Practicing while looking at the notes

[rimv2]

Tis tres weird for meh. Ah used to always look at mah hands while practicing and refer only to the music to know dynamics and notes. Ah memorized absurdly fast this way.

Now ahz learned to practice while looking at the music. Tis very weird as now Ahm not relying on sight to play, but on feeling. What ah mean is the way the notes feels as ah play them az well as the sound. I dont look down as much, but Ah have noticed that the feelings Ah get when playing are weak. Unless ah go absurdly slow I miss.

Is this a good way to practice? Will it get stronger?

More importantly, is this a good way to memorize?

Being able to play with eyes closed is cool, but what help is it if when a place is lost after  making a mistake

[steve jones]

I tend to work like you - memorizing from the score then looking at my hands. That said, when I have something down, I tend to find that my eyes just gaze at the keyboard and not really at my hands at all. So theoretically, it shouldnt be to difficult to play without looking down.

I think the problem arrises when the score begins to command your attention, diverting concentration from the hands. Speculation ofcourse.

[rc]

That's how I naturally approach learning a piece. It's nice not to have to worry about the score.

I suspect this style of learning cripples sightreading. I've been working hard the past few months at learning to sightread, so I've been keeping my eyes on the score most of the time (occassionally taking a peek for jumps or if my hands get lost). I'm thinking that learning to sightread will help speed of memorization, since you have to digest the information in realtime sightreading, gotta be quick. If the fingers land on a wrong note, there's no time to think about it, just move on and find the next note (by feel, or if you have to peek).

In learning sightreading, looking at the notes on the page has become melded with a mental visualization of the keys I'm aiming for at the keyboard, the kinesthetic feeling of what it should feel like if my hand is in the right spot, as well as (more or less) what it should sound like. Unexpected benefits, which I'm sure help in memorization.

Sightreading aside, it's very useful to be able to play strictly by feel (though, I still visualize what's going on in the mind). Even when looking, I can only watch one hand at a time while the other is going by feel. So typically I will learn a section by feel, often I'll have a harder time wactching my hands after learning it by feel. My teacher has noticed that when I get to a tricky bit, instead of looking down I'll stare off into the distance. I think memorizing things by feel gives a more secure performance.

Steve Jones is probably right, when looking at the keyboard we're probably doing all the visualizations and feeling, not really watching the hands anyhow. Just kind of having the eyes there to be safe.

[mcgillcomposer]

Hmmm...I feel that both are incorrect approaches.  Playing the piano is as much about hitting the right notes and playing with musicality as it is about understanding the music itself.  If you truly want to be comfortable playing a piece, and know it inside out, study it away from the piano: figure out what is happening harmonically, thematically, etc.  THEN sit at the piano and learn the notes (hands on the score or not...it doesn't really matter).  If you do this, you'll tackle two birds with one stone: you will add a piece to your repertoire, and you will understand the piece internally.

- Andrew

[nyquist]

Hmmm...I feel that both are incorrect approaches.  Playing the piano is as much about hitting the right notes and playing with musicality as it is about understanding the music itself.  If you truly want to be comfortable playing a piece, and know it inside out, study it away from the piano: figure out what is happening harmonically, thematically, etc.  THEN sit at the piano and learn the notes (hands on the score or not...it doesn't really matter).  If you do this, you'll tackle two birds with one stone: you will add a piece to your repertoire, and you will understand the piece internally.

- Andrew

I think you need to move beyond this approach.  Really evolved pianists do not need to ever touch a physical piano.  All playing happens in your mind.   People that live around you will also appreciate when you finally reach this level.   

Nyquist

[zheer]

I think you need to move beyond this approach.  Really evolved pianists do not need to ever touch a physical piano.  All playing happens in your mind.   People that live around you will also appreciate when you finally reach this level.   

Nyquist

  If you can sight read through a music perfectly there is know reason why you cant learn a piece of music away from the piano, and play it as though you are sight reading it perfectly.However haw many people do you know that can sight read perfectly through the Liszt sonata. Even though there are people who can play this way, they tend to be the least intresting pianists  . The fact that pianoist like Horowitz, Shnable, Richter, spent hours on perfecting music at the piano, does indeed falsefy your theory.

[steve jones]

Thats it mate. Sightreading is a skill in its own right. You could be amazing at sight reading but be a lousy pianist (and visa versa).

[nyquist]

  If you can sight read through a music perfectly there is know reason why you cant learn a piece of music away from the piano, and play it as though you are sight reading it perfectly.However haw many people do you know that can sight read perfectly through the Liszt sonata. Even though there are people who can play this way, they tend to be the least intresting pianists  . The fact that pianoist like Horowitz, Shnable, Richter, spent hours on perfecting music at the piano, does indeed falsefy your theory.

Please look up "facetiously".

Nyquist

[zheer]

Please look up "facetiously".

Nyquist

  Well look there are 2 types of idots in this world, the first type are those who believe that the ony way to learn a piece of music is by working on piano gymnastics, finger strength ex, hanon, dotted rythm, scales, arps, finger pushups,Dohny, Cortot teck ex, weight training to build sholder muscle etc etc.       The second type of idiots and there are many, are those who believe that by simply knowing the music in your head is enough to give a satisfactoty result, therefore pianists like chopin, liszt, Rachmaninof who wrote Piano etudes, infact new nothing about piano playing, since they adviced students to actually physically practice those etudes.

   Please look up the word DELIRIUM, because that is what you are suffering from .

[nyquist]

  Well look there are 2 types of idots in this world, the first type are those who believe that the ony way to learn a piece of music is by working on piano gymnastics, finger strength ex, hanon, dotted rythm, scales, arps, finger pushups,Dohny, Cortot teck ex, weight training to build sholder muscle etc etc.       The second type of idiots and there are many, are those who believe that by simply knowing the music in your head is enough to give a satisfactoty result, therefore pianists like chopin, liszt, Rachmaninof who wrote Piano etudes, infact new nothing about piano playing, since they adviced students to actually physically practice those etudes.

   Please look up the word DELIRIUM, because that is what you are suffering from .

Facetiously:  meant to be humorous or funny : not serious "a facetious remark"

In case it is not clear.  My original posting was a joke: as in poking gentle fun to the previous poster. 

Nyquist

[zheer]

Facetiously:  meant to be humorous or funny : not serious "a facetious remark"

In case it is not clear.  My original posting was a joke: as in poking gentle fun to the previous poster. 

Nyquist

   
    In that case am very very sorry, and it seems that am the idiot.

[mcgillcomposer]

  Well look there are 2 types of idots in this world, the first type are those who believe that the ony way to learn a piece of music is by working on piano gymnastics, finger strength ex, hanon, dotted rythm, scales, arps, finger pushups,Dohny, Cortot teck ex, weight training to build sholder muscle etc etc.       The second type of idiots and there are many, are those who believe that by simply knowing the music in your head is enough to give a satisfactoty result, therefore pianists like chopin, liszt, Rachmaninof who wrote Piano etudes, infact new nothing about piano playing, since they adviced students to actually physically practice those etudes.

   Please look up the word DELIRIUM, because that is what you are suffering from .

Hmmm...it's funny how things are so quickly misinterpreted.  You make a good point re: the two idiots.  that's why, in the method I described above, one must learn it away from the piano AND at the piano.  I don't see what is humorous about this statement.  Considering none of us are Horowitz's, or Richter's, we can learn a lot from them.  Both Richter and Horowitz would be able to speak about the intrinsic features of any piece in their repertoire...something many pianists cannot do.  They had a very good understanding of the music in historical AND musical terms, and from that they drew a unique interpretation.  Of course I am not referring to strict analysis (in fact, Richter hated analysis).  I am referring to UNDERSTANDING.  For example, Beethoven's piano sonatas are clearly orchestral ideas.  Any great pianists realizes this, and exploits it.  Alfred Brendel wrote an entire article on how to immitate orchestral colours on the piano for this very purpose.  Anyway, enough for now.

- Andrew

[rimv2]

Hmmm...it's funny how things are so quickly misinterpreted.  You make a good point re: the two idiots.  that's why, in the method I described above, one must learn it away from the piano AND at the piano.  I don't see what is humorous about this statement.  Considering none of us are Horowitz's, or Richter's, we can learn a lot from them.  Both Richter and Horowitz would be able to speak about the intrinsic features of any piece in their repertoire...something many pianists cannot do.  They had a very good understanding of the music in historical AND musical terms, and from that they drew a unique interpretation.  Of course I am not referring to strict analysis (in fact, Richter hated analysis).  I am referring to UNDERSTANDING.  For example, Beethoven's piano sonatas are clearly orchestral ideas.  Any great pianists realizes this, and exploits it.  Alfred Brendel wrote an entire article on how to immitate orchestral colours on the piano for this very purpose.  Anyway, enough for now.

- Andrew

[rc]

I would agree with everything you've said Mcgill. Especially this point:

Hmmm...it's funny how things are so quickly misinterpreted.

...Maybe you're lost in the wrong thread?