Violin vs. Piano

[ThEmUsIcMaNBJ]

Me and a good friend of mine have been having a little argument that I thought I would get some other peoples opinions on.  I know theres really no answer to this question but just in your opinion what would YOU think.  I say Piano is harder then Violin, she thinks thats horribly horribly wrong.  When I say harder I mean the whole thing, not just starting, but really mastering.  She's a violin player and I obviously am a Piano player.  Normally this wouldn't bug me but she makes it sound like piano is an easy instrument and it definately is not.  Obviously violin is not a walk in the park either but...  Anyways whats harder?  Any justification?  

[Hmoll]

It's hard to say which one is more difficult because they are both very difficult instruments for different reasons.
I would think one of the main difficulties of playing the violin is intonation. We pianists solve that problem by having a guy with a bag of tools work on our instruments every six months or so. Violinists have a very small margin for error. A couple of millimeters can mean the difference between  a sublime sound, and killing the cat.  For that reason, the piano might be an easier instrument for beginners.
My sister is a violinist - played with symphonies, chamber music, soloist, etc. She says the opening of the Bach Chaconne in D minor is the most difficult part of that piece. For the pianist - whether you play the Brahms left hand or the Busoni transcription of that piece - the opening of that piece is not the most difficult. So, what is difficult on the violin might be easy on the piano.  
Also, any sustained note on a violin has to be "maintained" by vibrato and bowing. Pianists, on the other hand, do not have the same consideration for noted once they are sounded - they can't control the sound of a note once it is struck.

If you ask me, the two instruments are probably the same in terms of difficulty, but for different reasons.

[allchopin]

I have often wondered this, with various instruments however.  I have never played a violin so I can't speak from a violinist's point of view (though I'd love to try to play one-just have never been around one).  For the pianist, various characteristics of the piano come to mind:
1)"we" have to worry about two different melody lines, making sight reading twice as hard (can't argue that)
2) we have much more chords than do violinists (in general)- thus we must worry about several notes at once, possibly in both hands as well
3) we cannot take our instruments anywhere to practice- we go where the piano is!
4) though not a big deal, the piano incorporates sustaining and dampening through 3 different pedals, which must be used conjunctively with playing

I know that a violinist has other things to worry about (such as timbre), but I would back my native instrument before anything else  

[eddie92099]

1)"we" have to worry about two different melody lines, making sight reading twice as hard (can't argue that)

Or 8 if we are playing Alkan fugues!
Ed

[comme_le_vent]

Or 8 if we are playing Alkan fugues!
Ed

hmmm quoting worketh not or so?
ed youve only read that, ive heard it, im too scared to play it though, its one small part in the 2nd mvt of the grande sonata, it has 6 parts in invertible counterpoint, plus 2 extra voices and 3 doublings - 11 parts in all.
Ive tried the violin and its very hard to begin with, but once youve got a good tone and intonation is perfect as can be , and all natural - most music is incredibly easy as it mostly uses similar patterns and double notes.
The piano is very easy to begin with, but the piano writing gets progressively more complex, up to the point of godowsky's etudes. There are simply more complex possibilities using 10 fingers- as opposed to 4.
A better argument could be made of comparing the organ to the piano in difficulty. With the organ you have to use your feet to play additional melodies. But the colours on the organ are created by pushing buttons, on the piano- colours are much more difficult to create. Also- the piano has the sustaining pedal which adds myriads of extra complexities and possibilities.

[The Tempest]

A private trial was conducted by a Hong Kong conservatory four years ago to survey the most difficult instruments. They measured things like the average amount of time it takes in order to learn the basics, what is required for mastering, etc. They did all sorts of unbiased tests and everything. It ran for three years.

The result?

Piano is one of the hardest instruments, and the violin did not even make the Top 3.

1. Harp
2. Organ
3. Piano


If I find the web page, I'll post the link here.

[eddie92099]

I don't trust Hong Kong conservatories to do anything, and I speak from experience,
Ed

[shazeelawan]

I'm getting bored of all the smart-alecs saying that pianos are easy to play,pianos are a piece of cake and pianos are a walk in the park. If that's the case,then we wouldn't even need to practise,we can just sit down on the piano stool and 'boom',an entire sonata flies out. I think the key word here is 'easier when starting out'. The piano may be easier if all you want to do is play 'twinkle twinkle little star' and stuff like that, but if you really want to master it,it's also difficult. Pianists have to deal with coordinating two different hands and reading two different lines of notes,not to mention pedalling and dynamics. Especially when both hands are doing different things (e.g taking the trouble to play one hand softer than the other to emphasize the melody instead of just pressing the keys with the same amount of force in both hands,etc,etc,not to mention streeetching your fingers to play 6 or more different notes at a time). I don't know anything about violin,except for the fact that if you play wrongly it can sound like fingernails screeching on a blackboard,and it takes longer to get a simple song out compared to a piano.In my opinion,in the long run,piano is harder to master. But in the end,violinsts have stuff to worry about that pianists don't,and pianists have stuff to worry about that violinists don't. However, in defense of my beloved lifelong partner,the piano, I have to say that it sounds musically richer,with more complex sounds than a violin,because you get to play more notes and you can add the pedal! -biased opinion-

[davidjosepha]

It's a ridiculous question. Pianists have to play music written for piano, violinists play music written for violin. And the most difficult music written for piano is written by pianists, and the most difficult music for violin is generally written by violinists. So a pianist is (indirectly, by the medium of the music) comparing himself to pianists, and the violinist is comparing herself to violinists. Piano is generally much easier for playing the same notes as a violin plays, but as a result, piano music is much more complex. A violin makes it much harder to play even a single note, but as a result, violin music is much less complicated.

That being said, I do think a violin has a lower upper limit, if that makes sense. I just think that after a certain point of difficulty, no matter how good you are, a violin doesn't sound good. Paganini's caprices, for example. Extraordinarily difficult, yet I don't think most of them sound good. So once you get to a certain point, I don't care if you can play something more difficult, it won't sound good. Because a piano has a way of sustaining notes beyond when you hold the note down, because the piano can ACTUALLY play multiple notes at the same time (yes, we get it, violinists, you can sorta play multiple notes), because the piano has such incredible range, because we don't have to worry about pitch or tone (other than balancing fingers so nothing bangs), I think piano music, in general, becomes better and more interesting as it gets more difficult (to a certain point).

I would describe the difference like this: piano music getting more difficult is going from a single or couple instruments playing one or two lines to an entire orchestra with tons of melodies, harmonies, sounds, volumes, etc. Violin music getting more difficult is taking a single instrument and continuing to play faster and faster.

I think a violin is best when the music itself is not technically "difficult" (not ridiculously fast etc.) but is simple, extremely well in tune, and with amazing tone.

[j_menz]

** wonders if the recent thread resurrection epidemic had anything to do with halloween

Since both are impossible to truly master, comparing infinities is pointless.

[chopin2015]

yes but how do you play the violin if you cannot hear? does it even have fret marks?  pfffft

[iansinclair]

** wonders if the recent thread resurrection epidemic had anything to do with halloween

Since both are impossible to truly master, comparing infinities is pointless.

Am I following you today?

Quite true.  In fact, with the possible exception of kazoo, to truly master any of the musical instruments takes a lifetime of work -- and you probably will never get there.  I have, in my time, never played violin.  I have played organ, piano, harpsichord -- and french horn.  My wife is a clarinetist; my sister plays harp, organ and flute.  We all sing or have sung in professional choruses.  Every single last one of those critters is a bear to master.  They each have their "easier" aspects.  They each have innumerable ways to betray you at the worst possible moment.  IMHO only a maniac would try to say which is hardest!

[j_menz]

Am I following you today?

If that's you in the trench coat and dark glasses, then yes. If not, then.... who is? 

with the possible exception of kazoo

Google "kazoo virtuoso" for a (surprisingly long) list of people who would challenge that exception.

[ajspiano]

...how about the idea that physical technique is different on different instruments. And in the same way that I may argue that comparing bach's keyboard works to chopin in terms of difficulty - and particularly for different people is silly..  comparing different instruments is equally silly, for the result will be dependent on the person.

..Also one must consider that the "mental/musical" element of performance, such as contrapuntal thinking is the same whether you do it on a violin or a piano..  and before anyone says but violinists don't play 4 voices at once..   Mentally, the good ones likely can and do, when playing in a string quartet.. and the lot of them would need the same mental's skills as a pianist does to bring this across as a cohesive unit...   and that stuff is harder and more interesting, and more relevant to mastery than pure physical technique.

[j_menz]

and before anyone says but violinists don't play 4 voices at once..   

They should consider JS Bach's solo Sonatas and Partitas for Violin.

[ajspiano]

They should consider JS Bach's solo Sonatas and Partitas for Violin.

Forgive my ignorance..  but I did just look at 5 violin sonata scores (admittedly in a rushed fashion) and failed to find something that would qualify.

Perhaps you could provide a BWV number..?

EDIT:
Wait, there it is.   1001-1006

I tried to play one..  evidently I suck.

[chopin2015]

...how about the idea that physical technique is different on different instruments. And in the same way that I may argue that comparing bach's keyboard works to chopin in terms of difficulty - and particularly for different people is silly..  comparing different instruments is equally silly, for the result will be dependent on the person.

..Also one must consider that the "mental/musical" element of performance, such as contrapuntal thinking is the same whether you do it on a violin or a piano..  and before anyone says but violinists don't play 4 voices at once..   Mentally, the good ones likely can and do, when playing in a string quartet.. and the lot of them would need the same mental's skills as a pianist does to bring this across as a cohesive unit...   and that stuff is harder and more interesting, and more relevant to mastery than pure physical technique.

but aj...don't you HAVE to have good hearing to play the violin, as opposed to having keys that coincide with notes? The violin(and string instruments) does not have that perfectly notated. To be a good violin player, you have to have great hearing, you cannot get by with just good sight reading or fast nimble fingers.

[j_menz]

Wait, there it is.   1001-1006

I tried to play one..  evidently I suck.

Thems the ones.

Did you try on a violin or piano?

[j_menz]

but aj...don't you HAVE to have good hearing to play the violin, as opposed to having keys that coincide with notes? The violin(and string instruments) does not have that perfectly notated. To be a good violin player, you have to have great hearing, you cannot get by with just good sight reading or fast nimble fingers.

I tinkered with the violin for a while. Frankly they are loud enough that you'd have to be clinically deaf not to hear it. I believe you mean good pitch. And yes, you do; but such instruments are a great way to develop that; you don't have to start with perfect pitch or perfect relative pitch.

[ajspiano]

but aj...don't you HAVE to have good hearing to play the violin, as opposed to having keys that coincide with notes? The violin(and string instruments) does not have that perfectly notated. To be a good violin player, you have to have great hearing, you cannot get by with just good sight reading or fast nimble fingers.

Actually I would argue that you HAVE to have good hearing/pitch to play any instrument. Period.
This isn't a question of "can kind of play" - it was "whats harder to master"

If you play piano, even if you play it fairly well..  and your pitch/hearing is rubbish you are missing a GIANT component of musical competence.

Its just that such a skill is perhaps learnt earlier on a violin than it is on a piano.. because you have to deal with intonation immediately to avoid sounding like a strangled cat. Where as pianists can get away with terrible hearing for an extended period because they do not have to develop that skill in order to be able to play something that sounds okay...

I mean really..  you want to tell me chopin had bad pitch? because he wasn't a violinist?

Thems the ones.

Did you try on a violin or piano?

Violin.

Actually, case in point.. I once asked a violin teacher if there was anything I could do to improve my ability to execute lines with accurate intonation - because I knew I had good hearing (partly evident because I could tell that my intonation was terrible) but couldnt seem to play in tune on the violin.

Violin teacher tells me that its just that my ear sucks, and that because I'm a pianist I couldn't possibly have as good an ear as her. What trollop. Turns out my ear was fine, the violin strings were terrible and my intonation was quite good when handed a higher quality instrument.

[chopin2015]

Actually I would argue that you HAVE to have good hearing/pitch to play any instrument. Period.
This isn't a question of "can kind of play" - it was "whats harder to master"

If you play piano, even if you play it fairly well..  and your pitch/hearing is rubbish you are missing a GIANT component of musical competence.

Its just that such a skill is perhaps learnt earlier on a violin than it is on a piano.. because you have to deal with intonation immediately to avoid sounding like a strangled cat. Where as pianists can get away with terrible hearing for an extended period because they do not have to develop that skill in order to be able to play something that sounds okay...

I mean really..  you want to tell me chopin had bad pitch? because he wasn't a violinist?

Violin.

Actually, case in point.. I once asked a violin teacher if there was anything I could do to improve my ability to execute lines with accurate innotation - because I knew I had good hearing (partly evident because I could tell that my intonation was terrible).

Violin teacher tells me that its just that my ear sucks, and that because I'm a pianist I couldn't possible have as good an ear as her. What trollop. Turns out my ear was fine, the violin strings were terrible and my intonation was quite good when handed a higher quality instrument.

I don't agree with you because you are missing my point. How can you master the violin if you cannot play it? There is no "kind of" playing it, you have to have atleast relative pitch to be even on a slight path to mastering the violin. I am not talking about mastering the piano at all, because either way it is more accessible in terms of theory than the violin which freaking looks like this:tiny and no frets, so have fun playing any type of classical reportoire on your own, and if you do not have relative pitch you will not play any violin and piano sonatas because you cannot hear semitones.

[ajspiano]

I don't agree with you because you are missing my point. How can you master the violin if you cannot play it? There is no "kind of" playing it, you have to have atleast relative pitch to be even on a slight path to mastering the violin. I am not talking about mastering the piano at all, because either way it is more accessible in terms of theory than the violin which freaking looks like this:tiny and no frets, so have fun playing any type of classical reportoire on your own, and if you do not have relative pitch you will not play any violin and piano sonatas because you cannot hear semitones.

I'm not sure if we're talking about me here..  but since I do have relative pitch, to a MUCH finer degree than semitones, this is not a problem for me. And I'm saying that being able to discern pitch like that applies to all instruments, its no less important as a pianist than it is as a violinist if you intend to be able to play truly well in any musical context.

Its just more important in early development for a string player.

As a pianist..  how can you have a mental sound image without pitch skills? how can you improvise? how can you compose? the fact that our notes are fixed in no way absolves us from having pitch skills.

[j_menz]

There is no "kind of" playing it

My neighbours at the time of my attempts would beg to disagree.

[chopin2015]

I'm not sure if we're talking about me here..  but since I do have relative pitch, to a MUCH finer degree than semitones, this is not a problem for me. And I'm saying that being able to discern pitch like that applies to all instruments, its no less important as a pianist than it is as a violinist if you intend to be able to play truly well in any musical context.

ok you may have the two lines meet between not being able to play either instrument or being able to play the violin if you become deaf but are familiar with it(there are more cases of this happening with the piano in history), but I do feel that it is more sensitive than the piano simply because the violin has a different tuning system and notes are not arranged like the piano, transposing works differently...etc. I really think that even though the guy who started the thread said he is not asking about which is harder to start still relates to the ultimate topic. So how can I convince you that the violin cannot be mastered unless you are familiar with both the well tempered system and the intonation of the violin in order to master the violin because the piano does not tune to the violin.

[j_menz]

So how can I convince you ...

Have you ever played a violin?

[chopin2015]

Define "played"

I play the piano because I can play pieces that are easy and some are advanced.

I cannot play anything on the violin but I have tried to make sounds. I have never tried to play violin to a piano but I would imagine it to be difficult because the piano cannot change pitch.

[ajspiano]

So how can I convince you that the violin cannot be mastered unless you are familiar with both the well tempered system and the intonation of the violin in order to master the violin because the piano does not tune to the violin.

How would anyone's piano education, or "mastery", be complete without an understanding or the well tempered system (..uh..  well tempered clavier) and the history of tempered tuning applied to keyboard instruments..

Also, while I doubt i'd be able to play at all in tune on a violin if I were deaf (I have enough trouble as it is with anything much beyond a scale since I never practice the thing anymore - and didn't much to begin with.. at least not beyond basic folky improv)..  there is absolutely a "feel" of conflicted tones in the way the instrument vibrates..  it wouldn't surprise me if one could learn to be very sensitive to the vibrations and discern pitch that way.

......

aside from all that, you have a misunderstanding about what pitch skill is required to do basics on a string instrument..   if you can sing in tune you have sufficient pitch skills..  its the moving your fingers in the right places that takes the practice.. and being able to focus on that and listening at the same time..   and it doesnt actually require "relative pitch" in the way that is commonly discussed, such as recognising intervals or chord progressions and naming them. You just have to be able to tell whether you are in tune or not at a given moment..

When you learn violin they put pencil marks on the finger board where your fingers are meant to go.. you don't just figure it all out by ear...  you only have to make the minute adjustments, which is not any harder than say, tuning the strings to perfect 5ths in the first place, or singing in tune..

The trouble comes when you have to maintain pitch over an extended period, without reference to an open string or key centre..  which is a little bit like trying to sing a chromatic scale - which any pianist should be able to do easily, but which non-muso's will find almost insurmountably challenging.

[j_menz]

Define "played"

I play the piano because I can play pieces that are easy and some are advanced.

I cannot play anything on the violin but I have tried to make sounds. I have never tried to play violin to a piano but I would imagine it to be difficult because the piano cannot change pitch.

Then frankly you have never "played" it at all, and are in no position to judge it's difficulties. Everything is hard at first, some harder than others, but that says nothing about how difficult they may be to learn to a basic standard, much less to a very high level indeed.

Do not mistake your own preliminary fears and imaginings for reality.

[chopin2015]

How would anyone's piano education, or "mastery", be complete without an understanding or the well tempered system (..uh..  well tempered clavier) and the history of tempered tuning applied to keyboard instruments..

Also, while I doubt i'd be able to play at all in tune on a violin if I were deaf (I have enough trouble as it is with anything much beyond a scale since I never practice the thing anymore)..  there is absolutely a "feel" of conflicted tones in the way the instrument vibrates..  it wouldnt surprise me if one could learn to be very sensitive to the vibrations and discern pitch that way.

......

aside from all that, you have a misunderstanding about what pitch skill is required to do basics on a string instrument..   if you can sing in tune you have sufficient pitch skills..  its the moving your fingers in the right places that takes the practice.. and being able to focus on that and listening at the same time..   and it doesnt actually require "relative pitch" in the way that is commonly discussed, such as recognising intervals or chord progressions and naming them. You just have to be able to tell whether you are in tune or not at a given moment..

When you learn violin they put pencil marks on the finger board where your fingers are meant to go.. you don't just figure it all out by ear...  you only have to make the minute adjustments, which is not any harder than say, tuning the strings to perfect 5ths in the first place..

of course a piano player is to know the well tempered system, but a violin player has to understand  beyond that as well, not just a recommendation. How can you have your fingers in the "right place" when the right place is related to a tuning system, and I swear on the science of acoustics that you have to hear what you are playing in order to know how it relates(for anything) but especially for the violin because it has semitones that are more available than on the piano. Also, would you not say since we all do not play the violin, it would be harder to master it?  

[j_menz]

of course a piano player is to know the well tempered system, but a violin player has to understand  beyond that as well, not just a recommendation. How can you have your fingers in the "right place" when the right place is related to a tuning system, and I swear on the science of acoustics that you have to hear what you are playing in order to know how it relates(for anything) but especially for the violin because it has semitones that are more available than on the piano. Also, would you not say since we all do not play the violin, it would be harder to master it?  

How can you, who has never played a tune on one presume to lecture someone who has on how to go about doing it? 

[chopin2015]

you miss very important technical information in my argument.

[chopin2015]

aj plays the piano. he used to play the violin but advanced at the piano more than the violin. Aj found the piano more applicable so the piano is easier to master.

[j_menz]

you miss very important technical information in my argument.

What you have in your argument is some fairly dodgy theorising backed up by no practical reference whatsoever.

aj plays the piano. he used to play the violin but advanced at the piano more than the violin. Aj found the piano more applicable so the piano is easier to master.

Maybe he just "took" to piano more.  I advanced more on piano than I did on the bagpipes; this does not suggest that piano is easier than bagpipes so much as that it is easier to practice without the neighborhood organising pitchforks and torches.

[clavile]

I wanted to play violin, but found it way harder than piano.

BUT the techniques are incomparable, and I've been playing piano for almost 5 years now. This would definitely make piano seem easier.

Each instrument takes its own talents, and I believe it depends which ones you are willing to work for, and which you aren't.

[ajspiano]

Just to clarify..  I grew up playing the piano.. and studied it to diploma level repertoire before really delving into anything else, and before I really hit highschool..

Then, I got really lazy about classical piano and branched out, and I have experience with a WIDE variety of instruments (and musical genres) as a result. I've been a professional performer (pub gigs, weddings, cocktail bar, accompanist, session recording, composer) as a pianist, drummer, guitarist, bassist, double-bassist, banjo-ist (? banjist? i dont know) and singer,  I'm also able to play the clarinet, tuba and violin..  and harmonica I guess..  but is that a real instrument?

How can you have your fingers in the "right place" when the right place is related to a tuning system

This statement is totally bogus.

You don't operate on a tuning system. You use your ears. The violins tuning is dynamic, it flows between different tunings. Nothing is fixed. Any given note is slightly different depending on what other notes are playing at the same time, or what preceded or will follow. This is not mathematically calculated with a system. It is done by ear, by instinct. The violin does not have semi-tones.. it has EVERY possible frequency within its range.

It is completely different to the piano because the only notes that are fixed are the open strings..   3 of which can be played on a different string with the fingers.. and all of which can be tuned mid performance..

This is precisely why the piano has tempered tuning, because it is not able to do this. A violin (and the whole string family) can ALWAYS have effectively untempered tuning.. even if the open strings are tempered and within the context of performance with a piano that can't do it at all without sacrificing certain intervals/keys. The violin will always make the subtle adjustments. Its like the human voice..  I assure you that you don't have to temper your voice, you just sing in pitch.

[chopin2015]

What you have in your argument is some fairly dodgy theorising backed up by no practical reference whatsoever.

Because?

 Generally aggressive response that is disappointing because you have no solution of explaining to me how you could play if not master the violin if you could not hear, when it is much harder to play a consonant melody on the violin than the piano because you cannot see where to play! So if you cannot see where to play as well on the violin because there are differences in tension points on the neck(no frets) as opposed to keys on the piano where you do not have to concentrate on 5ths...
those are my general points where you give no advance to the argument.

[chopin2015]

Just to clarify..  I grew up playing the piano.. and studied it to Amus level before really delving into anything else..

Then, I branched out, and I have experience on a WIDE variety of instruments. I've been a professional performer (pub gigs, weddings, cocktail bar, accompanist, session recording) as a pianist, drummer, guitarist, bassist, double-bassist, banjo-ist (? banjist? i dont know) and singer,  I'm also able to play the clarinet, tuba and violin..  and harmonica I guess..  but is that a real instrument?

This statement is totally bogus.

You don't operate on a tuning system. You use your ears. The violins tuning is dynamic, it flows between different tunings. Nothing is fixed. Any given note is slightly different depending on what other notes are playing at the same time, or what preceded or will follow. This is not mathematically calculated with a system. It is done by ear, by instinct.

It is completely different to the piano because the only notes that are fixed are the open strings..   3 of which can be played on a different string with the fingers.. and all of which can be tuned mid performance..

 exactly. the violin is more centered around hearing, and is less likely to become a performance instrument. Richter could still play the piano when he had a shift in ear function, because he could read the music easily. I do not know of any deaf violinists. If less people are violinists than pianists, violin is harder because if it was easier more people would be professional violinists(insert some law of function here)

[j_menz]

Because?

 Generally aggressive response that is disappointing because you have no solution of explaining to me how you could play if not master the violin if you could not hear, when it is much harder to play a consonant melody on the violin than the piano because you cannot see where to play! So if you cannot see where to play as well on the violin because there are differences in tension points on the neck(no frets) as opposed to keys on the piano where you do not have to concentrate on 5ths...
those are my general points where you give no advance to the argument.

Nonsense. That is not the way it operates in practice, and any student of the violin appears to overcome the difficulties of playing "in tune" reasonably quickly; it is a beginner problem, not a real one. By analogy, some people find it initially hard to play two hands doing different things on a piano; that is a beginner problem and everyone comes to grips with it pretty quickly.

Stop getting hung up on your inexperienced and purely theoretical hangups and listen to how it actually works in practice.

No one is addressing your "issue" because it is in practice a non-issue.

[j_menz]

I do not know of any deaf violinists.

Beethoven comes to mind.

If less people are violinists than pianists, violin is harder because if it was easier more people would be professional violinists(insert some law of function here)

Fewer people are stone tool makers than computer programmers? Does your analogy hold there?

And what evidence do you have that there are in fact fewer violinists?

[ajspiano]

exactly. the violin is more centered around hearing, and is less likely to become a performance instrument. Richter could still play the piano when he had a shift in ear function, because he could read the music easily. I do not know of any deaf violinists. If less people are violinists than pianists, violin is harder because if it was easier more people would be professional violinists(insert some law of function here)

The fact that in this example Richter may not hear accurately the sound produced, does not mean that he could not conceive it accurately in his mind before it was produced...   

[chopin2015]

But can you see precisely where middle c is on violin(no frets)? or the perfect octave from that? It is less accessible than an octave on the piano which is already tuned for you. My inexperience is just as well as your inexperience, because beginner issues are just as well reasons as complexity of structure and nature of instrument but beginner issues are present for either instrument... Although the mechanics of the piano are more complex, the system of the violin seems more ambiguous to me because I am used to an octave being perfectly laid out between my ears and the sheet music, on the keyboard.

[chopin2015]

The fact that in this example Richter may not hear accurately the sound produced, does not mean that he could not conceive it accurately in his mind before it was produced...  

he very well could, but he was not born deaf. Losing hearing was not as hard to him as a piano player because he had the opportunity of translating music from sheet to a keyboard that is connected to a mechanical system that did a lot of the work an ear would do with the violin?  

[j_menz]

the system of the violin seems more ambiguous to me because I am used to an octave being perfectly laid out between my ears and the sheet music, on the keyboard.

Can you sing?

[chopin2015]

I am very limited in that aspect here is like a year ago

https://soundcloud.com/the-before-and-after/moon-confronts-the-sun

[ajspiano]

But can you see precisely where middle c is on violin(no frets)?

Yes, but its feel as much as sight.

How do you suppose they start in key, or hit the next note in key if they are up the finger board at all?

finger tape for learning, before muscle memory kicks in..



Additionally, 1st/2nd/3rd and 4th hand positions..


..every finger/string within each position of course has a corresponding note.. so yes, you know where all the notes are..  its not a mystical black stretch of wood that performers magically pull consonant sound out of. And the thing is short, adjustments on the positions to maintain intonation are SMALL.

[j_menz]

I am very limited in that aspect here is like a year ago

You can keep in tune. Do you find singing with the piano easier or harder than singing solo?

[chopin2015]

Yes, but its feel as much as sight.

How do you suppose they start in key, or hit the next note in key if they are up the finger board at all?

finger tape for learning, before muscle memory kicks in..



Additionally, 1st/2nd/3rd and 4th hand positions..

ok but will you have finger tape for every single note? The piano has a key for avery single note and they are black or white! love it

j_menz I think it is just as hard to sing to a piano as it is to sing in tune to whatever pitch you are singing in, which is probably different for everyone each minute of their life, if they do not have perfect pitch seeing as there are oscillating things all around us.

[j_menz]

j_menz I think it is just as hard to sing to a piano as it is to sing in tune to whatever pitch you are singing in, which is probably different for everyone each minute of their life, if they do not have perfect pitch seeing as there are oscillating things all around us.

Yet lots of people can manage it, and everyone can be taught it.  The same holds for the violin (and other fretless instruments, including the trumpet, the saw and the theremin).  It is true that you don't have to learn it on the piano (or the recorder, or the guitar etc...), but that doesn't make it difficult to learn, just an initial barrier that can seem frightening and hard.

[ajspiano]

ok but will you have finger tape for every single note? The piano has a key for avery single note and they are black or white! love it

And yet beginning piano students are very often limited to 5 finger positions in C major.

When you start violin, you are probably going to spend a reasonable amount of time working in first position only..  in fact, rather more likely spend time with open strings only learning bowing techniques.

You can do mountains with a single position, and then you'll start working in second position only, before working on simple transitions between positions. Its not any different to how an advanced pianist can hit the right keys with their eyes shut.. you just know where they are.

...

EDIT:
It sounds as though you are perceiving the instrument as being very difficult because you're trying to imagine dealing with things you can manage at a piano..  without first having an understanding of what skills you already have on a piano (you won't really have a clue until you've taught 100 or so people the same stuff)...

and of course without also understanding the similar basic skills that you have not at all acquired on a violin.

[chopin2015]

Yet lots of people can manage it, and everyone can be taught it.  The same holds for the violin (and other fretless instruments, including the trumpet, the saw and the theremin).  It is true that you don't have to learn it on the piano (or the recorder, or the guitar etc...), but that doesn't make it difficult to learn, just an initial barrier that can seem frightening and hard.

Ok but I am going to go to bed still feeling that piano is easier, and that I have no excuses not to master it   and bach invention no 15 is stuck in my head, thank god. I would hate it if it was some 6000 hz overtone undeceive of a specific key on a piano...could you imagine playing the violin and having that right next to your face/head? >