Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Adult Beginners Forum Practicing what Bernhard teaches: a workshop thread

This is getting ridiculous!

I don't use Bernhard's method. Up to tempo HS before joining hands is too much for some of the passages I have to contend with. There are passages I've been playing for years that I still can't play up to tempo, HS or HT, eg. M10 & 12 of Beethoven's Moonlight, 3rd movement. I can't move my 4th finger fast enough in the descent. I'm content to take the hand up to a tempo where playing is automatic and without conscious effort. No more than that.

I made notes from a Bernhard post that summarised his approach. He spent two months memorising a piece of music before he looked at the score. This is his first step but it doesn't have to be two months (as someone had misunderstood). He was simply stressing the importance of the step. Then he went to the score and remarked that he is 'usually' surprised by it's appearance being different from what he'd imagined. Again he emphasises delaying going to the piano. Maybe he doesn't do that with his students.

What do we mean by memorising it and audiating it?

I mean "knowing what comes next" and hearing the melody with a bit of accompaniment in the gaps. I don't mean reproducing all the inner notes, bass, passing traffic, subtle nuances, the timbre of the bassoons...I just mean to be able to da-de-da the music in your head. I very much doubt that Bernhard means any more by it either.

When I play a piece that's recently been memorised the greatest difficulty I have to contend with is forgetting what comes after the current phrase. If I don't have the score in front of me, open at the right page, I have a few moments to recall it or I'm stuffed. If I learn a piece of music well enough to whistle it or hum it (and keep it in my head when it goes beyond my compass) while I do the washing up I don't have that pressure when I've recently learned a piece.

The issue and depth of memorising is, perhaps, overstated. If you know what phrase comes next that's usually enough and finger memory can take over from there. I prefer not to rely on finger memory but use cognitive recall which is hard work but bulletproof in performance, allows mental practise away from the piano and lasts a lifetime. Most non-memorisers "follow" the score rather than "read" it as they also have developed finger memory from their long hours of practise. It's a normal human function. That's why we use repetition.

If ever I was called on to turn a page in practise I'd lose it. I've never turned a page while playing or practising without stopping the music. I memorise the rest of the phrase over the page or memorise the whole thing up to the page turn. I use this method but do not advocate it.

Whatever method Bernhard advocates there's no point getting miserable over it whether it's what he writes or what someone else relates. No method is worth jack if it makes you miserable.

Woodog is right. It must be fun. And fun means it drives you and motivates you, not just amuses or entertains you.

Very interesting article. It reminds me of when I was memorising Japanese vocabulary and kanji, I was also using a system where I would repeat daily what I forgot, less frequently what I could remember. The granularity was a bit finer than just practice-now vs repeat-monthly, but the idea is the same. And I can fully testify that this approach works.

If I was a developer for tablet computers, I'd build an application that works as a daily work book for musicians on this base. After doing the initial phase of determining which passages to work on when, it could remind me what I'm working on, what I need to rehearse and what I need to re-do after a month's time. If anybody else is interested, you can steal this idea without referring to me

Hear, hear! (pun intended.)

We could not duplicate a Horowitz or Rubinstein interpretation if we tried. We are inspired by what we hear and we choose what appeals to us. These choices combine to form our 'style'. And if we didn't have the score (i.e. a system of writing music down) how would we learn other than by listening?

Tony Buzan beat you to it a few decades ago but not specific to music!

PS88,

As BobPickle pointed out above - and it bears repetition -



I cannot play up to speed quickly and avoid tension, so I play h.s. WAY over speed at first only to see if the fingering I've chosen isn't going to be problematic, then I apply the principle (I think I first read this phrase in one of Richards posts!) of increasing speed by relinquishing restraint.

But back to Bobs point, progress is satisfying. Small sections means my brain can continue to think about the music after I'm done with the section, when I'm away from the instrument. And....

I truly believe this point that Chang mentions in his writings, ...

If you can imagine yourself playing at speed, then you can (or will eventually) be able to play it at that speed.

It used to be that I focused in the fingers, but these days I'm putting focus on the brain work - and not so much the fingers as the shoulders.

Lastly, keep enjoyment in the process. :-)

Forrest

Richard, thank you for responding yesterday. I'm glad that I asked because with Internet posts, it happens all too easily that we think we understand or are understood, while everyone is going off on the picture they form of what the person is trying to say. That is what happened here.

I'll summarize what I see, and you can tell me if I'm off the mark. As I understand, you were talking about ways to get at the ability to hear music in general. Your various suggestions were for that purpose.

Meanwhile we were discussing Bernhard's approach to learning a piece of music. One stage, as I understand it, is listening to the performance to get it in your ear. (Did I get that right?). So when you were talking about being able to hear the whole thing in your head, and being able to see the notes, I thought you were talking about the preparation of the piece. At PS88's level of playing, these are not simple pieces. So you can see what I thought you were asking her to do. But in fact, you were talking about a type of ear training in general.

While in the context of a stage in preparing the music you are playing, "hearing the whole thing in your head", for me included all of the notes for both hands, recognition of chords in their entirety, their inversions, etc. Recognizing the notes would require "perfect pitch" unless you are thinking melody in Solfege. I can duplicate a melody, but it may be in a different key. I'll hear "Do Do So So La La So..." of "Twinkle, or "1 1 5 5 6 6 5..." in degrees, but I might play that as C C G G A A G; or G G D D E E D etc.

So while reading your advice in the context of Bernhard's preparation of a piece, what I pictured was far removed from what you had in mind. I don't know how far that was true for others.

That clarification thing has been done now.

But you have touched upon something important. What is written here in some ways matters more than what passes through the legal department, because it is taken more seriously and more at face value. A student will spend countless hours - maybe days or even months - trying to do what she understands a teacher has told her to do. If that is misunderstood, imagine the havoc it will create.

From time to time I see teachers or advanced musicians write in a kind of "shorthand". A single sentence reflects a concept that they themselves developed over years, and they are thinking of all those things as they write that single sentence. You get five such sentences, and each should be a paragraph or more.

So in this sense, yes, each word might sometimes be looked over like a legal text, because each word is being translated into hours and days of practise. If it's misunderstood, then a mess has been created.

Two things arise from this:
- care by someone who is teaching to check as much as possible that what he or she says is understood
- the awareness of students that it might not be understood as meant. There is a line to be tread where on the one hand you try to follow what someone you find trustworthy has told you, rather than putting in your own interpretation. Otoh, questioning your understanding of it, whether it applies to you, and listening to your own senses. The hardest thing that I have found as a student, was in how far to go on either side of that line. As teacher: not to overteach, underteach, or be misunderstood.

I caught a video yesterday on essential Life Skills. Skills 2 & 3 were understanding other people's ideas in perspective and making sure others understand our ideas correctly.

So I take all your points on board.

And yes, it's good that we've reached some clarity now.

ETA: and yes, your summary of my intent is correct. Ear training in general and the whole thing meant the span of its melody horizontally not the details of harmonic depth.

This is important. This thread is specifically about Bernhard's method, I imagine mostly for those who are trying to follow it. So when things that appear to be instructions or advice come, it is assumed that his method is the object. Whenever anyone writing here is talking about something that isn't his method, I think that should be clarified from the onset. Otherwise what you write risks being read in that context.

A final point is that TEACHING is not to be taken on lightly. Whenever anyone writes in the forum and is taken to be a teacher or an expert, what they write will be used by students. There is a reason why teacher training exists where teaching methodology is taught, followed by internship (in my time it was four). And even that is no guarantee, because there are lousy teachers out there who have had all the training in the world.

You've seen my bathroom?

You both have a point. It is good to analyze the score but how far you go with it depends on what you know. Michael_99, would you be able to tell elementary things, like that a section in the beginning repeats again at the end? If so, that helps in working on the music.

I was involved in the threads where music was being analyzed. If someone is to find the cadences, he first has to be able to recognize V7 and I chords. Before doing that he first has to be able to recognize chords. He also has to understand key signatures, know that a scale has 7 notes, i.e. rudiments of music.

The advice about analysis was good for PS88 and students with similar backgrounds, but will not be appropriate for someone who is beginning in music. So Michael_99, it might not suit you, but there are OTHER things that you can do which go with your present capabilities.

I was giving aural learning before looking at the score such serious consideration based on this post.

I will reconsider.

I'm sorry I can't give a link. This is what I have in one of my Word documents full of snippets from around the web that I've found useful or interesting.

This was cut and pasted from Pianostreet:



And this was a post or so later:



I have the guts of this hand-written in my desk diary. I don't use all of it - just what appeals to me. But this is my source for Bernhard's method.

Terrific, thank you Richard for sharing your notes in Bernhard's words. These are very helpful.

Not only does this give excellent perspective, but your own attitude toward it seems to be a good model. Thank you for sharing this, Richard.

I have a naive question in relation to the first point. How to memorise the 'sound' of a piece ?

At the moment, as I am writing, I have a vague, if any, memory of the piece that I am busy learning, titled Miles. I just have a recollection of the beat. It is more a sensation recollection. Todate, I never paid attention to this sound memorisation.

On the other hand, I have a vivid recollection of the introduction of Symphony no. 5 by Beethhoven because of its dramatic nature and most likely listening repetition.

How is your 'sound' memory ? How did you develop it ?

Mine started out pretty bad, too, but it did get better. I'm not sure what I did that helped, but I did a number of things to improve my inner ear and its relationship to written music.

I would buy sheet music with recordings a couple of levels ahead of where I was playing, and listen to them while following the music, analyze them theory-wise and pay attention to how the sounds reflected my analysis, then re-create the sound of them in my mind while looking at the score.

I also read the scores of my pieces away from the piano, and re-created in my head how it was supposed to sound. A second step along that road was, when I had insomnia (relatively common for me) I would practice visualizing the sheet music for my current pieces, and imagined hearing the music as I visualized playing it on a mental piano.

I also did some rhythmic and melodic dictation exercises (software generated).

By literally drowning myself in music.

About two years ago, I restarted formal piano study, after a lapse of decades.

About one year ago, I found a ragtime society in nearby city that has bimonthly "open mics" where all are welcome to listen or play.

I've been going to those pretty steadily over the past year.

Since I haven't wanted to just trot out the same old stuff, it means I'm usually working on at least two new pieces at any given time, while keeping older ones in rotation as well. I'm usually working from the page.

I knew my brain was changing around the time of my first open mic. I hadn't performed publicly for years and was pretty stressed out. I was about then that I'd find ragtime melodies running through my head for hours in the wee hours of the morning.

At this point:

* It's just melodies
* It can be the entire piece, but sometimes 8 measures or so get stuck on repeat. Those can be long nights.
* If you name a ragtime piece to me, I won't necessarily be able to summon the melody on command (particularly if I have to pull up a B, C, or D section)
* If I hear a melody, I may or may not be able to identify the piece (particularly if I have to identify it from a B, C, or D section)

Thanks Tangleweeds. I like your recount of following the score with the sound. I never tried it before. Will it better to follow a basic aural method book or just any piece like you?
I am not sure how to re-create sound of the notes in my head. Do you re-create sounds of individual notes or or phrases or whole section? Is it a recreation or a recollection ?
For example, I have some sound recollection of Fuer Elise through my playing and listening to my son playing it. But when I look at the score of Elise, my sound memory is of general nature. Except for the special recollection of the introduction section, I can not imagine that I can associate the notes with the sound.

Will it be possible to develop the skill to follow the music and notation the way we could follow the written text with audible sound ?

What software/iPad applicaion do you use devloping ypur rhythim and melodic dictation ?

Thanks Whizbang. So it happened naturally for you through performing "open mics" performances. I am not sure how to map 'drowning in the music' to specific course of action.

Easy. This is going to depend on the pace that you think you can pick up pieces, but...

...hold a recital in your home every three months. Invite family and friends.

You're on the hook. You can play whatever you want. This includes existing repertoire. But if all you play is existing repertoire, people are probably going to get a bit tired of it.

So, put yourself on the hook for at least one new piece each recital. Or two.

It's good to keep a few things pushing forward, because at least I find sometimes that I start a piece and then don't end up completing it for some reason.

It's a great motivator.

And, no, they don't always come off well, but then I can keep working and try 'em out next time.

And when you have a deadline and you're working hard to polish a piece, memorized or not, you might find that your brain starts problem-solving on the piece, late at night, and it starts to sing to you.