How do you define a piece that is beyond your level?

[canardroti]

I've been wondering that for a while now,  how do you really define a piece that is beyond your level? Is it a piece that you can't event play through the first time at all? is it a piece that you can't even sight read teh first 2 bars?
Is it a piece where the hand positions are so arkward that  you produce tension and decide that this piece is too hard? or it's a bit of everything? I'd like a clear definition of it.
any comments are appreciated!

[debussy symbolism]

Greetings.

I imagine that a piece that would be considered "boyond" the level would be containing material that one has either not covered or covered slightly, but not in enough quantity to meet the demands of a particular piece. Sometimes when you think that the piece is way too hard may turn out doable.

[lung7793]

I'm a horrible sightreader, but there are tons of pieces I've never played that are at my level or below.  I know I could play them if I gave myself a little time to learn them.  I would say it's beyond your current level if there is a technical aspect that you have not developed yet, such as rapid and/or repetitive octaves, double notes, long length/endurance problems, the list goes on.  I don't think it has anything to do with the ability to sightread or having tension (as long as you recognize the tension).  If you can't play a piece for these reasons, it just means you need to spend a bit of time playing slower or adjusting the hand to those awkward positions (with a teacher of course).

If we're talking about this from a musical standpoint then there can be a whole different level of determining whether a piece is beyond your level.  Bach fugues are a good example...most are playable technically by the average pianist, but to make each voice sound alive requires a very mature and well-practiced physical and spiritual mechanism.  You may be at the technical level of playing a certain chopin etude, but to play the etudes musically requires different skills.  

I believe that we have 2 bodies when we are playing the piano:  the physical body and the spirit.  They work together to create the performance that we all strive for.  Once you can balance both of them to your own satisfaction, you are golden.

[zheer]

  If a piece of music gives you physical discomfort due to its difficulty then its beyond one's level.
   This is what i do, first listen to a performance of it and then decide. Or simply sight read through it once ,if un-able to play through the piece at first sight at a reasonable tempo, then its possibly beyond ones level.  Speed is also the key here,anything that takes longer than a year to get to a fairly good leve,ie not necessaraly learnt perfect,but good to listen too regardless of its standard, then one should consider avoiding the piece for the time being.

[quasimodo]

Basically, one could say that as long as a piece is not entirely learned, mastered, it is beyond level. Now it's about how long it will take to get there.

[zheer]

. Now it's about how long it will take to get there.

  Whats difficult to learn will take longer, take one page at a time and dont be dis-couraged.

[thalbergmad]

For me, i consider a piece beyond me if after months of work i would not be prepared to air it publicly.

The Godowsky-Strauss-Artists Life i consider beyond me.

Thal

[ahinton]

For me, i consider a piece beyond me if after months of work i would not be prepared to air it publicly.

The Godowsky-Strauss-Artists Life i consider beyond me.

Thal

That's a shame - especially because it's also beyond wonderful! I do understand, however; to bring that off with the requisite admixture of linear and polyphonic clarity, definition, élan, elegance, intellectual drive and désinvolture (if so French a term could legitimately be used for such a Wienerwalzer-oriented masterpiece) is the very opposite of a stroll in the Schönbrunn...

Don't be discouraged, though; keep practising it!

Best,

Alistair

[lostinidlewonder]

This is quite a tricky question because we have to define how fast we want to learn a piece. If we need to learn a piece in quick time, say 2 weeks, then this reduces the amount of music we may choose, music we may actually be able to learn in 1 month easily will be impossible in 2 weeks. So time restrains is definatly something you must think about when determining if a piece if too hard for you or not.

Most people do not have time restraints and would study ONE piece for say one year. They will think that the piece is easy because they eventually managed to do it. To me when I learn a piece which is within my ability I make consisitient improvement and I can measure quite accuractly how long it will take me to complete the entire piece. With difficult pieces I find that measuring the time it takes to complete is very difficult. So once measurement of how long it should take you to learn a piece is blurred we start getting into the realms of learning a peice that is too hard for us.

[dnephi]

I like that definition Thal, I think I'll apply it.

[franzliszt2]

Something that I physically cannot do without inducucing pain upon myself. Technical dofficulty can be overcome by practice. I consider work beyond me if I cannot do it.

However it is important to realise that some stuff will take years to learn, so a Rachmaninoff concerto for example for me is totally un sightreadable, but after 6 months I expect to have it all learnt, so I don't think that the difficulty has anything to do with sightreading.

Some pieces will ALWAYS give you discomfort, I mean I recently performed Rach pag rhapsody and some passages in that are stupid, the last variation for example... that will always be hard, it will never feel easy, it was written that way, its dangerous, and thats what gives me the thrill of permorming it. All you can do with stuff like that is practice it to the best you can, but NEVER think it beyond your level. Some stuff is hard to sightread, well infact imossible, so never judge a piece by that, some things are just plain hard to learn, but not to play. Pieces with huge chordal passages need to be worked out, especially big complex chordal passages, but justbecasue you cannot read through it doesn't mean its beyond you.

[counterpoint]

How do you define a piece that is beyond your level?

I never would say this of a piece that I really like and I really want to play.
I would perhaps say it of a piece, which takes much time and energy to learn but doesn't interest me that much.
If a piece is extremely difficult and I want to be able to play it, I will study this piece for years, until I got it.

Beyond your level means for me: beyond your interest.

and don't forget

every piece is playable, if you play it slow

[canardroti]

I never would say this of a piece that I really like and I really want to play.
I would perhaps say it of a piece, which takes much time and energy to learn but doesn't interest me that much.
If a piece is extremely difficult and I want to be able to play it, I will study this piece for years, until I got it.

Beyond your level means for me: beyond your interest.

and don't forget

every piece is playable, if you play it slow

Thank you very much for this answer, this is how I've always thought about Grades and Level of pieces.

[counterpoint]

Thank you very much for this answer, this is how I've always thought about Grades and Level of pieces.

 

[debussy symbolism]

Playing pieces slow does ensure better accuracy, but studying a piece, however slowsly, that is clearly way too difficult will make you spend a lot of years on it. If you are however ready for the piece because you have tackled the challenges presented in one particular way or another, learning the particular piece will be much easier, and much faster.

[penguinlover]

I agree with counterpoint.  I tell my students that nothing is above them if they want to play it bad enough, and are willing to work until its done, however long it takes.

[thierry13]

I agree with counterpoint.  I tell my students that nothing is above them if they want to play it bad enough, and are willing to work until its done, however long it takes.

I wouldn't ask them if they want to play it bad, but if they want to play it good 

[penguinlover]

Sorry about that, maybe I should have worded my response more accurately.  To encourage him, if he is interested in a piece, and wants to play it more than anything else in the world, nothing is too difficult.

[pianistimo]

perhaps the grosse fugue is way beyond me, but i don't have any ears for  people who tell me this or that is too hard.  i have to find out for myself.  usually i don't give up.  people can tell you anything - you can't do this, you can't do that.  how do they know.  as far as i'm concerned i am the only one that can tell myself if it is beyond my level.  and then, i'll die trying.

ps imo, if you only play at your level - you're not challenging yourself beyond your comfort zone.

[steve jones]

  If a piece of music gives you physical discomfort due to its difficulty then its beyond one's level.
   This is what i do, first listen to a performance of it and then decide. Or simply sight read through it once ,if un-able to play through the piece at first sight at a reasonable tempo, then its possibly beyond ones level.  Speed is also the key here,anything that takes longer than a year to get to a fairly good leve,ie not necessaraly learnt perfect,but good to listen too regardless of its standard, then one should consider avoiding the piece for the time being.

Yeah, Im like you. Its either physicially possible or it isnt. Thats pretty much whaty defines whether Im going to try or not.

SJ

[ilikepie]

I define a piece beyond your level is a piece everyone tells you is too hard for you, and you can't find a reason why it's too hard for you.

[ramseytheii]

I cant answer your question but wanted to share an amusing anecdote.  I saw a few of Barenboims Beethoven masterclasses at Carnegie a few years ago, and he said that recently in Paris he found the score to Liszt's Don Juan fantasy in a used bookshop, and as he had never looked at it before, purchased it and returned to the hotel to read through.  He said he figured he could play about 60% of the piece, and that "pleased [him]..." until he looked at the cover and realized it was the simplified edition.

Walter Ramsey

[steve jones]

Lol.

That is a scary piece though isnt it?!

I dont think Im going to look down on the old boy for that!

SJ