Quality vs. Quantity

[asyncopated]

Just wondering if anyone has any opinions on this.

If you had a choice in picking up and difficult piece (interesting none the less) that will take you a few months to learn, or play many pieces within your grasp reasonably well, say you learn each piece within a couple of weeks, which would you choose? 

Put it another way, is it better to spend time (at an intermediate level), to try and acquire a more refined sound (depth), or just learn lots of repertoire to practice different techniques etc.  (breath)?

al.

[eastcountypiano]

Both are good to do.  You have the pieces that can be played relatively well in a week and every now and then one piece of music that you really want to learn that takes you a while to learn.  Such as a piece that you study for a recital.  It's great to take easy pieces and perfect them, but you will enjoy and learn by trying a more difficult piece that takes a while to learn. The trick is to not pick something that is way above your level, because that will only lead to frustration and bad technique.  Perfecting your technique is ongoing and going back to a piece that you played 3-6 months ago to play is always good to do once in a while.  You'll experience yourself playing in a whole new level everytime you go back and review an old piece.

[quasimodo]

I don't think that in music quality and quantity can go separately. The more pieces from various genres/composers you know, the better insight you acquire concerning Music, and the nicer your playing becomes.

Personally, I try to manage learning always several pieces in parallel (which is largely advocated by Bernhard in this forum). By working that way, I really feel that the efficiency of my practice is much higher than if I were to work only on a single piece.

Thus I choose to work on pieces of different levels, the harder ones being mid/long-term projects, while the easier ones might be finished in a few weeks.

As I have barely 2 hours of time at the piano on working days, I have to limit myself at 4/5 pieces going, but if I had the opportunity of playing 4 or 5 hours a day, I would definitely go for at least 10 pieces in parallel.

[026497]

for me, I practise one difficult piece and 3 'nornal' pieces together. I think it is the best way because you will feel bored and tired of the difficult pieces if you keep on playing the same pieces in 2 months or longer. You need something give you vigour to continue.

[kelly_kelly]

For me, it depends on haw much I like the pieces in question. If there are several easy pieces that I like, I'll learn those, but if I really love a piece that is long and difficult, I'll focus on it for a while.

[lostinidlewonder]

You must do both. Practice what stretches you and practice what is at your level. Try not to practice peices which are a walk in the park for you, use them as sight reading aids but don't waste your time trying to memorise them and brush them up.

[jeremyjchilds]

I will buck the norm here and say that Quantity is better, simple because most of my students usually err on the side of wanting to try songs that they are not ready for.

Also, perfecting easier songs gives the "taste" of perfection. Some people have never felt what it feels like to play a song exactly how they heard it in thier head...this taste of perfection will accompany them through the harder repertoire as a constant proverbial "dangled carrot"

Similarily, Let's think of what the pianist is left with after they are done. One song that is a little harder, or many wonderful songs that are a little easier, and still fresh.

If I was talking to a rare student that did not want to try harder songs, then I would not say what I just said.

[asyncopated]

Hi

Thanks for the replies!  I find it very helpful.  I do try to strike some kind of balance with both. 

Just out of curiositly, when is a piece ever perfect?  The longest I've stuck to learning a piece is about 8 months (a couple of pieces from schumann's kinderszernen).  It took me about 1 month to get the notes down but I needed that amount of time to get all the details down, I'm sure that if I disected the piece again, there is even more I can do to clean up the clarity and build on my technique, but I'm happy with where these pieces are right now. 

I'm playing 2 part invention no. 8 and have been for 2/3 months but i'm still not satisfied with it technically and speed wise.  I can play it reasonably well at a slower tempo, but at a fast tempo, I find my technique is not sufficent to produce a consistently good rendition.

Apart from that I am tinkering with many other pieces. 

I still find my technique changing.  For example, at the moment I'm trying to lighten my touch, start a phrase from my back, and concentrate on phrasing. After hearing uchida's mozart sonatas, I realised that I'm pressing the keys too hard!

Will my technique ever stablize?  Maybe quantity will help with this, but I find that I discover most of the problems with my technique by playing pieces that are not so easy for me (e.g. the bach invention).

al.

[alzado]

Asyncopated--

I really feel the replies have been very good to your question.  I can't disagree with any of them.

Here are a few new twists to the question--

How long is the piece?   I am starting on a piece this week that is at least 8 pages of score, rather compacted at that.   Just to play it all the way through would take some time.  Clearly, if I ever master this I will require a long time. 

I have some pieces that are just one or two pages, such as the #1 of Prokofiev's "Fugitive Visions" and Ravel's Prelude of 1913.  There are many others like this.  Because they are so short, you can perfect them in a fraction of a time that it would take a long piece.  I like to do a few of these along the way to add some variety when I am spending multi-weeks on some long or very technically difficult piece.

Another tactic is to work on something, then lay it aside short of perfection, and come back to it in a few months.  I am able to do this, but I'm not sure everyone would be comfortable with this.

As for your spending 8 months on a Schubert piece, I think I would collapse with boredom.  I get very tired of pieces after just 3 weeks.

Interesting question, and the answer has to include both quality and quantity.

[meli]

I guess many pianists are right : do both. Firstly, learning a long and difficult piece might give a nice challenge but I realize its not realistic to keep practicing it for months. I'll get bored, and my technique might even suffer. I think its good to play some easier stuff, intermediate pieces. Its nice if they are also related someway to your diploma piece. I remember having problems with the Gb Impromptu, and was given advice by Bernhard to play a few easier pieces (with same technique). First they might help me tackle the piece - (the one I took months to learn!), and second they will enhance my repertiore and technique acquisition. I try to do that now with every difficult piece!

[princessdecadence]

Quality! I'd rather spend 6 months on an amazingly beautiful but difficult piece rather than 20 cute songs for children.  Much rather!

I'll probably play little faery waltz when I'm tired of practicing that hard song.  That's what those easy songs are for. 

[Bouter Boogie]

It depends on the piece, but I'd say I'd go for quality most of the times.

[jeremyjchilds]

I think the term "quality" is a little misleading in this post. It could be construed to mean "one good song or a bunch of crappy songs"  My reply is assuming that the "quality" of the songs is the same, and only the difficulty is changed.

We need to remember that the difference between a song that is playable and not yet playable can be only a little...and the end result can be so much more convincing when a manageable song is undertaken.

THere are many reasons to undertake managable repertoire. I think that the most important reason is that it keeps people fresh and improves sight reading. The next is because students need to master songs...not just work on songs.

If I had a student that was working on 4 pieces...I would (generally) have him play three pieces that were at his level, and then only one long term "project piece" I agree that there are many benefits to playing "stretching" literature, but the ratio that has worked in my studio is about 75% quantity and 25% quality (I hate the use of the term Quality and Quantity here)


if those terms are used literally,  well of course Quality...