Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner This might be a stupid question but ..

Sorry about that I suppose it's my apparently massive ignorance that is to blame. So don't worry about it. I'm just a stupid idiot and I'll probably give up in two weeks or so anyway. Maybe. I don't know.

No, it's your apparently massive attitude that's to blame.

Nobody called you a stupid idiot and nobody said you would fail. If everybody thought you were only supposed to give up, they'd have said so and not offered advice that assumes the asker has the capacity to work hard for a long time.

I humbly suggest you re-read the replies you've been getting in this thread and your other thread and see if you really are getting sincere advice that you are mistaking for judgment.

You joke about Gaspard, but just going back in some of your posts, two years ago you were working on Scarbo, and yet as of now your Chopin nocturne lacks a lot of basic things it should have. I think your approach is not teaching you the things you want it to.

If you want to get better (and you clearly have the dedication to work hard for a long time) then do yourself a favor and step WAY back and if you're destined to play things like Gaspard, you'll actually get there.

Nobody's standing in your way more than you are.

The problem is that he may not be able to get up. Launching into this kind of practice regime on pieces like these without the requisite technique is just asking for injury. I am surprised Derulux did not bring this up since this is kind of his thing.

This guy says you're right but for different reasons.

http://etudemagazine.com/etude/1924/03/josef-lhevinne---basic-principles-in-pianoforte-playing.html

I know it's possible to injure yourself in this way so I haven't been playing at full force or tempo.

I'm pretty sure someone did say I was ignorant somewhere back there, the rest was just editorial commentary.

One thing I believe we can agree on is that it was foolish of me to post these threads here.

If I may be so bold, I'd humbly suggest that you add Balakirev's Islamey to your 'Working on' list (best sandwiched between the Liszt and Ravel - after all, Ravel wrote Scarbo partly to test pianists who find Islamey too easy), and finally Sorabji's Opus Clavicembalisticum as the final coup de théâtre, guaranteed to knock anyone's socks off (but a mere ball in the park for you, when you reach the ball, that is).

I haven't gotten the score to the Stevenson yet maybe Frank Music has it? I admit I put it there as a joke but now I'm curious about it. I'd like to collect the most critical, influential pieces in the piano literature.

As for Islamey I was thinking about adding it but forgot to. I'll add it later if the word count allows.

It's foolish to ask pianists about piano? The foolishness probably lies not in having asked your piano questions in a massive forum with hundreds of pianists with a combined tens, or even hundreds of thousands of hours playing, learning and working through problems exactly like the ones you are encountering, but in not listening to what pianists then have to say about piano. When there's overwhelming agreement among a group of pianists who don't often all agree on something, it stands to reason that a person should give it a certain amount of credit.

Look, I'm no advanced pianist, and often have basic questions of a level similar to the ones you've been asking, but I don't get my hackles up when I get taken to piano school. After all, that's exactly what I want. There are some strong personalities here, that's for sure, but I haven't (yet) elicited the kind of response you're getting here. It would be folly to simply chalk the problem up to having picked the wrong place to ask your question. It's sort of the internet equivalent of, "it's not me, it's you."

It comes down to what you want to do. If you want to do your own thing, then just do it. Don't ask for input and then get upset when the response isn't what you wanted to hear. Nobody can help you learn how to play fast runs in Liszt if you aren't willing to believe that playing Liszt is not the best way to learn how to play fast runs as a primary matter.

No less notable is this: If you're wondering if your question is stupid before you even ask it, it stands to reason that perhaps you already wonder if you're missing something obvious. I think you got your response. The question is, what are you going to do about it?

One possible reaction is to flip your hair and stomp off, condemning all these egotistic jerks who clearly just want to see you fail.

Another one would be to see if there's something of value in what's being said to you, and have the cojones to take that advice simply because it will help you get where you want to be, whether or not you liked the package that advice came in.

You clearly have goals. Now, how are you going to achieve them?

I just meant it was foolish because this has happened two times before and getting involved in heated debates here has not done me or my music any good, so in that sense it was a very foolish thing to trigger a third one. But the central problem is, because of a reason I cannot really explain, I don't accept your basic theory that the best way to play difficult passages is by not playing them. That's rather backwards to me. And if you looked at my curriculum thread you would have seen I'm going to also be playing Chopin, Beethoven, Bach and others, not just Liszt, so whatever intermediate requirements from a mere finger-technique point of view are being taken care of. I also got a book of exercises recommended by my college piano teacher. Is this conversation over yet? Here's hoping.

I didn't notice Opus Clavicembalisticum; I will add that also. Thanks.

I seem to be a glutton for this kind of punishment.

Honestly, I was hoping he would at least look deeper than the surface of the analogy, and possibly open a dialogue about it. But when someone glosses over your entire post and vaguely responds with something that clearly misses the point of the entire post (and does so more than once), it's obvious they're either not understanding or completely ignoring what you wrote. I'm happy to disagree about a topic for quite a long time, as long as we're talking intelligently about it. But right now, I don't feel like that's possible because the OP is too closed off to it.


I'm certain I'm not exaggerating, but this reply makes me think we're talking about two different things. I'm talking about making sure you get to the top of the mountain, but it seems to me like you're going to survey the mountain, and then if you decide the climb isn't worth it, you're not going to try scaling it. Is that closer to your level of motivation?


Yeah, I was trying to break into the conversation slowly. The OP is very closed off to any opinion that isn't his, and seems to be completely ignoring logic, metaphor, and any other method of relaying those ideas. He also seems to be very closed off to even having a discussion about it, which is unfortunate. I always feel that, if you ask a question, you should try to understand the responses you get even if you don't agree with them.


Normally, I would disagree, but you've been so closed off to what anyone says, that you might have a point. If the only voice you're going to listen to is yours, why have two ears in the first place?

It would be, if that's what I was saying. The problem with learning advanced technique by playing advanced pieces is that you need to ISOLATE the technical challenges in order to collect small building blocks that can be used to make big building blocks. That's what less challenging pieces do for you.

As far as I'm concerned, there's no such thing as pieces that are "easier". Easy pieces aren't really easy...they just present fewer technical challenges at once. But those technical elements present opportunities for both basic and advanced levels of mastery. An easy piece can be made enormously difficult simply by what you decide to use it for.

When you have enough of those individual building blocks, you are ready for pieces that require you to have their basic execution already locked in. If you play those pieces too early, then you're just falling massively short of being able to do anything competently. You may make some incremental progress, but it's just as likely you won't, whether or not you have any internal potential. Whereas building up slowly, you're guaranteed to make progress if you are, in fact, capable of it.



I don't know. Have you left the discussion?

I am inclined to agree. On the other hand, what you're saying is enormously prudent and how this conversation has gone is probably useful simply for the third party observers of it who are wondering how to go about improving their skills in a cogent fashion more than the OP himself.

Heck, it even helps me reinforce my efforts to put the work in at the basic levels and give me a chance to step back and see why I'm doing that. I sat down today and worked more on my Schumann than my Shostakovich. The Farmer is Happy indeed.

Yes, with all my heart. I'm done. I don't want to see this pointless debate continue any further than it already has.

Speed. Do not think of this word or the word fast. Remove them from your vocabulary and always replace them with control. That's all it is. You cannot have this without a robust technique. Without that speed is of no value and serves no purpose. How do you get the technical facility to execute a passage with enough precision(control) to increase the tempo? You have to understand the movements for that kind of passage at more than a superficial level. In context (that passage itself) and out-of-context (technical studies) and in completely other environments (other pieces). It is absolutely impossible to fully learn a piece in a vacuum. That's why you must play as much music in as many styles and levels as possible. It's an everything strategy and it's the only useful strategy.

You have set some goals for yourself, and it seems you have some kind of deadline in mind. But your focus seems to be on these two things. What is it that you really want? Why is it necessary that your musical pursuits be of the highest degree of difficulty? Yes it's good that you have long term goals. But have you set short and medium term achievable goals that support your long-term goals?

You want to play so you should continue to do just that but if you want to play faster you need to adjust your strategy.

Which one did you get?

Some pointers for working up tempo:

1) Work on small sections at a time. It might be a couple measures, or maybe even only one or two beats within a measure. The section has to be small enough that you can play it quite fast but still perfectly. When you have two sections, try joining them together. If it doesn't work, you still haven't learned the small sections well enough.

2) Figure out your exact fingering for every single note and use only that fingering. If the score has fingerings written in, I usually start there and see if I like it. If I don't, I experiment around until I find something I do like. Playing small sections up-to-tempo can help you find the best fingering, as very often numerous fingerings will work at a slow tempo but only one or two are possible at full speed. Make sure that you are holding all notes to their full value and using a fingering that allows you to do so.

3) You should work to be able to play at a slightly faster tempo than you feel is musical, as then you won't feel pushed to the limit when playing the musical tempo and will thus be able to maintain full control.

4) Your metronome is your friend. Some techniques for using the metronome to increase speed are: Start very slowly and work your way up 2-4 notches at a time, i.e. 60 bpm, 64 bpm, 68 bpm, etc. Or do the "two steps forward, one step back" method, i.e. 80 bpm, 88 bpm, 84 bpm, 92, bpm, etc. Or do a big jump forward and then a smaller jump back, i.e. Your current tempo is 100 bpm and you want to speed it up to 120. Play through at 100 bpm, then jump it all the way up to 140. Then go back to 120, 140, 124, 140, 128, 140, until you get all the way up to 140. Suddenly 120 feels like a piece of cake! I'm using this method on my Mozart sonata right now and it's working great but it took some work with the other methods to get it up to a comfortable moderate tempo where I knew the piece well enough for the big tempo jump method to be effective.

5) Memorize the small sections you are working on so that you can watch your hands closely while playing. What you are looking for are places where your hands are tense (risking injury and wasting energy that could be directed towards playing faster or with better tone), places where you are moving your fingers too high or far from the keys (your fingers can play faster the closer they are to the keys as there is less time wasted "in the air" so to speak), as well as the angle of your arms and wrists (awkward angles can put strain on your physical playing mechanism, causing it to be operating at less than its peak capabilities.) In addition to being able to keep an eye on your technique, memorizing is almost always key to playing fast as your brain needs to already know the notes ahead of time in order to be able to send signals to your hands fast enough.

A combination of all these techniques should be able to get you started on working up the tempo in your pieces.

Finally I must touch on the general trend of the conversation here. It is perfectly fine to have a piece you are working on that is way beyond your current capabilities. But that should be the exception from the rest of your pieces, which ought to be repertoire that will stretch your current capabilities a little at a time. A more effective list of pieces for you to work on would be something like ONE Chopin Nocturne, ONE Beethoven Sonata (Op. 2 no. 1 or Op. 49, say), a Bach Prelude and Fugue, or perhaps a French Suite, and maybe some Bartok or Kabalevsky to round out the more modern end of the chronology. This way you are building on the skills you currently have while still stretching yourself. You need to have pieces that are within your grasp to learn perfectly, and optionally a giant challenge piece. There are certainly technical things you can learn from a challenge piece, but there are many more EXTREMELY important things you can learn from working a smaller piece until it is absolutely polished and perfect. And believe it or not, many smaller pieces can teach you the exact same technical things as the Liszt sonata. There is something to be said for the psychological reward of playing a piece well rather than constantly beating our brains out on programs that even world famous concert pianists would tremble to attempt. You will be much less likely to burn out on practicing if you are careful in your programming.

You mention that you need to get in shape and lose 30 pounds to better your health. We already know how to walk, but that doesn't mean that we are going to go online tomorrow and sign up to run a marathon in 2 weeks. No, the best way to start training for a marathon is to run 3 or 4 miles every day, and once a week challenge ourselves with a longer run of 6-8 miles. Think of the Liszt sonata is the pianistic equivalent of a marathon. In other words, don't expect to be ready for it any time soon, but don't give up on training for it either!

Contrary to what you might think, the Liszt sonata is not one measure + another measure + another measure and so forth. It is not a piece that you can play well just by learning all the bits and cobbling them together. It is greater than the sum of its parts (same can be said for any of the other works on your list.) In order to play it well you need to know how it is structured, how to bring out the overarching shape of its entirety. This is the kind of stuff you learn by playing smaller pieces and gradually increasing the difficulty. This is the kind of stuff that goes beyond merely learning the notes. This is the kind of stuff we all aim for as musicians and thus I wish you well on your journey and hope that the advice I have posted here is of use.

Dohnányi

+1. Exactly. Wise words indeed.

This thread succeeds on the level of being a cautionary tale for the rest of us.

The ABRSM (U.K.) Teachers Forum has had a similar thread going in the past week or so. It's about adult students who play what they want regardless of their abilities and no matter what the teacher tries to tell them.

It's amusing - if you're not the teacher!

Here's the link to it. Its title is "Adult who charges through the book but can't play the pieces":
http://www.abrsm.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=55454