Method Books - Repertoire - Both?

[florentin]

Here's my question:

Is it better to continue and finish "all" method books in a series, or is it better to start playing some repertoire after completing levels 3-4? How about doing both at the same time?

I have been playing from Alfred's Piano Library. The adult course goes into level 3, and then it stops. I can play stuff from level 3, but it doesn't seem to be very advanced.

From your experience, is it better to stick with repertoire as soon as you can read it, or is it better to finish methods also? (I was also looking at level 1-2 of the Johnson method. I think the third book must be great, because I already like the second one.

What do you think?

[aryantes]

I am currently going through the Bastien books, given to me by my teacher. I asked him about pieces on the side and he said that learning through repertoire is good but only after you get through a lot of the basics.

He said that there are things that they do in the books that he would have never thought to teach. Things with coordination and getting used to fingering based on patterns and not just based on a set of notes.

After I get through the 4 levels of Bastien he has a lot of repertoire that he has lined up, starting with things like Minuet in G by Bach. Then Mozart and everything but he was pretty hard set on getting through the books first.

Yes, I am learning from the books steadily and I am eager to get through it so I can start doing some real stuff.

[florentin]

I see what you're saying, but if you think about it, there's a lot of repertoire out there that is actually great for teaching. Teaching pieces... Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, all these composers wrote them, to help their own students. Think about Clementi.

just some thoughts.

[gilad]

hi Florentin, good question.

what i've learned in life and especially in piano(my 6 months on it;)) is that there are many right ways of doing things.anyway i just started book 3 of alfreds adult course a few weeks ago. the lady at the shop where i bought it told me i should consider buying some repertoire books, she suggested a series that is graded from 1 to 10, so that sounds pretty methods bookish and repertoirish.

[florentin]

I have Alfred's adult level three. There's some good music in there, and the supplemental books are even better. But I am thinking, why not learn some classical repertoire that is at that same level, instead of playing all those "method" songs...

[abell88]

There is a thread on the forum, I think it is called "beautiful music that is not hard to play". In it you will find loads of suggested repertoire. I think it's better to get into repertoire as soon as feasible, because then you will not just learn skills, you will learn skills and make beauty.

[whynot]

This is a great question.  My short answer is, method books are for the teacher, not the student.

My slightly longer answer is, if a teacher needs the method to track student progress and remind him/her of what to be teaching, then it's serving a good purpose.  But the method isn't doing the teaching, the teacher is.  If  the teacher knows how to accomplish thorough teaching purely through repertoire, a method book isn't needed.  For a student working on his/her own for a while, I suppose a good method series could also bring one gently along, remind about some basic principles, and help with self-assessment etc. 

I would say that the most important "should" is that we should pay attention to what inspires us, really try to notice and realize whatever that is.  If we play music that inspires us, we will spend much more time playing, just for starters--a challenge for many of us at times.  And we will be more apt to notice our shortcomings because we want the pieces we care about to really work and sound good, so we are likely to solve more problems on our own or ask teachers how to solve problems, instead of just waiting to have mistakes pointed out.  Teachers, don't you love it when you don't have to convince a student why something matters or should be better, you can just teach them how to make it happen?  I absolutely love it when my students find pieces on their own and bring them to lessons.  I wish I could get everyone to be that invested in their own music.  If it's 'way off the mark in terms of their current ability, that will make itself clear in a short time.   Meanwhile, there will have been opportunities to teach some aspects of playing from the piece, plus the teacher gets a lot of information about what is meaningful to that student right now, which is really important--and sometimes very difficult to know.  PLUS the student has now started guided work on a piece that may become one of those lifelong-goal or lifelong-love pieces that we all have, sometimes why we get up in the morning, even if we can't play it for thirty years.  Anybody know what I mean?   If you love the music in your method book and find it inspiring to keep turning those pages and finishing the book, then that's probably serving you well right now--being able to see that progress in a somewhat measured way could be very encouraging.  But it's never too soon to look at repertoire, so if that appeals to you, jump in the pool and start swimming!

Play music you like, bring your questions to your teacher, and enjoy your playing. 

[florentin]

"slightly longer" you say... 

I did enjoy reading your post though. Thank you.

[fra ungdomsdagene]

Here's my question:

Is it better to continue and finish "all" method books in a series, or is it better to start playing some repertoire after completing levels 3-4? How about doing both at the same time?

My two cents.
You should always play repertory even if you're working on methods books.
When you learn a lot of "in a vacuum" theory and technique which is said to be "necessary" to play real pieces you're just wasting a lot of time.
The best way to learn how to swim is to be thrown where the water is too high when you can't yet swim. Today we have this political correct pedagogical nonsense progressive and slow step by step idea of learning in a vacuum which is absolutely hideous. People don't really know what is necessary as basic technique to be able to play something more advantage, in fact we don't even know if such milestones exist but the brain seems to learn better when it is given lot of different non progressive and non linear stimulus. Learning is hardly a mechanical and linear focusing on the material you can easily play or understand and move to the "next level" after months or years stuck on that trap, but providing your mind with something hard you can't do and let your curiosity, dedication, instinct, trials and errors, subconscious sorting it out for you. Learning by trying to reach directly a goal since as you try and make mistakes and find solutions you actively learn. That's how we learn our native language too, no progressive education stuff. I had a teacher that asked first grade students to learn 4 grade Scarlatti sonatas. As they attempted to "tame this wild beast" they learned while discovering the technique necessary to play that piece and  also learned while discovering harmonic and theoric fundamentals. No need to first learn how to mount a small colt, the attempt to mount the big wild beast provides everything you know to make yourself adequate for mounting it. When they mastered the sonatas after 5 or 6 months everything before was learned in just few weeks. The amount of time they saved is remarkable but also they learned actively, they knew their goal and what they were experimenting and practing with instead of the learning in a vacuum education where they get so obsessed with levels, grades, progression that they completely forget the reason they're doing all of this.

So my suggestion is not only to play beginner repertory as you practice your method books. But also to attempt to play something you like which is above whatever level your method books are.

Fra

[applelover]

hey F.U. i completely agree with you.  in piano and classes at college a lot of people are trying to slow me down and make me take it step by step.  the best way to learn it to do what you want to do, even if it's above your level.  taking on a real challenge means you'll learn a lot.

I have a question.  I'm working on those Bastien books now too, I like them a lot, and their choice of music.  I'm on level 5, and the lesson book has good music in there, doesn't seem very different from the repotoire book.  The lesson book doesn't give much explanitory text either, it looks just like the repitore book to me.   Could someone explain how the lesson book is different from the repotoire book, and also give some tips on how to learn the most from it if i'm not going through ti wtih a teach? thank

[whynot]

I'm not familiar with the specifics of Bastien, but when a method book has real repertoire in it, there are a few things that set it apart from non-method.  If there are theory and touch explanations, of course, that speaks for itself.  In the case of your book, I would guess that the literature itself has been chosen and put in an order that presents certain ideas or playing problems in some sequence that they thought was helpful.  Sometimes you can tell by the (editorial) titles, like "dancing in thirds" or something, or maybe there's a footnote, like "bring out the melody in the LH," which shows that the authors chose the piece to practice that aspect of playing.     

Fra U, I loved your post!