sounds odd. I meant a kind of rating without obviously referring to that as a rating. I've checked the term "subliminal" with a dictionary again and it seems to make sense, but well I am open to learn better.

"You don't get me right. I've already said 'double-edged'."
Ok, so maybe we agree more than we think - also this is as well not what my goal is, I enjoy opposite opinions and I do not need agreement for satisfaction here. But I want to understand as good as possible.

Finally it seems just the definition and definition style thing being unclear - but that is probably really not necessary to get the idea. I am a bit picky with some things but that should not make you worry - I am not "perfect", nobody is...

BTW, did we define "perfect" already...? Hey, that's a joke, ok?

[tapper mike]

Is it common for musicians to reach a level where when they hear a melody, they are able to almost immediately note it down. Like, anybody can hear a sentence, and instantly write it down...

There is a fraction of musicians (maybe only 10%) that do reach that level.

Weather any given individual gets there depends on their talent in this area, and the amount of practice you need to put in to get better at it and develop the talent.

While I agree, the practice is actually doing it. Practicing your favorite licks and scales add nauseum isn't going to open your mind.
The first part is turning off the background music in your life. I don't take an ipod while jogging or walking and turn off the radio when driving. Then I try to hold a song in my head. On occasion in an unclutterd moment a melody or lick will enter your head. Get it to a recorder quick. Your first attempts may not be what you are actually internally thinking but don't give up.
Sometimes you get it out of your head and you recognize that it's a tune you've already heard. Which is not a bad thing and doesn't mean you aren't creative. The hard part is that if it sounds familiar but isn't, trying to keep it from being "figuring out the cover" it's similar to.

Sometimes what you hear in your head is not that great. But on the way to your fingers it gets better. You have to be flexible.

You also have to not give up. The more you do it the better you get. I used to keep an acoustic guitar and a cassette recorder (yeah I'm old) near my bed.
I would dream melodies. Wake up record what I thought I was hearing, go back and listen the next day. If it was worth listening to and wasn't a cover (because they stick sub-conciously) Then I'd figure out what I did and try to develop a song.

[TiUser]

Maybe it's like learning to talk, when you miss the right (early) moment it's very hard to learn later.

[joseche]

Solfege !

That's it !

[sammy24]

How 'bout, solfege, in combination with visualizing the notes on a "mental piano"(regardless of what instrument you play.) I know this has really helped me a ton. It is kind of like learning to speak a new language, in a lot of ways, but it definitely can be learned at any age! (Plus, it's a language you're already extremely familiar with.)

[TiUser]

How 'bout, solfege, in combination with visualizing the notes on a "mental piano"(regardless of what instrument you play.) I know this has really helped me a ton. It is kind of like learning to speak a new language, in a lot of ways, but it definitely can be learned at any age! (Plus, it's a language you're already extremely familiar with.)

More important is listening and understanding. You don't need writing (scoring) or visualizing words (keyboards, fretboards, whatever) to speak (play) - but it can of course help.

Sure, you can learn everything at every age - just in some ages it's easier and comes more natural when the brain has opened it's doors.