Why we can do not? (about a post of Bernhard)

[franz_liszt82]

   Hi, I am new here and I've been reading some posts of Bernhard and I did not understand this:

" At the end of the month you will have learned certain pieces, and others you will be still learning. The learned pieces are replaced by new pieces. The others go on to the next month. You must wait until the end of the month to replace pieces, even if you have learned them in the first week. "

Why we have to wait the end of the month to replace pieces already learned? Doing this we would not save time?

thanks, Ricardo

[sarahlein]

It must have something to do with how "learning" is used in the context of that topic.

You might find that different people mean different things when they say: "I've learned this or that piece". Different things as to different levels of learning something.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I have the impression that whenever Bernhard talked about learning repertoire it was always aimed to bringing it to such a level that even if you let it be for some time ( say 6 months) your PPI will still be working on it.  I don't think a week's worth of study to learn it upto that level would be sufficient.
That might explain:

" At the end of the month you will have learned certain pieces, and others you will be still learning. The learned pieces are replaced by new pieces. The others go on to the next month. You must wait until the end of the month to replace pieces, even if you have learned them in the first week. "

I'm curious, what is the original thread of that quotation?

[franz_liszt82]

Here:


https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php/topic,2526.0.html


By the way, where is Bernhard?

[franz_liszt82]

  Hi, Bernhard! It's good to see you back.

[franz_liszt82]

Hello?

[ttrent]

i read up to the point that you quoted. it seems that bernhard is talking about short, middle and long term goals, in the example 100 different pieces of music. Bernhard explains a method of how to go about daily, monthly, and yearly planning/practice. i can only make my own interpretation of what bernhard said, but from reading the tips it seems a good idea to wait till the end of the month until you replace the learned pieces for two reasons (that i can think of): first, even if you learn a piece in the first week or two, you'll have it ingrained even more at a months time. This way you also know the minimum amount of time you would have spent on one particular piece.  #2 what i'm guessing is the real reason, organization. It's easier to organize 100 pieces over a certain amount of time  if you only add/replace once a month. Once again, it's only my interpretation of bernhard's words, so it may be wrong.

but even if it's wrong it still makes sense to me 

[franz_liszt82]

Yes, ttrent a though something like that too when I saw this text.

[franz_liszt82]

But I am still confuse.

[bernhard]

But I am still confuse.

What is the source of your confusion?

Yes, both Sarahlein

it was always aimed to bringing it to such a level that even if you let it be for some time ( say 6 months) your PPI will still be working on it.  I don't think a week's worth of study to learn it up to that level would be sufficient.

and ttrent:

first, even if you learn a piece in the first week or two, you'll have it ingrained even more at a months time. This way you also know the minimum amount of time you would have spent on one particular piece.  #2 what i'm guessing is the real reason, organization. It's easier to organize 100 pieces over a certain amount of time  if you only add/replace once a month.

explained it very well

It is a common trait of students to stop practising when they get it right. In fact, real practise only starts when you get it right.  So we don´t practise to get it right, but to never get it wrong.

By holding on to the piece until the end of the month, you give yourself the chance to practise a piece which has achieved the status of "right". It is a very different sort of practice when you are no more looking for and correcting mistakes.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.