| LearnJazzPiano.com archives: An Inspiring Post | |
| ziggysane -- 07/09/2005, 11:55:31 -- #16328 | |
| Hey Guys. This comes from the Piano Forum elsewhere on the net. It's a repsonse to a question by a 41 year old who asked if he could still aquire virtuoso technique at his age. This was brought up when his current teacher told him that the Revolutionary Study and other pieces were simply beyond his reach and that he shouldn't waste his time. Now I'm only 20 but it has really pulled me out of some of the ruts I've gotten myself into recently. "If your aim is simply playing the piano, I cannot see why you should not – in principle - play anything that you set your mind to. I certainly have taught the “virtuoso” repertory (whatever that might mean) to many over 40s (Chopin etudes, Beethoven sonatas, Scarlatti sonatas, Liszt etudes and the like). Most importantly they have learned it. However your advisee may have had something else in mind. Perhaps she was referring to making a career as a classical pianist. In that case she may be right: the odds are very much against you. But this is simply out of market considerations, not skill considerations. But if all you want is to play the piano as an amateur, the only real limit you will have is death (so much music, so little time…) One last word. If your evaluator is of such an opinion, will that not taint her choice of a teacher for you, and what this teacher is prepared to teach you? You may then face a huge external limitation. This is my suggestion. Make a list of 100 pieces you would like to play. Do not worry about degree of difficulty. The may be very easy, or impossibly difficult. But they must be pieces that you would love to play. For instance, in my own repertory I have many pieces that are ridiculously easy – even a total beginner could master them in their first lesson, but they are such beautiful pieces that their “easiness” is largely irrelevant (for instance, “Fur Alina” by Arvo Part is one such piece – hauntingly beautiful and yet just one page long and when you look at the score you cannot believe that such an easy piece can sound so amazing). Likewise you should not be afraid of “virtuoso” pieces – as long you really want to play them. For instance I was never interested in playing any of the Trascendental studies of Liszt apart from Gnomenreigen which I always loved. So I do not play them (apart form Gnomenreigen). The repertory is far too large and we cannot waste time on pieces we do not really like. This does not mean that I am not appreciative of “Feux Follets”, or “Mazeppa”, which I like to listen to and to watch performed by other pianists. However I was never really interested in playing these pieces. So make your list, and aim to be playing these 100 pieces in 5 years time. This is not unreasonable: with the right approach any one can master 20 pieces in a year (that’s less than two pieces a month), and will give you 3 – 4 hours of uninterrupted playing: enough for 3 or 4 recitals! Next you must ask your teacher to help you in learning these pieces. This means that she must order these 100 pieces in a progressive order of difficulty, from easy to difficult, so that you start by learning the easy pieces, and by doing so you will gradually acquire the technique needed for the next piece. In this way, from the very beginning you will be acquiring repertory. Of course you may change your mind in regards to these pieces at any time, and replace them with others. Our tastes change, and also we come to know pieces that we were unaware before. A further advantage to this approach is that since you have clear goals, you will be able to evaluate your progress (or lack of) by checking at the end of each year what you have accomplished so far. Now if your teacher is not prepared to go along with such a plan and is not prepared to help you achieve it, I would seriously consider changing teachers." Danny | |
| Bert -- 07/10/2005, 08:55:04 -- #16346 | |
| Inspiring indeed and oddly enough I recently decided part of my dissatisfaction with my pianistic progress was the lack of a goal. But specifically the Fur Elina piece sounded interesting so I used the search on this site, Amazon and Google and couldn't find the sheet music anywhere. Anyone know where to get a copy? | |
| Mike -- 07/11/2005, 22:52:35 -- #16408 | |
| I am most likely wrong, but perhaps try a search for " Fur Elise" instead of Fur Elina. I have been searching for Elena myself and can't find her. (cute hostess from Ukraine that used to work a place I played on Cape Cod) | |
| piano paul -- 07/12/2005, 01:32:22 -- #16409 | |
| There was a programme broadcast on BBC last week about becoming 'A Great Pianist'. It was classically orientated and contained interviews with Kissin, Rubenstein and some other classical greats. It also focused on a 12-year-old virtuoso training at a conservatoire somewhere. I didn't see this programme, but my Dad did - I'm reporting it second hand. Apparently the conclusion was that if you haven't started playing aged 3 there is no real hope of becoming 'Great'. One of these guys had his own piano at age 2. Now what struck me about this was: What is the point of this kind of programme? Why is it so classically - slanted? Are there likely to be any 2 or 3 year olds watching, who are inspired to put down their toys and say 'Wow, I'd better start learning now or it will be too late'. Maybe it will panic a few obsessive parents into reaching for the yellow pages to find a piano teacher quick sharp. But really, this kind of thing can only be discouraging. The most important thing is that people are encouraged to learn whatever the age, whatever the time they have to spare, whatever their talent. To enjoy it. It's a symptom of the 'star culture' times we live in. The 'I'm a nobody so why bother' culture that pervades society, encouraged by our celebrity-hoisting media. Also... this kind of relates to what I'm harping on about in another thread. Picture this: a 12 year old with perfect technique. Amazing to hear. But you need real world experience to draw on to find things to play about and express. In a way the older you are the more source material you will have for musical expression. | |
| Kai -- 07/12/2005, 03:18:40 -- #16412 | |
| I watched it and didn't hear the "conclusion was that if you haven't started playing aged 3 there is no real hope of becoming 'Great'". The programme focussed on what it is like to ATTEMPT TO BECOME A CONCERT PIANIST. | |
| SolArt -- 07/12/2005, 03:43:30 -- #16414 | |
| I agree with the program. This has been discussed before. Of course we all try our best to further our musical development, but it's simply true that the younger you start the better off you are, because of your brain "wiring-up" & your developing WHILE growing hands into "pianistically molded" capabilities, which is VERY hard, if not impossible to recapture later, after the fact that our hands are ALREADY grown into whatever they are. Can you hook your legs behind your neck? Plus you're "hard drive" is becoming programmed. However, DON'T FORGET, we're here talking about the highest cream of the crop, not regular Joes/JoAnnas who want to have fun, make money & even a living out of it. Believe me, being a concert pianist is VERY demanding! I myself am not of concert pianist caliper, although I can learn many pieces with effort & practice, whereas to them it simply comes easier & with less effort. And brothers, we NEED the technique in order to express our ideas to our content; there's simply no way getting around this. | |
| SolArt -- 07/12/2005, 03:47:15 -- #16415 | |
| Just wait 'til that 12-year old gets older! | |
| piano paul -- 07/12/2005, 04:10:18 -- #16417 | |
| OK Kai, fair enough, I didn't actually see it. But the message I got from my source was that starting very very young is one of the most important factors and will give you a huge headstart. Perhaps my Dad (usually reliable but he is inclined to nod off if he's been gardening) came away with a different conclusion than yourself... | |
| jazz jasper -- 07/12/2005, 04:27:22 -- #16419 | |
| Well the 12 year old had only been playing 4 years so he started when he was 8. Also there are some concert pianists who started at not such a young age, some have started at 14 and some at 20 and have gone on to become concert pianists. Maybe not as famous as kissin and rubenstien thought! | |
| Dr. Whack -- 07/12/2005, 06:45:28 -- #16420 | |
| On the flip side, one should be careful about getting too good, too young. When I started college, I had played jazz and pop most of my life and had only seriously studied "classical" for two years prior to entering music school. The piano teacher I was assigned was quite renowned as a performer but even more so as a teacher. She said I had to attend a "master class" twice a month, where her students all perform pieces they are studying. She said it was mostly teenaged girls aged 12-14. I was prepared to be bored. Much to my amazement and embarrassment, these young girls were playing rings around me! They all had won competition after competition. Many years later I ran in top one of them at a gig I was playing. To my amazement, she said she no longer plays and doesn't even have a piano....hmmmm...Isolated case? I'm not sure, I see this sort of thing quite often in competitive sports as well... I guess the point is to enjoy the journey of discovery - take your time and enjoy life | |
| 7 -- 07/12/2005, 08:42:15 -- #16421 | |
| It continues to be my experience that a dedicated adult (18+) learns music much more quickly and has a higher propensity to success than teenagers or children. Children lack the motor skills and drive to progress at the same rate as the adult. In addition, they have little or no life experience to draw from to be able to relate to what music actually is. Teenagers, while having better motor skills and a bit more experience with hearing music, still have attention problems and motivation issues for the most part. The fastest learners by far are those in their late teens and early twenties. They have the motivation to excel, the powers of concentration to focus on practice, and the motor skills necessary to move forward at great speed when they put their mind to it. A motivated adult can do in one year what it takes a four year old to do in five years. A great Jazz guitarist once said to me "I didn't start playing music until I was 15. I HAD to get good fast, 'cause everybody else was so much better than me." "Stage mothers" who push their children to practice music (or anything for that matter) against their will are a sick bunch. They try to vicariously fulfil their lost hopes and dreams through their children in spite of their children's own wishes. The vast majority of them end up either completely alienating the child (thereby accomplishing exactly the opposite of their "great plans") or if they succeed in turning their offspring into "child stars" the kids have a high risk of ending up like Mozart or Michael Jackson or Jesus. I can't tell you how many adults have said to me "My parent's forced me to take music lessons when I was young - and I hated it! But now I sure wish I'd stuck with it". | |
| Kai -- 07/12/2005, 09:22:32 -- #16424 | |
| I heard (no evidence) that Dr John used to play guitar and only took up piano in his later years when one of his fingers was shot right off. Kai | |
| Scot -- 07/12/2005, 09:37:35 -- #16425 | |
| Those kids who start at age 2-5 are the exception when it comes to prodigious talent. Their brains are different than the rest of our brains, physically. Just like Einstein- his brain physically was different than everyone elses. But I'm a very firm believer that you can start at virtually any age and progress to an extremely high level of playing providing you approach it correctly and scientifically. | |
| jazz jasper -- 07/12/2005, 10:38:06 -- #16428 | |
| I couldnt agree more | |
| ziggysane -- 07/12/2005, 12:08:56 -- #16436 | |
| Hey. I've seen the documentary (and have a digital copy of it). To clarify and add to what Scot said, a lot of the kids who start from an early age are very good, but the documentary implies the really good prodigy/mozart level ones like Kissin and the 12 year old pretty much come out of the womb with most of the gymnastic and physical problems conquered. You can't really compete with that. The other thing is that, although these kids are very good, they don't have normal lives and if they succeed may never have one for many years. Kissin also has a nasty eye twitch. Coincidentally, watching the documentary is what inspired me to start this post, although it was motivated by built up resentment over classical elitism and its discouragement and the implication that playing piano at anything less than concert level is cute and amaturish. (I exaggerate a little, but not much.) If anyone's interested, I might be able to find the torrent that I downloaded the program from in the first place. And yes, Dr. John did switch to piano as his primary instrument after his finger was shot off/injured in an accident. He might have been playing piano before that though. I do know that the reason he didn't play more in the first place was that he was scared that he wouldn't measure up to all the legends he hung around: Fats Domino, Professor Longhair, James Booker (genius who should be listened to more often), Huey Smith, Allen Toussiant, ect. Danny | |
| SolArt -- 07/12/2005, 16:32:40 -- #16445 | |
| Dr. John is COOL, I once saw him on the Tom Snyder show I believe it was, way back. 'Wish I had that episode. | |
| Mike -- 07/12/2005, 19:20:33 -- #16451 | |
| I started when I was 17 and i have not met a 2 year old yet that can out play me!!!!! and I challenge them when ever i can get one near a piano. Freakin babies I sse em stare at me from the crib. I say "Oh yeh" I pick em put em down at the piano and say "Ok you lil shit" out play me" They pee there pants every time. My advice... save face and humilation start older like I did. | |
| Copyright © 2005 by Scot Ranney. All rights reserved. | |
| Click Here for more information about performances and clinics. Click Here to sign up for Scot's music announcements. | |