Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Adult Beginners Forum What To Learn?

Even though some people appear to have an open mind, it can be completely shut. You can talk rationally until you are blue in the face. You can decide for yourself if it is worth the effort.

Ummm...ok. Now that’s just ridiculous. Are you a med mal attorney? Are you against heart surgery in general or just pointing out that training does not matter here? A diy heart surgery might be just as good, or good enough? People do die after heart surgery but they are usually so sick going in that it was their only chance. The overall mortality rate is probably about 5%. 95% get a new lease on life; an extension of years to decades, without living with a weak or failing heart or at constant risk of a heart attack.

I’m not sure that this line supports your argument that teachers are unnecessary and superfluous.

Finn, read keystrings first post. To me that is the most accurate representation of both sides of the question. It is amazing to me that people use a poster's thread to promote opinions that are totally irrelevant to the OPs needs. And who are these posters? Do they reveal their own pianistic expertise? I think each poster should post an example of his or her playing so that we have something to judge their opinions by. I do not deny any posters right to a strong opinion, I just would like to know how much credibility and prowess that poster has, as I would pay much more attention to the opinions of an accomplished pianist ( no matter what genre).

As far as any statements about jazz made in this thread ( other than my own, of course!😈) I find them rather off the mark re teaching for the most part. If it is hard to find a good classical teacher, it is almost impossible to find a good jazz teacher.

LOL ...
These types of arguments are what the "arguers" live for.
They check back periodically to see if anyone acknowledged their latest argument as a "good point".

However, usually they find that there is now a "counter argument" which they must (enjoyably) respond to.

So .... they make their "point" and on and on it goes.

And, as you say, there is no particular rational to it ..... mostly opinion backed by questionable supporting data.

It ends when all participants become "weary" of the process .... which can take several days to weeks or even months.

One can only hope ....

Better playing comes from practice mostly and relation to knowledge is far smaller. More knowledgeable does not equate to better playing. There is some relation but minimal compared to sheer practice and experience at the keyboard.

I think you and pianoloverus are talking slightly about different points in the development of pianism. Clearly at an earlier point in the development of this skill, practice has a great effect. Even if you don't have "knowledge" of what is good and what is bad, practice will allow pieces to become smoother and sound better. But I think pianoloverus is talking about a phase after you are already technically proficient. At that point, knowledge kicks in because you are proficient enough to control your hands and fingers to be able to do what you want. But what do you want them to do?

I was watching this masterclass with Lang Lang last night:

What struck me is that this student clearly has the technical skills already to make this Beethoven sonata sound as she wants, but what Lang Lang was focusing on was "how should it sound?" That is knowledge.

There is no right answer of how it is suppossed to sound. If there were, we could all sound the same. He has no such knowledge. The video is more to do with interpretation and articulation. Specialized training which is skills development.

I'm glad you posted this example, TS:

When I started to watch, I thought, "Oh no, another pianist trying to push his interpretation on a student." But no, it was not that at all. It was what I have coined "applied theory" for want of a term, and am seeking myself. He was correcting counting (she was coming in too early a few times), and he also gave her a device for correcting it with his soft "tatatatata" for counting the pulses. Later it was the expression of a phrase,which has a LH harmony, as much music has, and the melody --- and he worked with the interplay of both. There is the sense of the music itself: for example, the meaning and execution of a cadence (music theory), and how to bring that into effect in both hands. When she applies this theoretical knowledge, the music refines itself, becomes even more effective.

Well, this goes straight into the argument between Pianoloverus and Greener, because it is this extra knowledge that LangLang brought in,which improved the playing. If you don't hear the slightly missed beat, you will keep practising it that way. Here the applied knowledge does equate to better playing. You're practising - yes - but what are you practising toward as you practise? What knowledge is guiding you?

By chance I just ran into similar things in my own lessons. I had a missed beat, which sounded perfectly fine to me and I only heard it once it was pointed out to me. I have learned ways of counting, so it was quickly fixed. There was also the "dotted eighth + 16th" figure that we so often have in music- you can play these literally, giving the first note 3X the value of the 2nd, or you can stretch the 1st and make the 2nd a bit shorter for a jaunty hop into the next note. I'd done a jaunty hop, but by lengthening the shorter note, it added to the slightly somber mood, giving dignity by taking away from playfulness - and the composer had sombreness in that piece even though on the surface its rhythms were playful and light. (The harmonies weren't). It was the same kind of thing, obviously at a different level, which is why this clip spoke to me.

I don't entirely agree. A missed beat is not a matter of interpretation. (It was not actually about how it's supposed to sound, though it was presented that way).

(We cross-posted so you didn't see my earlier post on the subject.)

Wow, what a great and fun teacher he is. I, too, don't think he is teaching so much how it should sound as much as he is talking about a consciousness in the approach as well as the dramatic tensions involved. "Beethoven goes crazy here!" " You need to learn how to hold the tension here"
And he is transferring his excitement and enthusiasm about music in general. It is like going to college where we learn how to learn. He wants her to be able to think like this on her own. "Don't think it is finished... It is just beginning!" The "sound" is something that arises from all the other elements involved. Just my opinion, however

For me, my hobbies are about learning, learning about learning, and learning about how to learn by oneself. The process is never ending, and there is no concept of good and bad - just learning.

The Thunderbirds are very artistic, and as such the results are often not as predictable as one might desire. There are extremes as well as an infinite number of gradations between robotic mechanisation and creativity.

Yes, it is all about money and industry. Without it, then it becomes just something to do in life, in any manner one sees fit. All rather neutral.

The original comparison i thought was beyond these technecalities. Of course you need sufficient knowledge so not to reinforce problems.

Everything contributes and it is all good. Just saying there is more bang for your buck spending time at the keyboard then anything. More knowledge does not give you a better sound or ability as much as more time practicing and gaining playing experience (technecalities being equal).

I agree that it is the actual experience of doing something that enables the mind, that permeates the body, to learn. Reading or observing may assist someone in choosing directions for their learning process, but it is the actual experience of doing that creates learning.

Woof. You guys can sure make something that is deep fun sound boring. The OP may be having second thoughts about the piano and go for the bagpipes. At least we know what it was made for.... Scaring the enemy! Just kidding, but remember, children are watching!

One person's boredom is another's fascination I suppose. I don't take any reasponsibility for their emotions.

Everything is game for learning. It's even hard to really do the wrong thing provided you stay with it long enough.

For sure you need to keep it interesting and there was great advice provided earlier in the thread about this. What you actually end up with is your own path, as it should be.

It really goes without saying that better playing requires practice. Knowledge alone doesn't guarantee better playing but it's critical to improvement. Practice will help only if one knows what one is doing both musically and technically. Otherwise, a person could easily be practicing musical or technical errors.

Without knowledge progress will either be monumentally slower or not at all. Just playing the same passage over and over with the hope of solving a technical problem by brute force repetition is in no way effective. Plenty of people play the piano their whole lives and after decades of playing have minimal technical skill and minimal musical understanding. Same thing for tennis players and almost almost any skill.

I think one only has to listen to amateurs who have been playing their whole lives but with little good instruction to see that is not the case. Same for tennis players. Just go to the public courts and watch most of the people who play there regularly who cannot hit a backhand well if their life depended on it.

There may be some confusion then of what is musical understanding vs. Technical skill.

This now refers to the latter whereas the comparison was more related to the former. Ie. Musical understanding was what separated the great from not so great. Indeed it is more to do with technical understanding.