Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Adult Beginners Forum when is enough enough

In a larger sense aren't we all self-taught?

How much of one's piano studies are actually accomplished in the presence of a teacher? Less than 5% probably...

Most of one's work is done alone - both the physical work of playing/practicing and the psychological/emotional work involved in persisting and motivating and encouraging yourself.

Random thoughts on a rainy day...

Peyton - not a "character flaw", because I feel the same way more often than not (and I certainly don't have any character flaws ) - but maybe it's just a matter of setting one's standards too high, or operating under the illusion that there is more one can do, or believing too much in the "myth" that a piece is never really finished (because one can't play it perfectly every time - or even at all).

When is a piece "finished"?

Technically, it's probably finished when one can play it perfectly as written. Interpretively, it's probably never finished because there may be an almost unlimited number of interpretations and variations one can put on it...perhaps this is what is meant by a piece never being finished...

Lessons help me grow (entering yr 5) and give me someone to talk to about music which is absent elsewhere in my life...hmmmm have to do something about that!

TrapperJohn,

Here on ABF it's my feeling that we're a mixture of two strains of piano hobbyists. One strain is motivated primarily by the challenge of "getting better" and/or they are really into the whole "a piece is never finished" type pursuit of perfection. The other strain, in which I hope it's not too presumptuous of me to include yourself, is not looking for mountains to climb but just into playing tunes and hearing the hopefully lovely sounds that our piano can make when played with any modicum of technique at all.

I have to take care to remember that even though a perfectionistic set of expectations would make me, personally, so miserable I'd quit playing tomorrow for some other people my own ideas of "that sounds good enough, let's move on" would be just a miserably discouraging. But one result is in threads like this the two types of ABF'ers can end up talking across each other rather with each other...

There is a quote from a famous musician and I can't remember who the heck it was. It was told to me a long time ago. A famous pianist was asked near the end of his life after countless performances and recordings what he thought about a certain piece that was considered to be the cornerstone of his work. He said something like "I've almost got it!". That says it all to me. A good work is never "finished" because as soon as you think it is you lose something.

Well that's the kind of thing I was talking about. It's a neat anecdote but it really boils down to illustrating that famous touring concert pianists are incredibly perfectionistic about their performances. I think we all know that.

It certainly doesn't inspire me to try to practice some piece of music until it's so perfect a concert artist would think it's almost "finished". I've found two things about my playing. I really enjoy a good tune played well enough that it sounds beautiful and is recognizable. And other people who hear me play are much more concerned with hearing a tune they love than with figuring out how close to perfectly I played it.

In the end, if it gives me pleasure and gives pleasure to others that's as "finished" as it was ever meant to be.

P.S. I also found if I can sing the words to a song people know, they don't even care if I'm playing the piano at all much less how well I played!

I don't read it as trying to be "perfect". I see it as always wanting to make it better (not "perfect"). For me that is what keeps the music alive. You don't have to be a famous touring concert pianist to keep trying to improve a piece.

There is a certain element of discovery and growth. There is always something new to discover in a good piece of music, or a new way to expand it. There are always other ways of hearing, or drawing out a note or a series of notes, or using silence. You're not trying to "complete" something like putting together an Ikea chair and when the last bolt is in place and it looks and functions like a chair, you know it's done. There is a creative element and that's the fun part. (Something like that).

Well stated Brent - I agree with this approach or attitude to a very large extent, especially the part I've italicized...it's nice if others think so too, but since I'm playing it - creating it or re-creating it - what matters most is what I think and feel...although this in itself goes to the "when is it finished" question because the next question is: just how beautiful can one make it sound given additional efforts?

How much better? When does "diminishing returns" kick in? That is, with each new effort when does the difference not make a difference; when is better not hardly recognizable as better?

And when does one just plain get sick and tired of playing the same piece over and over and over...

I think that you absolutely do get sick and tired of playing the same piece over and over. But then, you remind yourself that it is necessary if you wish to be able to play something very well and not just ok. It just plain requires repetition and plenty of it.

Now, you can stop playing something for awhile and then come back to it in 2 or 3 months and then hit it hard again for a week or so. There are any number of ways to get the reps in ... but you do need the reps.

I know this works - I've used this "technique" several times with favorite pieces I really loved - work on it until its "finished" - set it aside to rest for awhile - then hammer it again with even more determination and intensity - it's invariably better with the 2nd and 3rd efforts - sort of like a romance with a spirited, haughty and independent woman!

That's what I'm trying to say... if it's a beautiful piece (take any Chopin prelude for example)... I never ever get tired of playing it over and over. I think part of the reason is because I'm constantly thinking..."I can make this better." For me that just makes playing even more enjoyable... knowing that "I'm not there yet" and that I can still improve. You ask "When is better not hardly recognizable as better?" and I don't know the answer because I've never reached that point. Maybe, if anyone else was listening, they would not hear the difference, but I do.

Where is the Like button?

People are different...I am a perfectionist and always will be. That is probably the reason why I got so sucked into learning piano... Finally something that I won't get bored at because things become easy or "done".

There are pieces that are not worth perfecting, but many are and I don't think I will ever get permanently tired of them. They may never be perfect enough in my own ears, but I will leave them for a while when I see no improvement and come back later when I have evolved enough to make them even better. I can easily understand why some real pianists feel they have never finished a piece they have been playing for years.

I think I enjoy solving problems more than just playing things.
At least for now performing is not interesting to me. I just want to uncover all the secrets to the perfect sound and technique

OK - fair enough - but then if you got to the point with a piece where it was near perfection to most listeners, and they no longer could say it had gotten better; and more, if after a series of attempts you couldn't hear any difference or tell that the latest version was better - would you know or recognize or acknowledge that point?

To tell you the truth, I don't think I put that much importance on what "listeners" think (unless of course you are talking a master pianist/instructor). I love it when people say "that was beautiful" and, although I certainly appreciate praise and want people to like what I play I still know it was no where near what I really wanted it to sound like. And John, I don't think I think of pieces that I'm working on (and I have been working on some for over 15 years now) as "versions". To me that sounds too cut and dried like "Here is this way and now here is this way". There are so many possibilities and so many nuances that I never think of them as separate versions. I don't think I'm expressing my self very well here but I think in a nutshell, if that's possible, what I'm trying to say is that I feel that a piece of music is kept alive by the musician always trying to make it "better"...not "perfect".( Who is to say what is "perfect"?) The most boring artists and musicians are the one's that have found a formula that works and just keep doing the same thing over and over.

Peyton - very well done! I've pressed you pretty hard on this, and...

You've taken every question and objection that I raised and blown them aside like so much dust in the wind...

I stand enlightened and somewhat humbled.

Looking forward to hearing/seeing your latest "unfinished" gem in the Aug. ABF Recital!

You have come up with some very good and interesting points as well. It's a very enlightening discussion with no obvious answer but one I love to ponder.

Another thought I was having about "finishing a piece"... Just as a painter has to at some point say the painting is "done", sign it and frame it, so a composer must do the same. I wonder if Chopin always played his published pieces in a similar fashion while performing? I'm guessing he was always changing here and there but I would love to know.

I don't know for sure since - contrary to popular public opinion - I wasn't actually around when he was performing (I'm old, but not that old ) I'm guessing that what you're guessing is in fact the case. Any good biography would probably shed much light on this.

From my own reading I've learned that it was a rare exception when any of the major Classical or Romantic composers ever performed any of their own works "as written" - improvisation and variations were the norm...this went to their highly prized reputation for "spontaneous creativity"...