Can i jump through School of Velocity to Chopin's etudes? (Read 2908 times)

redrum232 · « on: September 04, 2006, 01:59:37 AM »

Hi you guys,

I've studied piano for nearly 4 years and i've just taken 2 months to tackle the Fantaisie impromptu, and now that piece seems quite comfortable for me. But my fingers are not so perfect that during the FI a few notes could be blurred when i sped up (about 2 or 3 notes). My teacher said that my hands are not qualified enough to play another pieces more difficult than FI, and he recommended me the School of velocity. But I was bored stiff and fell asleep when i studied those pieces and I really want to learn from Chopin etudes which really fascinated me despite the fact that thoses etudes are far harder than Czerny. I'm starting Revolultionary( this piece is quite comfortable for me) and two harder: op 10 no 8 and Ocean. Is it possible for me to jump through Czerny? I read from a topic here that it is quite stupid that when one does not have enough technique and learn Chopin Etudes. So can Chopin etudes do something good for me or that is totally inappropriate?

By the way, my fourth finger is really... dependent

, can i fix it with Chromatic etude with a very slow speed? or that piece only works with high speed? Can someone recommend me some exercises on 3rd, 4th, 5th fingers?

shun · «Reply #1 on: September 04, 2006, 02:10:03 AM »

Leopold Godowsky wrote some good excercises for 3rd, 4th and 5th fingers. When I get home toningt I'll send then to you if you like.
Also the chopin etudes are not all that difficult. Alot of them are but you could probably start with the easier one; Op. 10 no. 9? (f minor), the butterfly etude, Op. 25 no. 2 are all good ones to start with.

debussy symbolism · «Reply #2 on: September 04, 2006, 02:21:43 AM »

Greetings.

From my experience, you can't jump through Czerny. Czerny covers many many things, which are further used in the Chopin etudes. Just slightly dabbling in Czerny isn't going to have any effect. From my experience, deep Czerny study greatly pays off, that is when I have an etude in speed.

shun · «Reply #3 on: September 04, 2006, 02:42:25 AM »

Here is the godowsky exercise
Czerny Op. 821 is good. 160 8 bar etudes covering just about every technical problem

debussy symbolism · «Reply #4 on: September 04, 2006, 02:44:29 AM »

debussy symbolism · «Reply #5 on: September 04, 2006, 02:47:34 AM »

These are very interesting and helpful studies in my opinion. The book that I practice from has many many variations of these. Marguerite Long is covers about every aspect of technique in the book. When doing these exercises make sure you are very relaxed and no tension comes through.

gonzalo · «Reply #6 on: September 04, 2006, 01:24:49 PM »

Quote from: debussy symbolism on September 04, 2006, 02:21:43 AM

Greetings.

From my experience, you can't jump through Czerny. Czerny covers many many things, which are further used in the Chopin etudes. Just slightly dabbling in Czerny isn't going to have any effect. From my experience, deep Czerny study greatly pays off, that is when I have an etude in speed.

It's important to see that Debussy S. wrote " In my experience.." so if you decide to follow his advice do it at your own risk.
However,let's see what Bernhard said about this:

"There is no record that Chopin – as a teacher – ever assigned his students any Czerny whatsoever (although they have met and were on friendly terms). He did assign them Scarlatti though (and of course Bach).

All accounts we have of Chopin’s pedagogy never mention Czerny – he did assign his beginning students exercises, most notably scales, Cramer “Etudes”, Moschelles op. 70 & op. 95 and the second volume of Clementi’s “Preludes and exercises”. In his own opinion the works that best prepared for his own compositions were J. S. Bach (not only the WTC, but also the Partitas and Suites), Field’s works and Scarlatti. According to his student Emilie von Gretsh, “he gave absolute priority to Bach”.

Interestingly enough, although he regarded Mozart in great awe, he never gave any of Mozart’s pieces to his students (except Mikuli)

Hence, there is no need to do Czerny in order to tackle Chopin. (if there was, don’t you think Chopin would see to it?)"
Take care,
Gonzalo

ganymed · «Reply #7 on: September 04, 2006, 02:25:05 PM »

now that you mention it gonzola ^^! are there any books that deal with chopin's teaching methods i think ive come across of one but forgot the name thanks

gonzalo · «Reply #8 on: September 04, 2006, 02:35:16 PM »

Quote from: ganymed on September 04, 2006, 02:25:05 PM

now that you mention it gonzola ^^! are there any books that deal with chopin's teaching methods i think ive come across of one but forgot the name thanks

For a full account of Chopin’s pedagogy, see Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger “Chopin – Pianist and Teacher as seen by his Pupils” – Cambridge University Press

Take care,
Gonzalo.

shun · «Reply #9 on: September 06, 2006, 06:37:29 AM »

Chopin's Preludes also make excelent etudes.

faulty_damper · «Reply #10 on: September 06, 2006, 08:12:54 AM »

Quote

Re: Can i jump through School of Velocity to Chopin's etudes?

You can go right to Godowsky's transcriptions of Chopin's etudes if you prefer.

My teacher thought that the best way to "build technique" was to Czerny and Hanon-ize the fingers. I ignored his "advice" and went into Godowsky's transcriptions (mostly for musical purposes.) It was a pivotal moment in the improvement in the coordination of my body (not because I learned it but because I knew how.) What I was able to accomplish was impossilbe according to his ideas. I learned the first few Hanon exercises and gave up after pain in my left hand. I had never learned a complete Czerny study or at full tempo. And then I told him I was learning a Chopin/Godowsky etude...

You could imagine the doubt he may have had.

He is now a former teacher partly because of this and because taking lessons from him was demoralizing - he had little confidence in me and said I couldn't play what I wanted because "you need to be realistic... you don't have the technique". Being assigned pieces which sounded terrible are not on my list priorities.

But you probably shouldn't listen to me. I was a bad student. Not just from him but all of my past teachers.

arbisley · «Reply #11 on: September 06, 2006, 08:24:59 AM »

I believe you can if you practice the etudes in tiny sections, say half a bar or two notes even, keeping in mind that it has to be musical. I you feel determined to achieve this, it won't be necessary to to mind-boggling exercises with no result other than being able to play them, and maybe use the technique acquired to play other pieces. Learn the technique with the pieces instead. Maybe do some exercises to go with some of the etudes if you see that they are similar and will help you to learn that particular piece.

I have stopped thinkin that it's necessary to be a boring automaton to learn technique!

All the best,
arbisley

( I might say that I have been influenced by Bernhard's posts and Chang's book)

mike_lang · «Reply #12 on: September 06, 2006, 12:05:34 PM »

The probability that Czerny exercises were not used by Chopin in teaching does not obfuscate their importance. I speak only of the School of Velocity - it is the most useful of the Czerny exercises. This set facilitates the development of agility, improves sight-reading ability by feeding forty courses of patterns, and familiarizes the player with techniques typical of the pianistic idiom. Theoretically, one can skip ahead, however, the School of Velocity lays an essential foundation for the Chopin Etudes.

dnephi · «Reply #13 on: September 06, 2006, 12:10:38 PM »

Quote from: faulty_damper on September 06, 2006, 08:12:54 AM

You can go right to Godowsky's transcriptions of Chopin's etudes if you prefer.

My teacher thought that the best way to "build technique" was to Czerny and Hanon-ize the fingers. I ignored his "advice" and went into Godowsky's transcriptions (mostly for musical purposes.) It was a pivotal moment in the improvement in the coordination of my body (not because I learned it but because I knew how.) What I was able to accomplish was impossilbe according to his ideas. I learned the first few Hanon exercises and gave up after pain in my left hand. I had never learned a complete Czerny study or at full tempo. And then I told him I was learning a Chopin/Godowsky etude...

You could imagine the doubt he may have had.

He is now a former teacher partly because of this and because taking lessons from him was demoralizing - he had little confidence in me and said I couldn't play what I wanted because "you need to be realistic... you don't have the technique". Being assigned pieces which sounded terrible are not on my list priorities.

But you probably shouldn't listen to me. I was a bad student. Not just from him but all of my past teachers.

He's crazy.. don't listen...

But seriously, you have to step back and be realistic sometimes.

debussy symbolism · «Reply #14 on: September 06, 2006, 07:28:42 PM »

Exactly. Jumping right into very difficult etudes is possible, for anyone. Playing them correctly and at tempo before even attempting the easier and basic technique is impossible. Sure you could just jump into them, but guess how long you are going to be scrutinizing those modicum sections of etudes before even allowing them to sound right? With easier etudes one will not have to spend a really long while to perfect them.

daniel patschan · «Reply #15 on: September 07, 2006, 02:45:33 PM »

I can only say: don´t do it ! I JUMPED into Chopin Opus 10.1 about a year ago and it has become so frustrating. I am moving forward slower than you can imagine. I didn´t have the technique to play it, and now i learn about the consequences. I don´t like the piece any more ! Can you believe that ? Chopin Opus 10.1 induces only pain and frustration everytime i hear it. I gave it up. I lost so much time in doing the wrong (much too difficult) piece too early. About a year ago i did what some people in this forum suggested: "If you really want to play it, do it !" That´s b......t - some pieces are simply not achievable at a certain time, no matter how much you like them.

And another thing about Chopin and Czerny: Chopin suggested Clementi (beside Bach) as preparation for his studies. Now please everybody tell me: what is the difference between Clementi and Czerny when it comes to their studies ? The only difference is that Czerny wrote studies that cover a broader spectrum of technical patterns. Why should they be useless as preparation for Opus 10+25 ?

debussy symbolism · «Reply #16 on: September 07, 2006, 08:27:21 PM »

Clementi is a wonder.
I am going to start learning his Sonatas soon according to my teacher. They look very hard and am sure provide technique. If you look at them, they consist of exercises found in Czerny, only the sonatas are very musical. Czerny makes the sonatas alot easier and faster to learn and that will consequently make something else easier to learn.

faulty_damper · «Reply #17 on: September 08, 2006, 07:39:37 PM »

Quote from: debussy symbolism on September 06, 2006, 07:28:42 PM

Exactly. Jumping right into very difficult etudes is possible, for anyone. Playing them correctly and at tempo before even attempting the easier and basic technique is impossible. Sure you could just jump into them, but guess how long you are going to be scrutinizing those modicum sections of etudes before even allowing them to sound right? With easier etudes one will not have to spend a really long while to perfect them.

This is one commonly held belief about "building technique." Technique is not something you need to "build". You either have it, you learn it, or you never get it. If you try to build it, you will be building forever attempting to "strenghthen your fingers", gaining "complete finger independence", etc., you'll never get it.

Technique is not something you learn directly from any study or piece of music. It is entirely possible to learn many pieces of music with an in-efficient/un-effective technique and still sound good or even great... you'll look uncomfortable doing it, though.

There are no "basic techniques" in piano playing. There are commonly recurring motions and combinations of motions that allow you to play either very efficiently and effectively to playing just badly and sounding badly.

ilikepie · «Reply #18 on: September 08, 2006, 10:30:18 PM »

If you really like the etudes, I would suggest you wait. Czerny is a good technique enhancer. I would suggest some easier etudes(except chopin) first to build up technique. Like daniel patschan said, if it takes you too long to learn a piece, you will lose interest then hate it.

cloches_de_geneve · «Reply #19 on: September 10, 2006, 07:15:44 AM »

Quote from: faulty_damper on September 06, 2006, 08:12:54 AM

You can go right to Godowsky's transcriptions of Chopin's etudes if you prefer.

My teacher thought that the best way to "build technique" was to Czerny and Hanon-ize the fingers. I ignored his "advice" and went into Godowsky's transcriptions (mostly for musical purposes.) It was a pivotal moment in the improvement in the coordination of my body (not because I learned it but because I knew how.)

In principle, I concur with this approach. I don't think it's crazy. In general I find these "Am I ready to play xy..." threads rather funny. It is as if trying out a piece for which you are not ready would lead to some kind of major irreversible disaster. I mean just try them out ... just try, and you'll see after a couple of weeks if you are up to it or not. If you don't try you will never know and you might have stripped yourself of a chance to make substantial progress.

This said, I would not recommend just any of the etudes. I would definitely not start with op. 10/1, which is among the five most difficult ones (with 10/2, 10/4, 25/6 and 25/11) -- Horowitz considered it the hardest of them all. Nor would I begin with the Godowsky transcriptions of the Chopin etudes

. I would go for etudes such as op. 10/5 (black keys), op. 10/12 (revolutionary), or op. 25/2.