Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Anyone here ever stop raising the bar for a minute?

Seems ever since I started playing the piano I've always looked towards learning the next harder or more intricate piece. I learn one, then find a harder one etc... Recently I've been asking myself "why haven't I stopped and learned the countless other pieces that should be easy by now?"

I'm learning etudes, ballades and large works by Liszt and Chopin, but I wonder why I haven't stopped to learn a majority of say Chopin's preludes or waltzes or Bach's Inventions and Sinfonias etc... Many of the pieces in these sets and similar sets should be well within my grasp, yet I don't bother to tackle them unless I get motivate to learn one randomly.

Anyone else have this thought or curious question? I would think by now there should be no reason why I shouldn't have more of these pieces under my belt.

Keep in mind that so-called "easy" music can be difficult to play if you want to play it well. OTOH I recently learned two easy pieces to play with my piano group because my Beethoven and Chopin are far from ready to perform. I learned Schumann's "Chopin" from Carnaval and Alkan's Barcarolle. Both are quite lovely and well "below the bar". I often sight read music that is easy just for the pleasure of hearing something new.

I never stop "raising the bar" in the sense of trying to get better every year. That means getting better at things like phrasing, expression, and timing, not just hitting the notes of intricate pieces.

Recently my teacher suggested Chopin's 2nd Ballade; she told me she thought I was finally ready for... the opening section (!).

-J

I never choose pieces with the goal of challenging myself with harder music. There is so much great music within my present level(nowhere near that needed to get into a conservatory)that I just choose pieces I love. As others have pointed out, this doesn't mean I don't continually try to improve.

Actually, I think based on your first paragraph, one would assume that you wouldn't have more of those easier pieces learned.

Well yes I haven't forgotten that, but when I say easy I mean a piece where no one would say "no, stay away from that piece that's beyond your level". There are plenty of pieces that are far below your current skill level that really don't need to be given a 2nd thought as to whether or not it's possible for you to play.

You mean the easy part?? That makes no sense at all!!

(Just kidding.)

BTW, in competitions, when people play that piece, I'd guess most of them cook their goose before they're out of that opening section.


I never stop raising the bar either, and it's as Beet314 said: It's not that I go for more and more difficult pieces (not necessarily), but trying to do better and better than I've done before.


It was clear what you meant. We're just looking at it how we look at it.

It's hard for me to stop raising the bar because of my attitude towards my playing. I view my playing as "not good enough yet", and if I get assigned an "easy" piece, I wonder if it's because my teacher thinks I can't handle something harder.

Even when I'm accompanying and have the option of simplifying something, I still struggle to play it as written because I think I will learn from it and it will make me a better pianist.

Maybe it's because I enjoy challenges, whether of the physical (climbing, running, open-water swimming etc) or mental kind, but I rarely set out to learn easier pieces than what I'm currently playing. They're almost always at least the same level of difficulty (usually harder), and usually has something that's challenging to my current level of technique. Though the difficulty needn't be wholly technical - sometimes, it's just a piece that I find awkward but which others might not necessarily do. But whatever I set out to learn, it must appeal to me at some level - usually on both the musical (nice tunes and/or interesting harmonies) and technical (enjoyable to play as well as difficult): I never learn something simply for the sake of its technical difficulty. The same reason I've never played studies/études of no musical merit.

It follows that my memorized repertoire tends to be somewhat skewed towards fast music. I tend to just sight-read easier pieces for relaxation, but rarely go on to learn them properly. Such is the prerogative of an amateur who hasn't got a teacher and therefore learns and plays exactly what he wants.......

+1. I am actually a little overwhelmed with all of the music that I love that I *can* play, and other stuff that I either want to learn, have read through, and/or am working on, that I feel I can leave the virtuoso repertoire to the virtuosos. That said, I sometimes hear a piece that I am compelled to learn, and never consider that it might be beyond my level. As said in another thread, there are some things that you just want to hear come from your own hands. So, I dive into it and take the long view, put it aside when I hit a wall or a plateau, work on something else for a while, get it back out later, and find I've made progress to allow me to proceed with the piece that was giving me a hassle.

It's the love for the piece and being compelled to play it that determines what I work on. Whether it is "easy" or "hard" has nothing to do with it.

--Andy

I'll usually play one piece that "raises the bar" each year, but the vast majority of what I play lies well within my capabilities. Lots of repeat repertoire and easier fare makes up the bulk of what I do.

The funny thing is that it was me that said that on the thread "pinpointing what got us hooked"...lol

LOL! I *thought* so!!!... Good one, CL!

Yes I have. There's a lot to learn from setting the bar high, but there's also a lot to learn from playing pieces can be learn in a relatively short period of time. I spend the second half of last year working on easier pieces, and I enjoyed it thoroughly.

I usually have a blend of two or three each-- stretch pieces, pieces at my level, and easier pieces. E.g., a Henle 8/9 sonata or ballade, 6/7 nocturne or waltz, and an easier prelude, maybe even a mazurka. It's just nice to be able to play something through for gratification.

I regularly learn pieces that are easy for me, either because it's my job (most choral and ballet music) or because I find something I like and want to learn it.

Eventually we all get to the point where it's not about just reaching the next level of difficulty anymore -- difficulty becomes more a measure of time (how long will it take me to learn this) rather than a measure of our status/level of advancement.

I happen to think it's good for everyone to learn short-term and long-term pieces, short-term being more about one's ability to absorb material quickly, an important skill even though the material may be easier.

BTW have you ever actually played through Chopin Op. 28? You might be surprised. There are a couple easy ones but most aren't.

If you're ready for the third movement of Beethoven's 109, you're ready for the Chopin.

There are no easy ones. Chopin says more in 45 seconds than some composers do in an entire 30-minute piece.

Yes. I missed the 'in passing' thing he said about the Preludes. (BTW he only said "most" of them are probably within his grasp, and they probably are. But still.)
It's easy to assume (because of the title) that these are relatively easy Chopin pieces. But several of them are among Chopin's very most difficult works.

And what a great set. A while back, I think there was something like a "desert island" thread -- i.e. what piece would you take if you could only take one. Chopin's Opus 28 is mine.

Mark, I think that's sort of cheating.