Level 5 Chopin?

[aaron_ginn]

Greetings!  I'm a beginner who's been playing for a little over four months looking for something new to start working on.  I'm currently working on three pieces.  These are as follows:

1) Bach Invention 4 in Dm
2) Maple Leaf Rag by Scott Joplin
3) 3rd movement of the Moonlight Sonata.

I can play about half of the Bach Invention although it's the piece I've worked the least on, about 80 perecnt of the Maple Leaf Rag and about 10% of the Moonlight badly!   I had been working on the 1st movement of the Moonlight, but I'm at the point where I can play all of it nearly mistake-free (although it still doesn't sound the way it should - that will come in time).  Now it's time to start something new.  I was thinking of taking on something by Chopin that would be around a level 5 difficulty (about what the Bach and Joplin pieces rate, I believe).  I don't want anything easier than that so please don't try to talk me out of it.  I'm learning much more quickly (and enjoying playing more) by taking on pieces that are above my head than by aiming low.

Any reccomendations?

Thanks.

[pianowelsh]

Buy Eleanor Bailies book on Chopin (a performers guide) it is brilliant at grading all chopins solo works and gives good explainations on style and how to practice the pieces. it will last you too as it covers all the really difficult stuff too..an investment for years to come..espec at the rate your progressing.

[swim4ever_22]

Perhaps this can help you.


https://pianoforum.net/smf/index.php/topic,2958.msg25879.html#msg25879
(Easiest Chopin pieces - grades 4-5-6)

[steve jones]

Preludes - 4, 6, 7, 9, 15, 20 should all be accessible to you.

Perhaps a couple of the Waltzes. Op69 No2 is very nice and about Gr6 level (its not too hard at all).

Also, if you want to move up a touch, perhaps look at the Nocturnes. Op9 No2 isnt so bad. Op9 No1 also, except for the deadly RH runs that are killing me right now, lol.

Im not sure but I think there are also a couple of easier Mazurka's.

SJ

[pianowelsh]

Really Chopins works start to kick in at upper grade 4 level there are quite a number as its been mentioned of ones around the gd 5 level but the majority are in the 6-8 category with a large body of his work being 8+.  Generally thepreludes, waltzes, mazurkas etc are accessible for those of grade 6 or lower (with odd exceptions) things like impromptus, ballades, scherzos, etudes, rondos, variations etc are post grade 8 assignments - by and large.

[aaron_ginn]

Thanks all!  This gives me plenty of options to start.

[maestoso]

Greetings!  I'm a beginner who's been playing for a little over four months looking for something new to start working on.

I'm finding any level bach is challenging. i've been playing about as long as you working on chopin nocturnes, and as well they are beautiful, i find now my want to learn  smaller pieces for technique is overpowering my need to play difficult pieces. I am the same way i wanted to play the stuff i shouldn't like fantasie impromptu, but in reading old posts about people just diving in to play stuff above their level, i find myself wanting more out of it than that. i mean simple little bach pieces have challenging technique and are amazingly beautiful. i don't want to sit here and discourage you just wanted to give some input to let you know there is more than notes to these works and there is technique building challenges in everything. good luck and may the force be with you!

[aaron_ginn]

maestoso,

That's probably good advice.  I'm already working on one piece way above my head.  Perhaps I'll look into another Bach Invention.  The one I'm learning is quite fun to play and is also very challenging.  My fingering has improved noticeably since I've started working on it.  I can see why these works are considered to be among the finest teaching pieces ever written.

Thanks again!

[kelly_kelly]

Please no one jump on me for this, but... is it possible that the Moonlight might not be the greatest piece for you at this time?

There. Now let the controversy start 

[debussy symbolism]

Greetings.

Are you currectly studying with a teacher? Because a teacher should direct you in repertoire that is best for you. If you say that you can play 10% of the Moonlight sonata movement badly, that means to me that you aren't quite ready for that piece. Tackling on a very challenging piece isn't going to help you as much as tackling easier pieces that will take you a shorter while to complete.

To the extent of my knowledge, Chopin did write a few easier preludes that are quite beautiful. Perhaps you may want to look at them.

Hope this helps.

[stormx]

Playing for 4 months and currently tackling Moonlight's 3º movement?
It looks pretty unbeleivable to me...

I see 3 possibilities here:

1. You are a prodigy. Hats off in this case.

2. You think you can "play" it, but it sounds pretty horribly actually  (extremely slow tempo, lot of wrong notes, bad phrasing, bad dinamics, etc etc, all problems arising from lacking  the technique and musicallity needed to play this piece).

3. You are just trying to impress people with an overstatement.

[aaron_ginn]

Playing for 4 months and currently tackling Moonlight's 3º movement?
It looks pretty unbeleivable to me...

I see 3 possibilities here:

1. You are a prodigy. Hats off in this case.

2. You think you can "play" it, but it sounds pretty horribly actually  (extremely slow tempo, lot of wrong notes, bad phrasing, bad dinamics, etc etc, all problems arising from lacking  the technique and musicallity needed to play this piece).

3. You are just trying to impress people with an overstatement.

*Sigh*

I said I play 10% of it badly, so that rules out both options 1 and 3.  Actually it rules out 2 as well since I obviously don't "think" I can play it yet.  There's a big difference between playing the notes and playing the notes well.  I'm just having fun and working through a piece that is way over my head.  I'm a 36-year old engineer who has no ambitions about becoming a professsional musician.  If you want a little more background, please see this thread.

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php/topic,16052.msg234317.html#msg234317

So what's wrong with learning something very difficult if I'm enjoying it and I can see myself making progress?  I'd rather spend the time learning something I'll enjoy playing for the rest of my life than obscure little pieces.

[kelly_kelly]

*Sigh*

I said I play 10% of it badly, so that rules out both options 1 and 3.  Actually it rules out 2 as well since I obviously don't "think" I can play it yet.  There's a big difference between playing the notes and playing the notes well.  I'm just having fun and working through a piece that is way over my head.  I'm a 36-year old engineer who has no ambitions about becoming a professsional musician.  If you want a little more background, please see this thread.

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php/topic,16052.msg234317.html#msg234317

So what's wrong with learning something very difficult if I'm enjoying it and I can see myself making progress?  I'd rather spend the time learning something I'll enjoy playing for the rest of my life than obscure little pieces.

There are several problems:

1. You may frustrate yourself when you find that, despite great effort on your part, you are unable to play it.

2. You may play it badly.

3. You may spend so much time attempting to attain the unattainable that you will limit the scope of your repertoire.

4. You may embarrass yourself.

5. Your bad experiences with the piece may cause you to hate it.

If none of these possibilities bothers you, go ahead. However, there is much more chance of your being able to "enjoy" playing it (which it seems as though you aspire to do), if you set it aside and wait until you have developed the necessary technique.

Please don't interpret these statements as insults- I am not trying to belittle or offend you. I am merely trying to advise you (I have had many experiences with attempting pieces above my level, none of which ended well  )

[ada]

Agreed with kelly_kelly.

I don't see why anyone would want to sweat their way through a piece that is way out of reach for them when they could have the satisfaction of playing something at their level, or just below, very well in a few days or weeks.

There's a lot to be said for "obscure little pieces" you can play with ease and style as opposed to struggling through overplayed but demanding pieces your fingers and head aren't ready for.

If you get something out of tackling a difficult piece, well you should obviously do it. I suppose it's like  working out a sudoku puzzle or something. Personally, I just get bored and find it a waste of time.

My rule of thumb is, if I can't sight read it through first off, or in sections for longer pieces, I'm not ready to learn it and I'll put it aside for the time being.

I'd be very surprised if anyone could sight read the third movement of the moonlight or play it by ear after four months unless they are a freak with associated mental peculiarities.

[debussy symbolism]

By sightreading do you mean actually playing it at a slow tempo, or just actually realizing what the notes on the score are? Very different situations. Not being able to coherently sightread the music does in no way signify that you aren't ready for it. It just means that you will be spending more time figuring out the notes. Try Bach's polyphonic work: do you instantly sightread many voices at the same time? I would think that that would pose a bit of a problem. Instead, instead of working out two voices at a time, I spend time on one and then the other, only combining them when they are ready. Although this case might be a little bit different, the point is the same: not being able to sighread it somewhat coherently does in no way imply that the piece is way too difficult for you.


Best.

[ada]

By sightreading do you mean actually playing it at a slow tempo, or just actually realizing what the notes on the score are? Very different situations. Not being able to coherently sightread the music does in no way signify that you aren't ready for it. It just means that you will be spending more time figuring out the notes.

I mean picking up a piece you haven't seen before, or haven't seen for a while,  and getting through it so it hangs together. I don't mean playing it perfectly. It might be slow and imperfect and you might have to leave off ornaments and make corrections as you go,  but basically you should be able to play the piece all the way through in a way which bears some semblance to what it will eventually sound like.

Try Bach's polyphonic work: do you instantly sightread many voices at the same time? I would think that that would pose a bit of a problem. Instead, instead of working out two voices at a time, I spend time on one and then the other, only combining them when they are ready.

I stand corrected, Debussy! You are entirely right of course  . Yes, with a polyphonic piece you should be able to sight read each individual voice through before getting your teeth into it. If you can't sight read it voice by voice, it's too hard.

not being able to sighread it somewhat coherently does in no way imply that the piece is way too difficult for you.

sure, maybe not for everyone. But in my humble case, I like to be able to do what I've described above cos it works for me 

[debussy symbolism]

You are agreeing with me? I find that difficult to believe. No one ever agrees with me, that is those that are around my age. What's the catch?


Its okay I am just joking.

[ada]

You are agreeing with me? I find that difficult to believe. No one ever agrees with me, that is those that are around my age. What's the catch?

haha don't sound so suprised. You just said something sensible, for once 

[the_duck]

I mean picking up a piece you haven't seen before, or haven't seen for a while,  and getting through it so it hangs together. I don't mean playing it perfectly. It might be slow and imperfect and you might have to leave off ornaments and make corrections as you go,  but basically you should be able to play the piece all the way through in a way which bears some semblance to what it will eventually sound like.

i'd have to humbly disagree with you on the sightreading point. i find sightreading and learning pieces to be two entirely different disciplines, so different in fact that they're barely related. like many others on this forum i'm sure, my sightreading is at a pretty basic level. if i only learned pieces i could sightread through (even slowly and inaccurately), then my selection of repertoire would be unbelievably limited. at the same time, i'm not advocating learning pieces way above one's level. i find that listening to a piece and having a careful look at its most difficult section is the best way to assess whether it is the right level for you or not, as well as closely monitoring your progress. i'm currently working on the winter wind, a piece which i could not sightread in a million years, but one that is actually not too difficult once you start to solve the technical problems.

i can obviously see how for some people (particularly good sightreaders), sightreading through a piece provides a good yardstick of how suitable that piece is, but for those of us not blessed with good sightreading i would say that it really isn't that relevant.

[debussy symbolism]

haha don't sound so suprised. You just said something sensible, for once 

Ada how old are you. Around 20? I am next to certain that you have brown hair. Possibly white, but most likely brown. Am I right?