Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum How do I get the most out of practicing scales

Well put. That does kinda say it all.

Though not quite. Here's a quote from L E J Brouwer for those who insist on an 'external' tempo: Brouwer's Cambridge Lectures on Intuitionism (1951) publ. Cambridge University Press, 1981.

Those of us who wish to teach or learn to control the use of timing in order to be able to better use it at will may or may not be imposing it externally in a rigidly mathematical manner. That is what your contention seems to be about. Before moving on to the practical world, an exploration:

It seems that you are opposing the act of applying dry mathematical measurement to music, in this case, measured tempo. Rather, you propose an intuitive sense of pulse. The analogy can be brought to pitch. Much talk is made of equal, pythagorean, just etc. temperament. As a violinist in the making I switch between several at will. One is involved in melodic passages, the other when harmonizing a second note to the first, and the third when needing to adjust to the unyielding equal temperament of a piano. This adjustment, however, is according to what the ear hears, however much others may measure it in cents, with numbers bearing a lot of decimal points. The opponents of being overly mathematical, proponents of following the "feel" of things, stem back to the ancient Greeks themselves - there is nothing new there. Tempo itself can be thought of as beats per minute, imposed by the relentless tick of a metronome. That is mathematically measured time, externally imposed.

Back in the real and practical world. The question was whether one should learn to be able to play something at a steady tempo without involuntary hiccups or involuntary and meaningless variances. Whether this is externally imposed and mathematical, or achieved in another fashion, is not the question.

As a student, yes, I need to acquire that control which is also awareness, and yes, I achieve it by practicing playing in a control manner, including aiming for even tempo. That does not mean "external mathematical", though I may draw on an external device such as a metronome to check, as a means of comparison. Since I seem to have a natural musical instinct, and was not taught and so also not inhibited musically, I already had plenty of "instinct". I played instruments and sometimes I moved the people who heard me for the 40 plus years that I had no instruction. This playing was crude and unrefined. I do not enjoy hearing old recordings. By gaining control and understanding of such things as tempo, volume, and pitch, I can refine my playing, and it has a new aesthetic or musical-emotional impact on listeners that I could not achieve before. The playing of music and hearing it have acquired a new pleasure, and within areas I never would have dreamed of.

I would not run out of fingers if I counted the number of times a metronome was used in numerous years of study with my teacher. Tempo and meter at times involved the "dum diddles", a stomp of a foot or tap of a pencil for one or two measures. There was an absolutely wild number with sudden stops and starts, going into a frenzied accelerando. I played second violin and so had the difficult job of achieving the split second timing based on what the first violinist was doing. I was not told of measured time: I was told of heart beats - a shared heart beats. That is your instinctive internal pulse, kbk.

I still need these controlled things, whether external or internal. These need to be exercised and acquired, the way baseball players throw balls at each other in predictable pattern, so that they can master the unpredictable nature of a real game, these skills sitting underneath. This is not theory gleaned from a mathematical theorist, but real life experience. There is a difference to my playing, and the response especialy of those who are musicians to that playing. I have not lost one shred of instinct orinternal impulse: I have only gained sensitivity.

To learn about things that we must learn from others, they must be named. Thus bodies of knowledge are built up, common measurements and axioms are derived, so that we can have names of things, and rough guideposts. There are those who confuse the names OF things, and the measurement OF measurable things, and axioms ABOUT things, for the thing itself. That is the rhealm of knowledge of facts, and not of understanding. I wish that anyone teaching me not only be replete with facts, but also have an understanding and sense of what is being taught - how else can I learn? The blind leading the ignorant? Therefore I would expect that the person teaching me within the rhealm of these names, axioms, and measurements, is also aiming to subtly lead me beyond them to the music itself, or to never lose sight of them.

These are all subtle things. We cannot surmise what any individual teacher is doing in the heart of hearts of his lessons, nor the students. They may be externally mathematical and stiff, so full of facts that there is no real music left, wildly instinctive and uncontrolled without knowledge - who knows how this teacher or that teaches?

I do know that I need more than magic, and also that the magic resides within me, within the music, and within the teacher who is also a musician, so that at times this magic can blend in the playing of music together. But for the time being I need these facts, axioms, measurements, control - I need the tools from this teacher. I need the parts that I can't get myself, and I will fight tooth and nail for those tools, or go elsewhere if someone wants me to just go by "feeling". You might as well try to be a physician, where the doctor tells you that you can glance at a patient, and by hearing the way he sighs and a certain look in his eyes, what ails him. Some old doctors can - it is the sum of vast quantities of knowledge, experience, and a kind of global visioning or instinct going beyond the whole which enables them to. But I, as a new physician, were I on that path, cannot instantly acquire what he has even if potentially I have the same instinct. I have to get at the nitty gritties.

I am in a stage of being relatively pedantic and strict with myself as a student. I am being deliberately accurate and careful in everything that I do, and someone watching me in my practice might even conclude that I am mechanical and overly careful. But I have not replaced instinct and feeling. When I emerge from this disciplined way of playing, I go back to the instinct and feeling, but the structure of what I have acquired sits underneath like a supporting skeleton. It's like being a gymnast with bones and good muscles. Gymnasts are full of grace.

If the question is mechanical, overly measured, metronomic playing, you have a point which I've seen others concerned with. But is that the question? Was it not just about being able to play evenly, and practicing that in scales?

Yes, and Chopin's answer was no.

We're talking about different things. nm

Gyro: "I'm not convinced of the value of scale
practice... scales take a lot
of energy to play well, which leaves less
energy..."

That's ridiculous. I daresay more supposed energy is lost in the tension inherent when scales and position change have *not been mastered and have not become 2nd nature*.

Fats Waller also didn't see the value in scales... until his mentors, James P. Johnson, and Willie "The Lion" Smith told him that practicing them was the only way to gain facility of movement across the keyboard. Well, he did practice his scales, and developed a most fluid, even legato style.

Moreover, Art Tatum was a master of scales... fully blind. One of his monikers was "The Flying Orchestra."

My thoughts exactly

Charlie Parker too. But practicing scales is no guarantee of gaining 'facility' even in the playing of scales. Just like walking to work isn't necessarily going to turn you into a cat walk model.

All the philosophising about music makes us giddy ... with little prospect of any worthwhile return ... potshot-ting in the dark tends to raise more questions than answers.

Music forms a structure as rigid in its
SHAPE, SIZE, RHYTHM AND DETAILING as Westminster Bridge ... our keyboard notation doesn't reflect this visual reality ... we have to rely on our ears to create an aural image.

Here's a sketch of the shape of music based on a diagrammatic comparison with the striding bridges over the Thames.

shape of music

Must have been a clear day when William Wordsworth penned

Upon Westminster Bridge

Earth has not anything to show more fair:
Dull would he be of soul who could pass by
A sight so touching in its majesty:
This City now doth like a garment wear
The beauty of the morning; silent, bare,
Ships, towers, domes, theatres, and temples lie
Open unto the field, and to the sky;
All bright and glittering in the smokeless air.
Never did sun more beautifully steep
In his first splendour valley, rock, or hill;
Ne'er saw I, never felt, a calm so deep!
The river glideth at his own sweet will;
Dear God! The very houses seem asleep;
And all that mighty heart is lying still!

Yea, right. He obviously didn't visit the 'marks of weakness, marks of woe' part of London. And I'm potshot-ting in the dark?

Frycek, everything crystal clear now ?

Page one makes sense.

I'm not sure what you are getting at!!??

I think we are all functioning on a certain level of assumption that just playing scales over and over means nothing...after all the title of this thread is: "getting the most out of practicing scales".

I think we all agree with you there.

Reviewing the previous 3 pages the title would appear to be "getting the most out of practicing arpeggios". So, back on topic:
To paraphrase Chopin: Don't do them evenly. There is no point as nothing in music even. It's like studying to be a cat walk model when all you need to do is walk to work each day! Why not take up ornithology while your at it?

If the question were: 'How to play scales musically?' we might have got somewhere.

It’s nest-building time in my garden so the klutz ornithology caper is most apt ... here’s a sketch of 5 of the wee birdies that visit my feeding tray ... because size counts for much in the avian pecking order ... the fruit for the Grey Lourie is spiked well away from the bread and seed-eaters (doves and weavers).

wee birdies

In my school we don’t play boring scales ... we find examples in the works of master composers ... which puts the importance of understanding the strategic inter-relation of the consonant and dissonant notes in the scale (not to mention those juicy "outsiders").

IMHO far more is registered in playing the universally respected inventions of the keyboard Greats ... for myself I like to get the hands warm (it’s leaning on early Spring here) with a quick trundle through the piano intro to Beethoven’s Emperor Concerto... lots of scales, arpeggios and trills to quicken the fingers.

Much better than your bridge drawings. Maybe you should have been a naturalist?

The turning point for me once upon a time which led to me finally treating scales seriously and with dedication was a teacher who got through to me with this:

"working on technique (including scales, broken chords, arpeggios, and (technical) exercises aimed at specifics such as Bach Inventions, Brahms 51, Czerny, Clementi, Cramer, etc.) are to skilled musicians what running laps, or lifting weights, or practicing a swing or physical condition training are to athletes."

It is hard to imagine a successful athlete not putting in the effort, next to the direct playing of his game or competing in his sport, to get his or her body into condition and to really have spent/spend the time with full awareness on the fundamentals.

This also helped instill me with the realization that playing the piano well (=being able to apply the right physical movements to create the desired sound which is experienced subjectively as "nice tone" and which creates an appropriate emotional reaction in the listener) is fundamentally a physical act requiring physical control.

They don't of neccessity go together. If you're set on conquering the 'great romantic repertoire', you have a point but for some of us life's just too short.

Is it possible to have the name of the book you are quoting, kbk, so that it can be read in complete context?

One source for chopin's own method is: http://www.amazon.com/Chopin-Pianist-Teacher-Seen-Pupils/dp/0521367093