Hi. I’ve been using journeys on ML, but without exactly establishing loci, when I had a place I knew I simply was doing it more instictively, so “this looks good cause there is a table, over there there is a chair, yeah, great, I will have one locus there, another later in that chair” - that was my thinking while actually memorizing on ML and I didn’t actually in that case create a memorized pathway beforehand (where locus 1, locus 2, locus 3, etc. are). So, could you tell me if adding that step beforehand (memorized pathway) would pay off after some time of practising it while playing on ML?
I think having pre-made journeys will be faster than finding locations on the spot.
Your reasoning seems valid, it’s an argument I’ve considered before, it’s just for ML I only use locations that I know the hang of, I know their layout, and my loci move a little sometimes, but knowing the layout of the location I find my loci pretty easily during recall (40s for cards and numbers).
So I was wondering if revising my locations for ML with precisely set loci would improve my time and accuracy. I was thinking for example that precisely set loci maybe serve as better anchors for recall phase?
There’s a place for instinctive MPs. But those will probably increase in value for you when you’ve also got dedicated MPs where you’ve worked out exactly how the journey goes.
One thing to consider either way is this question:
Is it really a Memory Palace if you have to work at memorizing the journey?
Isn’t the whole point to use “no brainer” loci with an “of course that comes next” effect so that you can just focus on placing your associations as much as possible?
According to your suggestion, in that case what sense to make of images 00 - 99 and numbering loci with them, are they useful at all in a journey in a memory palace?
I think my confusion increases just like when I tried to learn PAO then figured it would take me a loooong time to master that system. XD