Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Realistic Goals as adults/late starter

I agree everthing is possible. But using Thomas Yu as your example may not be a good idea. Thomas Yu or Christopher Shih is a superman. These two are not only smart at their regular school, but also very good in piano. They are basically not a NORMAL human being. By the way both of them went to a very intense piano training, they did no start at old age. Thomas graduated from a big conservatory in Canada, and Chris went to Curtis.

To the original PO, if you are not young anymore, you should play piano seriously but keep in mind your limitation too. Push yourself upto what you physically and mentally can handle but don't push yourself to an unreasonable level.

Ron

There are so many factors that goes into it that I can't really say its one way or the other. One thing I noticed about really good piano students in my school was that they started playing piano very early in their lives. So it seems like it's not so much raw talent per se.. a they've been blessed with a very fortunate musical upbringing.

But I've also met so many people who were able to surpass expectations of what they could possibly achieve. I think it's pretty amazing that my teacher was able to play those college level pieces after 6-7yrs of study, and I've met good number of people who were able to do the same. I even hear about people starting in their 30-40s who are able to play very demanding pieces too. Of course it could be that they were talented and the didn't know about it.

I also have a reason to believe that people are capable of high level achievements, because I've made tremendous amount of progress in other areas of music that I didn't think was possible before. I am a jazz pianist, and I've posted my transcriptions here. And when I talk to people, they are amazed at what I am able to transcribe, and they usually assume that I started doing music early or that I have some insane talent. But that is not the case at all, I acquired that ability over time through lots of practice.

Of course, your aural skills and technical facility are two different things, and maybe I have a natural gift for hearing, but if I did, I showed very little sign of that early on.

I guess I don't really have a desire to master Ravel's Jeau d'eau or the winter wind etude , because I am focused mainly on jazz and that takes up a lot of my time. But I do want to learn as much of it as possible for my personal growth.. but I guess it would be more about fullfilling my intellectual curiosity and applying that knowledge to what I do in jazz, rather than about delivering a concert-level performance. And it's a lifetime goal so I am not in a rush to learn them.

But then again, the level of classical training varies quite a bit between jazz pianits. Some of them are able to play the most demanding pieces competently, but some of the teachers I had are probably not able to play the chopin etudes well enough to pass a college recital.. but they are still wonderful players.

I agree with Steve. Talent is one important variable in the equation.

Thomas Lau, I wish your encouragement were real. I do not see myself will be able to play 10/3 or 10/12 well enough in this life. Do you know how difficult those two are? Especially the 10/12.

Hey sottovoce,

You are analyzing my posts as if it were an academic journal, when my thoughts are indeed spurious, but based on facts and objective perceptions.

RonaldSteinway,

Yes Thomas Yu is like a beast, and I guess he did study at a big conservatory. Sigh, wish I had to opportunity when I was younger, oh well. He's also won major competitions and methinks guys like him are one in a million, or at least had a good family, advantages early in the life that he has taken full advantage of.

It's not possible for something simultaneously to be spurious and based on facts and objective perceptions.

I'm sorry if you object to commentary and discussion about what you posted, but that's the nature of a discussion forum. Statements are inevitably challenged, and those who participate should expect to stand behind their words and opinions. You haven't been singled out or held to a different standard from anyone else, and there's no reason to single me out for criticism for doing what everyone does. That's why we have a "Quote" function!

One of our own moderators observed several months ago that "posts around here tend to get parsed with a fairly sharp blade." I don't think that's a bad thing; it keeps us honest—all of us.

Steven

Am I the only pianist who finds Bach Inventions and Chopin Waltzes challenging?!?!?

"You keep using that word...I do not think it means what you think it means"
-The Princess Bride

oh yes I used the word spurious, but I meant to use another word. Again, in an internet forum one doesn't tend to revise their words as posts are generally not graded/reviewed/parsed as it is in these forums.

Yeah, I'm sure you did. If you can't stomach it, maybe you ought to go over to Piano Street.

Would you like to copyright these sentences as well?

No. Nor are you the only pianist who finds them beautiful and also containing multiple levels of depth to discover over a lifetime.

That's right.

And for that reason I think that it is pointless to have the goal, as a beginner, to play Jeux d'eau, or l'Etude révolutionnaire, or a Rachmaninov concerto, or whatever.

I agree whole-heartedly with etcetra that anyone can get to a level where they can play this difficult music. It don't believe that it is reserved for the lucky few who are born with talent.

But I do believe that those who will get to that level are those who play Inventions and waltzes, and even the Minuet in G, with all their heart, who perceive the genious of this music and don't have the idea that it is nothing more than preparatory excercises for la Campanella.

I think many pianists at a certain level have little understanding of how diffiult some pieces are technically and musically(just look at the number of posts asking if someone is ready to play such and such a piece or "which piece is more diffcult?").Without this understanding, how can one say that anyone can reach a certain level with a big enough effort?

If one doesn't know how tall Everest is, how can one know how difficult it is to climb?

RS, I don't think it's ever advisable to state certain people are "supermen", "not a NORMAL human being" etc - neither in piano nor any other area of human life. The reason is that this excuse is leading oneself immediately to accept mediocrity and not to strive for realizing one's full potential. Thus, this attitude is just building up a mental barrier for yourself without helping you in any way.

Of course, there's a difference between thinking that you may reach a certain goal, as opposed to thinking that you definitely will. The latter is a sure way to disappointment and frustration, whereas the former is a positive way of thinking which does not involve any self-imposed barriers.



Just my personal opinion, of course

btw have any of you guys read Maclom Gladwell's "Outliers"? He talks about talent not so much about natural ability, and how most of time it's comparataive advantage that most of us are not aware of. he has a section on musicans too.

pianoloverus,

I also don't think we are qualified to say what a person can or cannot reach at a given amount of time either, because we are all different (unless the expectation is totally ridiculous). If you met someone who was playing Bach invention right now and asked whether they are able to play chopin etudes in 5 yrs, what would you say? You might say that's impossible, but I have met people who were able to do it very musically at a descent level even though it may not be competition level.

From my experience in college, it all came down to effort. I met people who in my opinion 'just didn't have it' when they started.. but they made unbelievable amount of progress through hard work . Some people didn't go very far because they just didn't practice much. I have not met anyone in college who practiced at least 4 hrs a day and just wasn't able to reach the level to play Chopin Etudes or something of that difficulty.

of course there are people with extremely unrealistic expectations, like wanting to play the Fantasie Impromptu within 1 year. But I have met good number of people who could play Chopin ballades/etudes in 6-7 yrs with hard practice, so from my experience, it does seem possible if you are dedicated.

I think it may be that people today aren't on the same timetable as pianists and composers of the past or say poets either. They used to learn their crafts at an early age, compose before they were 20 and die before 30 or 40. People say that about learning a languages too but I like to think someone can learn a skill really well at any age if they have the time.

You should keep in mind, though, that those college students aren't representative of adult learners or pianists generally. They were already, literally, a select group filtered for talent, potential and, presumably, motivation to succeed. If "it all came down to effort" at that point, it's because the playing field was more or less leveled for the other variables; the statement needs to be considered in the context of an atypical sample of people rather than treated as having broad applicability.

Steven

+1

sotto voce,

That's true to a certain extent, but my school had a very wide variety of talent.. and frankly some of them were not very good when they started. And my teacher did audition with Bach inventions from what I remember.

I do agree that you do have to have talent, but I also think talent can be very a hard thing to judge. My teacher is a very accomplished jazz pianist, and none of his friends from college ever expected him to go that far because apparently he was horrible... there are plenty of people like that out there.

But then again, I have met good number of people who couldn't believe what I accomplished as a late starter(in jazz). I thought that I was a slow learner, and everything I accomplished was a result of my effort. But then again, you have people who have hard time improvising at all.

I guess its hard to judge what's achievable or not, or define what talent is, because your perspective is going to change depending on what kind of (natural) ability you have or not.