Audiation and Inner Hearing:
two related ideas—or two different stages of musical thinking?
Over the past few decades, the term audiation has become increasingly familiar in music education. Introduced by Edwin Gordon, it describes the ability to hear and understand music internally when no physical sound is present. Much like thinking in language without speaking aloud, audiation allows musicians to anticipate melodies, recognize harmonic functions, and comprehend rhythm before producing a sound.
Today, the term is widely used in music cognition and music education research. Studies associate audiation with sight-reading, improvisation, memorization, and musical understanding. Rather than hearing isolated pitches, audiation refers to mentally processing music as meaningful relationships.
In that sense, audiation represents an important shift away from viewing music as merely a sequence of notes.
Yet another expression has long existed in classical performance: inner hearing.
Although the two terms are often used interchangeably, they do not always describe exactly the same experience.
Inner hearing
Traditionally, inner hearing refers to the ability to imagine sound internally.
- A pianist may silently hear a melody while reading the score.
- A conductor may hear the full orchestra before the rehearsal begins.
- A composer may hear an entire musical texture before writing it down.
Research commonly describes inner hearing as auditory imagery—the voluntary or involuntary experience of sound without external stimulation.
In many publications, audiation and inner hearing overlap considerably. Both involve internally experienced music.
The difference often lies in emphasis.
Audiation tends to emphasize musical understanding—hearing music as a meaningful language.
Inner hearing tends to emphasize the vividness of the imagined sound itself.
Both are valuable perspectives.
Where another perspective begins
Over many years of observing pianists, I gradually found myself asking a different question.
What exactly are we hearing internally?
For many musicians, inner hearing means imagining pitch accurately.
For others, it includes harmony and rhythm.
But while working with professional pianists, I repeatedly encountered another limitation.
A pianist could hear every note correctly in the mind and still struggle to produce a free, expressive performance.
Something seemed to be missing.
Beyond hearing the notes
In the PianoWell framework, inner hearing is not limited to hearing pitches or harmonic relationships.
Each imagined note also contains:
- its harmonic color,
- its dynamic character,
- its tone quality,
- its role in the musical texture,
- its direction toward the following note,
- its phrasing,
- its musical form,
- and eventually even the movement required to express it.
The imagined sound gradually becomes so complete that movement begins responding to it naturally.
Rather than consciously deciding how the wrist, elbow, or fingers should move, the body follows an already-existing musical image. As the materials repeatedly emphasize, what you imagine is what your body responds to.
From auditory imagery to musical representation
Perhaps the distinction is not between audiation and inner hearing at all.
Perhaps it is between hearing music and building a complete musical representation.
That representation includes not only sound, but also movement, phrasing, timing, harmony, voicing, and expressive direction, all connected to the written score rather than existing as separate skills.
When these elements become unified, practice changes.
- Memorization becomes easier.
- Movement becomes more natural.
- The score becomes less a collection of notes and more a living musical process.
A continuing conversation
Research into audiation and auditory imagery continues to grow, offering valuable insights into how musicians think internally.
Perhaps the next question is not simply whether we can hear music without sound.
Perhaps it is:
How complete can our inner musical experience become before we ever touch the keyboard?