Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum Why learn scales?

My 9 year old daughter has been doing piano about five years now. She’s done well... I arranged to sign her up for lessons this summer with a well know jazz pianist/teacher. The jazz teacher requested that she comes to first lesson knowing all the major scales. I told her regular piano teacher about the jazz teacher's request and I was surprised that the regular teacher said she did not understand why my daughter would have to know her scales. The regular teacher went on to explain that it's better to learn pieces that contain lots of scale passages - like Bach. Basically she said that practicing scales outside of a musical context was a bit of a waste of time. In short she wouldn't agree to teacher my daughter her scales. OK... I'm a pianist to so I taught her the major scale/ circle of 5th. It took about five min. a day for a few weeks. Now she has them down cold. I just thought it would be silly to pay the jazz teacher (who charges a lot of money) to teach my daughter the major scales. It’s something she'll need to learn at some point. Or so I thought... Her regular teacher thought on scales seems a bit odd. What do you think?

IMHO scales are mainly important to learn fingering, and to gain the knowledge to be able to build and analyze chords. (The most basic way to figure out what a Bb major chord is, is to take the 1st, 3rd, and 5th notes from the Bb major scale.) I would never require a 9-yo to know all the major scales, but I can see how for jazz it would be essential, especially if they will be working off lead sheets. Outside of jazz/improvising, I'd tend to side with the regular teacher here, although I definitely think that at a certain point it is really important that they understand *how* to make a scale. (whole/half step pattern.)

(Full disclaimer: I never formally learned more than a couple scales, and I managed to survive just fine! )

Scales are an important part of a technical regimen and serve several purposes. I use them to develop fluency of tone, to build an understanding of key and to help students understand the unique properties of their own hands (I teach how to play the scale differently depending on the student's hand size and structure).

I totally understand why the jazz teacher insisted on knowing them. They are the basis of all harmonic implications, and he needs to be able work the circle of 5ths and make the alterations to jazz scales.

You asked what we think. My first thought was to suggest you reevaluate your daughter's current teacher. Minniemay offered several important reasons to learn scales, but there are many others. Musicians need to learn to listen to their own playing. Our fingers each have different strengths and so learning to play with a very even touch (as well as timing) is a must. Practicing scales allows the student to focus on just one or two skills at a time, allowing her to hone in on this vital skill.

Music often requires the pianist pass their thumb under the hand. This isn't a natural motion and takes time to develop a smooth technique. Again, learning and practicing scales allows the student to do so without having to concentrate on other aspects of piano playing.

These are just a few additional reasons. Wishing your daughter great success at the piano.

John

Gieseking said this was the most important skill, and the most neglected skill, in piano playing, and that playing scales with careful attention to evenness of tone and evenness of timing was the best way to learn it. And for this reason, scales should always be done HS.

All my students do a daily warmup practice with scales. They start with pentascales and learn the pattern. That way, they are not intimidated by sharps and flats. We do without the written music until the scales are presented in their method books. They also plays arpeggios and chord progressions. So it is a simple daily exercise used to improve technique, key tone, knowledge of scale and chord patterns, to develop independent fingering, to learn phrasing, dynamics, and theory, and speed, as they learn to move around the circle of 5ths. I struggled with this for some time as most method books don't introduce these things early on. I was unhappy with my students not knowing and understanding scales. Little by little, I developed a regimen that it working well, and while different students on focusing on differents parts of the exercise, it is working well. When the students encounter hand moves, cross-overs, scale patterns, chord progressions, etc., etc., in their music, they are knowledgeable and equipped to analyze and play. Even when they are simply playing a pentascale and I V7 I chords.

Congratulations, Joyce, and with your more adept students, you might try skipping the pentascales and go directly to one octave scales. You might be pleasantly surprised at how quickly many students can grasp this concept.

It might be interesting for teachers who do not teach scales, and think they are a waste of time, to post their reasoning and experience here. I do not understand this approach at all.

Maybe the jazz pianist/teacher is going to teach with alot of theory so if your daughter knows scales already it will save alot of time.
My teacher said learning music without knowing scales compares learning language without knowing the alphabet. It makes more sense to learn scales!

Yes, a lot of teachers go straight to the one octave scales. I did once have all my students play a scale pattern with finger #2 only, stating whole, half, etc. Each week they moved to a different scale. I went back to pentascales for the early students because it is presented in the method books so often. I more focused on the pattern WWHW than the method books suggest. Perhaps it's time to go back to the one-octave scale for all students. You are right, they often can handle it. I am amazed myself at how my youngest students (4 yrs old) can readily respond to "cross-hand arpeggios", chord progression I-V7-I without blinking an eye. I like having the students knowledgeable about terminology and basic skills. Thanks for comments.

I think scales are important; however, they need to be tied to the literature and be given in appropriate doses.

I have taken a transfer student who knows all the major scales (quite evenly and fluently) and most of the minor scales. But he can't play Level 3 music without stumbling! There was a giant disconnect between scales and repertoire.

The purpose of teaching scales is to teach the common or traditional fingering, with smooth legato being a secondary goal. I don't hit scales until students are about the level of Clementi Sonatinas. I just teach whatever is in the method books.

"I just teach whatever is in the method books."

How ghoulishly boring!

The whole reason for teaching scales is to make sure on finger dexterity and NOT RUN OUT OF FINGERS in completing a passage.

btb, AZNpiano is a very high quality and successful teacher (I've heard a number of his students perform and they are uniformly well prepared), and I respect his opinion while disagreeing with it. He obviously achieves the same goals by other means.

And this brings me to a sidebar. While teaching in Germany, I learned that for the most part, European teachers use a technique first, then literature, approach to teaching, whereas we in the USA generally take the opposite approach (instant gratification, and all that). Both approaches achieve success, so what we have is a chicken and egg type argument. If you've found a means to successfully teach students, stick with it, and search for ways to improve it as time passes.

+1.

You could argue that, when improvising (which includes playing lead sheets), scales and chords (and arpeggios) _are_ jazz!

There's no music to read -- what other patterns is the player going to use to fill-in the harmonic structure? The scales had better be "under the fingers" -- playable without much thinking.

. Charles

There are several issues here:

1) How long is the lesson, and how many other things need to be taught?

2) What are the priorities of the teacher?

3) How advanced is the student?

4) What are the needs of the student?

5) How much time does the student practice?

I would be very wary of judging another teacher without a lot of information, and here is not the place to do it.

I have parents who try to push me to do all sorts of things at a time that I do not think is right. I think we can all agree that knowing scales is important.

The big question is: WHEN is the best time to learn/teach them?

This is probably my most short post ever: one word: to be able to improvise!

Obviously you are not familiar with post-1984 method book series. Kids complete quite a few 2-octave scales by the time they're through.

Gary D - my daughter's teacher teaches them as they come up in music. Sometimes she assigns a new one just because (usually though it turns out she has a plan and they come up quickly).

She doesn't play all the scales every day. She just practices the ones listed in her log book. It might mean some are over and done with quickly and others get more practice.

I think it odd that the teacher doesn't give a more detailed reason. When approached that they were needed for jazz, was she more in the camp of "she needs to focus on HER lessons more before starting something new." It's hard to understand why she was not willing to compromise.

Thanks, John!

Perhaps my earlier post led some to believe that I don't teach scales at all. I do teach scales. But I'm erring on the minimalist end. I teach scales as they come up in method books, and then if the kids do CM I teach the required technique for each level. For really little kids (under 8) I am being extra judicious when it comes to teaching scales.

This is the same logic that I apply to teaching pedaling. I skip pedaling altogether for little kids unless they have everything else together, and are talented musically. Otherwise I see no rush to teach pedaling until the kids can reach the pedals naturally.

Of all the exercises I have worked throughout the years - Clementi, Czerny, Tausig, Brahms, etc. - none has delivered more useful 'bang for the buck' than simple, old fashioned scales. Rachmaninoff practiced them daily almost to the day he died. Their technical value is obvious: the consecutive finger motion is the most common configuration in music written for the piano, and the value of listening carefully to the evenness of scales will refine both hand and ear sensitivity, if practiced with that in intent.

And scales are the basis of harmony, so one cannot be too familiar with key signatures and every type of chord and harmonic progression. No musician can function very well without a comfortable familiarity with the building blocks of music.

I cannot name one major pianist in history who did not master scales, arpeggios, etc. at an early age, nor can I name one major piano teacher in history who dismissed scales as irrelevant. Any so-called teacher who dismisses the importance of scales should themselves be dismissed, and promptly.

It is true that after achieving world fame, both Leopold Godowsky and Wladimir Horowitz did not practice scales daily as they had in their youth, but instead, invented exercises tailored to their personal needs. One hardly needs to argue with that, given the level at which these two super-technicians worked, but they had long since mastered their scales, arpeggios, octaves, double notes, etc., while they were young students.

No exercise should be engaged if it does not deliver a tangible result - time is too precious. Scales deliver very tangible results by upgrading technique and enhancing musicianship. For a pianist to not learn scales early on would be like a mathematician who learns addition but not multiplication - the idea is incomprehensible.