Practicing (NOT learning)

[newsgroupeuan]

The more and more I learn ,  the question still bugs me.  You've learned whatever you want to,  then you're left with something which is learned but still can fall apart at places.  Do you reapeated over,  and over,  and over and over again.  Or is there better means to pick out major flaws. How do you practice?

[Ashley_Steinway]

You've learned whatever you want to,  then you're left with something which is learned but still can fall apart at places.

I only consider a piece learned when it is committed to muscle memory; when you can play it without necessarily thinking about it, and indeed think about other things. Like expression, dynamics, rubato. So, if certain areas can still 'fall apart', as in drastically go horribly wrong, then it is those parts which still need to be thoroughly isolated, learned, and committed to muscle memory. Thus, practicing cannot yet take place.

If mistakes are merely minor, this may be due to other factors such as tiredness; but what you refer to is simply not having the notes 'to hand' (as it were, no pun intended), direct from the memory.

So your solution is to identify the afflicted areas, isolate them, and learn them thoroughly.

-Ash.

[rhapsody in orange]

Hmm I've got a problem here. Wonder if it's due to lack of practice, but I find that my playing is not very consistent. Sometimes the playing would go fine, but at certain times there would be glitches here and there. Like for example a wrong note in the arpeggio or a slip in the long passage. However, when I play it the second time, it seems alright again. When i tried to analyse what was going wrong, I can't find a particular area that is causing the glitches. It can happen anywhere. So it makes me wonder if there's anything I can do, or I just have to keep on practising the whole piece over and over again. Any advice?

[Troldhaugen]

The same thing happens to me from time to time. I usually practice over and over till I feel I've perfected a piece. Even so, I still make some minor mistakes especially when I get distracted....like pondering upon something.....or when I skip warm-up exercises. Even with a "muscle memory", I always try to be conscious of what keys I'm hitting.

[donjuan]

I dont know if I am understanding this topic right...
Practicing without learning is pointless - what do you expect to do by practicing if it isnt learning? hand muscles exercises?

[rhapsody in orange]

If i'm not interpreting it wrongly, I think newsgroupeuan's definition of learning means getting the notes right as well as the technical aspect of the piece (am i right to say that?). And practising the piece probably means trying to get the musicality out and to get the piece to sound as good as possible. If that's the case, then i guess you can't really practise without learning (i.e. you need to know your notes and be able to get them technically correct before you can bring out the musical aspect of the piece). I mean it's quite impossible to care so much about dynanics and expression when you don't know half the notes that are there? But as mentioned in the previous posts, yep minor slips do occur here and there. And that's precisely the thing that makes me not have as much confidence as i should have. Maybe it's got to do with the mentality. The more pressured you are, the more you are trying not to make a mistake, the worse it becomes.

[bernhard]

It is possible that this problem arises simply from a certain attitude and changing that attitude may change everything. Here are a few examples:

1.   Wrong attitude: To practise to get it right.

Why is it wrong to practise to get it right? Because the moment you get it right you loose your motivation to keep practise. A lot of students will fight with a piece for ages and then finally get it right and immediately stop practising it. The consequence is that their unconscious will have accumulated all the numerous wrong repeats against the one single correct event. At pressure guess which version is going to spring from the unconscious? You can bet it will be the wrong one.

Correct alternative attitude: To practise to never ever get it wrong.

2.   Wrong attitude: To consider a piece “difficult.”

Some students are fascinated and deeply impressed by pieces they consider “difficult”. They want to play those pieces, and they want to be seen playing a “difficult piece”. As a consequence, they expect the “difficult” piece to be “difficult” to play, and therefore they feel somehow cheated if it turns out that the piece was actually quite easy to play after all. The idea of “effort” gets built up in the practice. The result: the piece sounds labored, and looks like a lot of effort is involved in plying it.

Correct alternative attitude: No piece is difficult. A piece is either impossible or easy, and the difference is correct practice.

As a consequence of this correct attitude, the aim of practice becomes to make the piece easy. Difficulty does not enter the equation any more. Either you can play it with ease, or you can’t play it at all. No piece is ready until it has become easy. But it will not become easy by itself. You have to figure out what to do, which movements to use, etc. so that it becomes indeed easy.

3.   Wrong attitude: To believe one has exhausted all practice approaches to a piece.

Lots of student sight read through a piece and come up with a reasonable (but far from acceptable) rendition. They are then lured into a false sense of confidence: “This is easy”. So they never bother in doing all the work they would do with a piece that hey would regard as impossible. As a consequence they are forever sight –reading the piece and producing a less than acceptable performance. Repeating the same mistakes and inbuilding bad habits. I knew a guy once who had been playing (badly) Bach’s 2 voice invention no.8 for some 5 – 6 years. He just could not be bothered to work on it properly. And he kept moaning how he could not master this piece even after 6 years of practising it. When I pointed out that he actually had never really practised it he was deeply offended.

Correct attitude: Approach every piece with the same degree of seriousness. Leave no leaf unturned. Go the whole way.

Ultimately these bad attitudes ultimately refer to aim. Whatever is it that you want, you must aim at it. If you do not aim at your piece being completely without mistakes; if you don’t aim at making it easy to play, if don’t aim at perfection, is it that surprising that you don’t get it?

Best wishes.
Bernhard.

[Spatula]

Correct alternative attitude: To practise to never ever get it wrong.

Whoa...far out dude 

[BoliverAllmon]

It is possible that this problem arises simply from a certain attitude and changing that attitude may change everything. Here are a few examples:

1.   Wrong attitude: To practise to get it right.

Why is it wrong to practise to get it right? Because the moment you get it right you loose your motivation to keep practise. A lot of students will fight with a piece for ages and then finally get it right and immediately stop practising it. The consequence is that their unconscious will have accumulated all the numerous wrong repeats against the one single correct event. At pressure guess which version is going to spring from the unconscious? You can bet it will be the wrong one.

Correct alternative attitude: To practise to never ever get it wrong.

2.   Wrong attitude: To consider a piece “difficult.”

Some students are fascinated and deeply impressed by pieces they consider “difficult”. They want to play those pieces, and they want to be seen playing a “difficult piece”. As a consequence, they expect the “difficult” piece to be “difficult” to play, and therefore they feel somehow cheated if it turns out that the piece was actually quite easy to play after all. The idea of “effort” gets built up in the practice. The result: the piece sounds labored, and looks like a lot of effort is involved in plying it.

Correct alternative attitude: No piece is difficult. A piece is either impossible or easy, and the difference is correct practice.

As a consequence of this correct attitude, the aim of practice becomes to make the piece easy. Difficulty does not enter the equation any more. Either you can play it with ease, or you can’t play it at all. No piece is ready until it has become easy. But it will not become easy by itself. You have to figure out what to do, which movements to use, etc. so that it becomes indeed easy.

3.   Wrong attitude: To believe one has exhausted all practice approaches to a piece.

Lots of student sight read through a piece and come up with a reasonable (but far from acceptable) rendition. They are then lured into a false sense of confidence: “This is easy”. So they never bother in doing all the work they would do with a piece that hey would regard as impossible. As a consequence they are forever sight –reading the piece and producing a less than acceptable performance. Repeating the same mistakes and inbuilding bad habits. I knew a guy once who had been playing (badly) Bach’s 2 voice invention no.8 for some 5 – 6 years. He just could not be bothered to work on it properly. And he kept moaning how he could not master this piece even after 6 years of practising it. When I pointed out that he actually had never really practised it he was deeply offended.

Correct attitude: Approach every piece with the same degree of seriousness. Leave no leaf unturned. Go the whole way.

Ultimately these bad attitudes ultimately refer to aim. Whatever is it that you want, you must aim at it. If you do not aim at your piece being completely without mistakes; if you don’t aim at making it easy to play, if don’t aim at perfection, is it that surprising that you don’t get it?

Best wishes.
Bernhard.

I disagree. Some pieces are difficult and are above one's ability. Take for example. i should not even consider tackling Alkan's Concerto. I would work on it for like the next 15 years.

[nick]

Repeat the passage in question  at a speed that is perfect and solid, each note going to key bed. Gradually move up in speed, with perfect repeats. Don't increase speed unless it is still easy to play perfect repeats with the same solid volume. Not as though it is like having a cup of tea, but just  not a  strain or imperfections.

Nick

[mound]

I disagree. Some pieces are difficult and are above one's ability. Take for example. i should not even consider tackling Alkan's Concerto. I would work on it for like the next 15 years.

What exactly did he say that you disagree with?

[jazzyprof]

I disagree. Some pieces are difficult and are above one's ability. Take for example. i should not even consider tackling Alkan's Concerto. I would work on it for like the next 15 years.

I think what Bernhard said was that a piece is either impossible or it is easy.  Until you can play it perfectly it is impossible.  Once you can play it perfectly it is easy.  For you then, right now Alkan's Concerto is impossible.  Presumably, if you desired it enough and were willing to invest the time on it, then with the correct practice methods you could turn it from an impossible piece to an easy one.

[rhapsody in orange]

ah well. for me some pieces are 'impossible' because of the hand span required. i can hardly reach a 9th if it's a chord with notes in between =(

[BoliverAllmon]

he said that no piece is difficult only easy and impossible and if it is impossible you are practicing incorrectly. Therefore everything is easy. Hence my disagreement.

boliver

[Spatula]

Are you talking about alkans camera op 10 and 20 or something around that work? 

[BoliverAllmon]

is concerto for solo piano.

[kevink]

I think what Bernhard was getting at with the easy/impossible stuff is that in order for piece to be effective, it must be played with ease.  If it is played with difficulty, it will sound arduous.  The more I think about it the more I realize that in performance, we are really transparent--if we are nervous and find the keyboard difficult to traverse, that will be heard--but if we are enraptured by the music and find the passages easy (enjoyable is a better word) to play, that too will be felt.  So, Bolliver, I think you agreed with Bernhard when you said that everything must be easy--if it is possible to play, then it is easy given the right approach.  If it cannot be played easily under any practice technique, then it is by definition impossible to play effectively.  Makes sense to me.

[faulty_damper]

I disagree. Some pieces are difficult and are above one's ability. Take for example. i should not even consider tackling Alkan's Concerto. I would work on it for like the next 15 years.

 
Happy Birthday was once beyond my ability.  It still would be if I never bothered to touch the piano.  The Op39 Concerto may be more difficult to play but that doesn't mean I should never attempt to play it.  Of course I could restrain myself but 15 years from now, would I be able to play it?

Short answer:  No.
Long answer:  No.

 

fDsF.

[BoliverAllmon]

I think what Bernhard was getting at with the easy/impossible stuff is that in order for piece to be effective, it must be played with ease.  If it is played with difficulty, it will sound arduous.  The more I think about it the more I realize that in performance, we are really transparent--if we are nervous and find the keyboard difficult to traverse, that will be heard--but if we are enraptured by the music and find the passages easy (enjoyable is a better word) to play, that too will be felt.  So, Bolliver, I think you agreed with Bernhard when you said that everything must be easy--if it is possible to play, then it is easy given the right approach.  If it cannot be played easily under any practice technique, then it is by definition impossible to play effectively.  Makes sense to me.

yeah, if that is what he means then ok. I agree you are transparent and you have to be able to play the music with absolute ease. If on the other hand he means that any piece can be mastered and be easy, then I tend to disagree. If everything is easy, then why do we have grades? I would just skip them all go to the end and get the certificate.

boliver
boliver

[mound]

I think what Bernhard was getting at with the easy/impossible stuff is that in order for piece to be effective, it must be played with ease.  If it is played with difficulty, it will sound arduous.  The more I think about it the more I realize that in performance, we are really transparent--if we are nervous and find the keyboard difficult to traverse, that will be heard--but if we are enraptured by the music and find the passages easy (enjoyable is a better word) to play, that too will be felt.  So, Bolliver, I think you agreed with Bernhard when you said that everything must be easy--if it is possible to play, then it is easy given the right approach.  If it cannot be played easily under any practice technique, then it is by definition impossible to play effectively.  Makes sense to me.

yeah, if that is what he means then ok. I agree you are transparent and you have to be able to play the music with absolute ease. If on the other hand he means that any piece can be mastered and be easy, then I tend to disagree.

You have to take that "it's either easy or impossible" statement in the context of everything else he has said about learning and the non-linear qualities of it.  A piece as a whole, if you do not yet have the technique required to play it easilly,  is at first impossible. But two notes of it are easy. Master two notes and then add two more. Those 4 are now easy. Continue until the impossible piece becomes easy at which time you are ready to perform it.  (Once again I find myself unable to adaquately express a point he's made    )

If everything is easy, then why do we have grades? I would just skip them all go to the end and get the certificate.

He wrote somewhere "to play effortlessly takes alot of effort" which I think illustrates the rationale perfectly when you think about it.

-Paul

[BoliverAllmon]

gotcha