Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner This day, last year...

...Was my first piano lesson!

So forgive me if I lapse into a little bit of reflection mode.

I was so excited to start. It was my 40th birthday present to myself to get a piano, and my first two months of lessons were my mother's gift to me. Bit of a tongue in cheek thing as of course she had been the source of my ORIGINAL lessons, quit all those years ago, but she was utterly thrilled to do it again considering how clear it was I was serious.

Two friends had recently gotten pianos and had gone back to playing after long absences, and so I'd known for the past 8 or so years that the plan was "turn 40, get piano". I wasn't sure if I wanted lessons or not, but as time went on, it became clear that I did.

My two older children were taking piano lessons, and I had hired a teacher the prior year for them. I was not that thrilled with her, but didn't think much of it. But then I randomly discovered that my primary ballet teacher was, actually, primarily a pianist and piano teacher. She is a fantastic ballet teacher, and she is incredibly technically rigorous, even with adults. She'd rather drive off a student than lower her standards, and this meant two things: a) she'd be perfect for me, and b) she probably has room in her schedule, heh.

So I hired her for myself, and then switched my kids over to her in the Fall.

She asked me, I recall, whether or not I had prior piano experience. I played it incredibly safe, telling her that yes I had lessons as a kid, didn't really progress, but really wanted to try again and learn things properly. I wasn't interested in just quickly getting some skills to play some easy favorites, but really getting the technique right. She was thrilled and excited to start.

I guess I really underplayed my prior experience because she showed up with some books on how to read a music staff. I came clean and confessed to a higher prior skill level than that, but before I forked over the Beethoven Sonatas and the Mendelssohn, I warned her that obviously things have eroded GREATLY over the years and a lot wasn't very well learned in the first place, even if it had been taught.

So we took it step by step. She wanted me to play what I could play. I could still play through a middle movement on an old Beethoven. I could read music like I can read English. But I couldn't do scales. Seriously. I could not put two hands together on a two octave scale without getting out of sync or running out of fingers. That was depressing.

So I think I ended up as the only person on the planet with the following assignment: a Chopin nocturne and C major, hands together, two octaves.

Looking back, a lot has changed. A lot. I'm proud of how much I accomplished this year, and thrilled to see what happens next year. I'm fairly certain I'm already a lot more solid of a pianist than when I originally quit, even if I was playing more difficult repertoire at the time. Here's my list of completed (or almost-completed) repertoire for the year:

1) C major, two octaves, hands together!
2) Chopin Nocturne Op. Post. C Minor
3) Chopin Nocturne Op. Post. C# Minor
4) Bergmüller, Op. 100 (Nos. 1-15)
5) Clementi Sonatina in C Major
6) Mozart Sonata K310 (partly learned, then abandoned)
7) Haydn Sonata Hob.XVI:32 B minor
8) Rachmaninoff Prelude Op. 3 No. 2 (90% there)
9) Schumann Album for the Young, Op. 68 (Nos. 1-15)
10) Shostakovich Trio No. 2 (second movement 70% done, last movement 50% done)
11) Grieg Norwegian Dances (halfway done)

I'm also happy to report that I've progressed from C major, two octaves to completing a round trip around the circle of fifths, and the current daily scale routine is: four octaves, hands together, parallel and contrary in octaves; in thirds and sixths. Major, Natural Minor, Harmonic, Melodic. Arpeggios, parallel and contrary; chromatics parallel and contrary. Broken arpeggios, chords, and cadences.

So that's where I am.

Just thrilled to be here, and excited to see what comes next for me.

Anybody want to make any suggestions for what you'd make sure someone like me should consider essential learning in the short and longer term? I know my teacher has already identified the gaping Bach hole, and I think both of us are disappointed the Mozart was set aside, though the Haydn I specifically picked to replace it was, at least, a moderately comparable piece in terms of stylistic parity.

I don't know that I'm quite ready to re-tackle the K310 Mozart yet. Well, I think I actually could, but it would take me the better part of the year to get good enough to finish it with any arguable competence. If I were sliiightly closer to the skill level one would normally take it on at, it wouldn't take me so long, so maybe not this one. On the other hand, I make my best progress when I'm REALLY struggling with something.

Nothing's pushed me harder than the Shostakovich, for example. A month after starting it and having to totally deconstruct all sorts of things simply to be able to play certain aspects of it at all, I found I suddenly am flying through all sorts of things that I would not have just a few months ago.

So I guess there's one argument for always having something that's a big reach for you on your plate.

Anyway, hit me. What would next year look like if you were me?

I should point out that I am not proud. I will play anything if it serves a musical purpose. I don't have singular goals like "play La Campanella" or any other common warhorse pieces. I also don't need to have something super advanced in my repertoire list to flatter me into feeling like a Real Pianist.

I mean, I would not turn down the opportunity to learn all of the famous big pieces, but I want to be ready for them when they come, not use them to get to them, if that makes sense. That way, I'm guaranteed to have a broad and varied foundation when (and if) it comes time for me to tackle a "famous" piece.

I know other people fall in love with these pieces and use that tenacity to get them to the top of Ballade Mountain, or whatever piece it is that hooked them. But I love good music all over the darn place. I'm just as likely to fall in love with an etude nobody's ever heard of than the standard "blow off the socks" stuff everybody knows. I feel like if I were to focus on one extremely hard piece, even if I were to achieve it, I'd have spent so much time doing it, I'd have very little in the way of overall learned repertoire. Whereas if I get to it when I'm ready, I'll end up finishing it at the same time as I otherwise would, but I'd get there along with possibly a hundred other pieces as well. And that's preferable to me.

Does that make any sense?

I have a current thing with printing off obscure children's etude notebooks from the internet from lesser known composer. I give them to my teacher with the explanation that maybe she's got a student who might like one or two in there, but I wouldn't mind playing any of them. Some are delicious little gems and a great way to learn a few things.

But, that being said, there probably is a some obvious repertoire I should think about working through in terms of foundational works and etudes. Things that people would consider you to have a gap in your background if you hadn't spent some time working through.

So, I'm open to it all. What would YOU consider essential learning?

You're already way ahead of me, so I don't have suggestions for you - but I do want to say happy pianoversary and thanks for sharing your story! Congrats on all your progress!

Heh, "Pianoversary". Love it.

I tend to get pretty obsessive about the music I listen to. If something captures my imagination, I *have* to play it. It's a compulsive thing for me. What I consider essential is to always enjoy whatever it is that I'm playing. If I don't find the music enjoyable, I tend to lose motivation to play.

To specifically answer your question, if I were you, I'd look into blues, jazz and other styles of piano. I have begun to enjoy improvisation after I starting to learn the blues. The freedom it offers is truly great.

I guess I should clarify a little bit: while I can and do enjoy listening to music from a variety of genres, I enjoy learning, for better or for worse, what's considered the standard classical repertoire. Of course, I don't find that to be terribly limiting because there's an awful lot in there from Pachabel to Prokofiev. Or maybe call it Buxtehude to Berg? Corelli to Cage? Purcell to Pärt?

I think you probably get my drift. I'll stop now.

On the basis of what you've written in your first paragraph - about having to play something if you've been captivated by it - should you not be a little more careful about recommending a totally different style or a genre, when you don't know whether the person likes that kind of music. It's not clear that "If I were you..." really applies in this context.

Regards,

Wonderful story. Thank you for sharing your journey with all of us. My one suggestion: Bach.

Two Snowflakes, happy pianoversary! You're progressing wonderfully, and I'd be more than a bit envious of your progress if it did any good.

I'm glad you're enjoying it so much, and also glad that you grace us with such thoughtful posts here.

I agree that blues, jazz etc isn't for you if that's not the kind of music you like. It isn't for me either, because, frankly, I find much of it boring and surplus to requirements - I think composers like Ravel, Debussy, Shostakovich, Copland et al got it right by incorporating elements of them into their music (apart from the obvious parodies like the Jazz Suite) when it's appropriate, rather than making a fetish of turning every harmony into 'added-note' ones and syncopating everything. And you can play by ear and improvise quite well without ever using them....

What I'd recommend is music that extends your current range but which is not too far above the standard of what you've already played:

Schumann's Arabeske requires nifty passing of accompanimental notes between hands while playing a melody on the RH 4th and 5th fingers, and careful voicing; his Kreisleriana (or movements from it) extends the voicing requirements further, and develops good independence of fingers and fingerwork; Brahms's Op.118/2 Intermezzo is a lovely piece that develops voicing, control of inner lines, playing 2 against 3 while keeping two melodies going simultaneously, and maybe you can even go on to the No.3 Ballade for chord technique, and in fact on to the rest of the set.

And Rachmaninov's Prelude Op.23/4 requires projection and control of a melody in the midst of an accompaniment that crosses over both hands.

Finally, Scarlatti sonatas have much to commend them for developing finger work - and there are so many to choose from that you'll find many that you'll enjoy.

Uh, if you didn't live so far away, Bennevis, I might think you had been peeking at my "pile of things I buy because I want to play them."

Here are, and I kid you not, the first four things in that pile:



Wow.

I always thought I was clairvoyant, but you've confirmed it for me .

But hang on, where's Kreisleriana?

Here:

Wow!!

(Admittedly, that volume was purchased because it has Op 15, not 16 in it. What a difference in difficulty level one opus number makes, hmm?)

Some would tell you that Opus 15 is harder.

That could be, but until I finish Op. 68 with any degree of competency, there will be no 15, 16, or 18. So they are all, for the moment, lumped in the category of "harder than Op. 68." Heh.

And they would be wrong.

Agreeing with Carey, they would be absolutely, unequivocally dead wrong.

I was referring to the fact that the extreme simplicity of many of Opus 15's numbers makes them very difficult to play well.