SUZUKI v YAMAHA??

[pianowelsh]

Dear teachers,

Im intrigued as to your perceptions of these two methods of 'mass' piano instruction. I would particularly like to know if any of your are actively involved in teaching either of these methods or have had students transfer to you from these methods.

Can you list some of the fundamentals of these two methods so it is possible for the outsider to see what lies at the core of each of these methods and how infact they contrast with oneanother?

Your cooperation will be much appreciated.

[pianowelsh]

Do I take it here that noone knows anything about these methods?

[keyofc]

I have never heard of Yamaha teaching method,
but all I can tell you about Suzuki is my very limited understanding on it.

Their big point - is since you learn how to speak first before you can spell -
than you should learn how to play first before you can read music.

Since it is from a Japanese background and the Japanese people are very hard workers and very strict - I think it's more succesful with the Japanese.

I have a couple of friends (American) who takes their  kids to Suzuki lessons and also had two students from Suzuki

One of my friends kids have been taking lessons for years - and they don't know what a C chord is.  They call the C chord a One Chord - but they call it the one chord even if they are in the key of G.  .
But once they get sold on the idea of Suzuki they keep going.  I feel terrible when I hear them play.   One just started playing with two hands after a couple of years.

They think they are doing great when they finally memorize a piece, but they may stay on that book for over a year or two.  Perhaps my own acquaintances with Suzuki kids are unusual.  But I don't think so - as I've never an exception.

I hear that the Japaense kids can play fantastic though, so is it that the Americans are wanting the philosophy without the disipline?

Anyway - I know this is not exactly what you're asking
but it's just my two cents.

[pianowelsh]

Ok as noone else can be bothered  The difference as I understand it is precicely that the Suzuki teach ear first..listen repeat play...(very simplified) The yamah method seems to do more reading form the start but is still in the group mould. They seem to have more action oriented strategies too - ie make the kids march around the room to bet the beat internalised etc.  Im sure both methods have their down sides - what method dosent?! WHat Id really like is more of an insiders view of what each method seeks to develop as a primary.  As with all methods - particularly in a group setting - its success or failure rests hugely on the shoulders of the person up front leading it.

[rebecca0627]

Hi
I am a certified Yamaha group lesson teacher.  Yamaha education system has two major categories: Junior Music Course (ages 4-6) and Young Musician Course (ages 6-8).   Each course is 2-year long.  After that, another 2-year extension course follows.  Various teaching methods are used, i.e. imitation playing (to prep), team relay (to rehearse), pitch ID (for ear-training), solfege singing (to link pitch and notes together), rhythm steps (to sense the pulse), and lots lots more. 

The JMC course strongly emphasizes on the aural ability.  At that age, kids learn (languages for example) by ear, not by reading.  It's the best time to start the ear training.  In order to do it successfully, Yamaha Education System uses solfege/song singing which include story telling, dynamics, and articulations.  I personally think that this is really effective.  Kids not only develop good ear to identify pitch/chords but also are sensitive to musical expression/feeling.

Here is the learning process of Yamaha method: Listen, Sing, Play, Read.  So, reading is the last thing to accomplish.  I have seen students (taught by other teachers) with bad reading skill.  My students read well. 

Every method has its pros and cons.  The con that I have seen so far is the playing part.  It's very difficult to drill students the proper playing technique in a group environment.  Kids often developed bad hand form after the 2-year program. 

If you have more questions, let me know.  I will help you understand the Yamaha Method.  You can visit www.yamaha.com and read more about YMES (Yamaha Music Education System). 
 

[cora]

The truth is that students from both of these methods eventually end up taking traditional lessons.

I've had students from Yamaha come to me, but I start them off at the beginning like everybody else. I haven't had Suzuki students come to me but I have heard they don't read very well.

[pianowelsh]

It seems to me the strength of these methods is particularly for the youngest children pre reading as they develop a wonderful sense of pitch and internal rhythm.. correct me if im wrong.   I believe both Yamaha and suzuki aim for individual lessons as soon as students show progress and are confident readers.  certainly the class situation seems more Fun for the very young ones 6yrs and under?! although it seems a little worrying that the reading is a weakness in both..but one cant focus on everything.
rebecca can you give me some kind of idea what level of playing (repertoire) the kids are expected to be at at the end of each course JMC and YMC and are they reading these works or playing them by rote?? Also being totally honest could you give an approximate % of how many students in a typical class achieve the second course and are fluent readers by age 8.

[rebecca0627]

Hi Pianowelsh,

I will be very glad to answer your questions.  Your point of view and comments are objective.  I appreciate your attitude in trying to look into things instead of directly forming conclusions.   Here are answers for your questions:

Pianowelsh: It seems to me the strength of these methods is particularly for the youngest children pre reading as they develop a wonderful sense of pitch and internal rhythm.. correct me if im wrong.
Rebecca: You are absolutely right!  That is exactly what JMC is about.  YMC is somewhat a little different.  Kids at ages 6-8 are in school already.  They are able to read.    Compared to kids at ages 4-6, they are better formed physically and mentally.  Therefore, the ability to read is strongly emphasized in YMC.  [A correction to be made: JMC and YMC are different classes.  JMC kids don't go to YMC when they are 6.  They are separated branches.]

Pianowelsh:   I believe both Yamaha and suzuki aim for individual lessons as soon as students show progress and are confident readers.  certainly the class situation seems more Fun for the very young ones 6yrs and under?! although it seems a little worrying that the reading is a weakness in both..but one cant focus on everything.
Rebecca: You are right again.  The class situation is really fun.  First, we bring out the fun of music and stimulate kids' interest.  Once they get hooked up, they know how to ENJOY it.  I personally don't think that music is about sitting in front of the piano and "copy" whatever is written, especially for little kids.  That's what makes kids quit/hate piano because it is darn boring.  Music should be CREATIVE and FUN to begin with.   

Pianowelsh: can you give me some kind of idea what level of playing (repertoire) the kids are expected to be at at the end of each course JMC and YMC?
Rebecca: After the 2-year JMC program, the level is equivalent to Faber's Piano Adventure Level 2B.  They may read notes a little slower in the beginning when going for private lessons but can pick it up quickly.   For the 2-year YMC program, it's equivalent to Keith Snell Level 2.   Those kids may not have proper piano playing technique.  However, they understand musical expression naturally.   Amazingly, they don't rush the tempo, and they can quickly memorize pieces with very little mistakes. 

Pianowelsh: are they reading these works or playing them by rote?
Rebecca: That depends on the instructors.  My JMC kids read decently.  I can't say fast, but they understand line/space, skips/steps, high/low, and notes on the keyboard relatively.   Some kids taught by other instructors seem to be lack of these simple and fundamental concepts. 

Pianowelsh: Also being totally honest could you give an approximate % of how many students in a typical class achieve the second course and are fluent readers by age 8.
Rebecca: If the instructor knows how to teach note reading effectively, I would say that 70% of the JMC and YMC kids are fluent in reading once they are 3 to 6 months into private lessons. 

[cygnusdei]

KAWASAKI!!!!!

 

[pianowelsh]

I wasnt aware Kawasaki did piano courses - though it wouldnt surprise me!
Thankyou rebecca for your detailed responses. That is very helpfull. 
Does your programme deal with the reading of ledger lines by the competion of YMC? does it handle real repertoire...ie by famous composers - I find students and parents like this as it makes them feel they are accomplishing more? When do students start to look into how a piece is built..ie analysis?  Also im really intrigued by what you say about memory...are there corporate ways of teaching memory to the class..or is it principaly achieved through repetition?!?

Im sorry I ask so many questions. But I have friends and prospective students who are always asking me about these methods and they ask me if I will teach a student under 5.  I usually say NO to this as I dont feel my strength is working with very young children.  I usually recommend a general music programme for them rather than an instrument specific one unless they are about 6 or older.  I do know of  a friends daughter who attended a Yamaha programme but they had a lot of issues with the tutor and felt their daughter was severely held back by the class environment..so it would seem its not for everyone..but it strikes me that it might be a very good introduction as long as the fundamentals are clearly taught.  The way I tend to approach things with beginners is very much a giving them tools such as reading and analysing skills so that they can pick up pieces and read them quickly and easily..as I believe so much of what can be learnt must be done through their own exploration of pieces and sightreading..so I encourage this early on.  I too aim to have them memorise from the beginning BUT I begin with reading as the means of taking the information onboard then we memorise that by conducting analysis on what we have read and heard.  I understand this approach wouldnt work in class particularly well...which is one reason why I have never considered a 'method' form of teaching career..but I do find youngsters coming to me from this backgroud of class teaching and I really wnat to know what they have experienced and how I can help them develop most effecively without causing confusion for them.

[rebecca0627]

Q: Does your programme deal with the reading of ledger lines by the completion of YMC?

A: Yes.  Kids read ledger lines since BK1.  Instead of recognizing notes as A, B, C, etc., they read them as do, re, mi, etc. (fixed-Do system).

Q: Does it handle real repertoire...ie by famous composers?

A: Yes, the piano literature pieces appear in BK 4, 5, & 6.  Due to the copyrightS, YAMAHA Corporation uses pieces mostly composed by its own students or teachers.

Q: When do students start to look into how a piece is built..ie analysis?

A: I am teaching BK 3 (YMC) now.  I just told him about ABA (ternary form) because of the structure of the piece.  Compared to BK1+2, the pieces in BK3 are longer (16 measures or more).  To practice effectively, it's important to break the piece in sections.  In terms of "harmony analysis," we don't do that.  However, the kids do know about the chord progressions (e.g. I-IV-V7-I, I-IV-I-I, etc.)  of the pieces.  They don't know the Roman numerals yet.  They sing, for example CM, "Do-Mi-Sol", "Do-Fa-La", "Ti-Fa-Sol".   Every piece in the book is on the course CD w/ beautiful orchestra arrangements and distinct styles.

Q: Also im really intrigued by what you say about memory...are there corporate ways of teaching memory to the class..or is it principaly achieved through repetition?!?

A: Honestly, I have no idea how the kids in the program build the ability to memorize pieces fast.  Before learning a new piece (usually a couple of classes before introducing it), the teacher prepares students for the most difficult elements/measures/fingering of the piece.  When the piece is introduced, students would be familiar with it.  It usually takes up to 5 wks to learn a piece.  New pieces are brought in when existing pieces are still being learned.
=====================================
I wouldn't take on kids younger than 6 yrs old UNLESS they are in or have been in some kind of music course.  The dilemma I face now is that some parents are too enthusiastic.  They are so eager to have their kids play something to impress people.  They feel that YAMAHA courses, especially JMC, go too slowly.  (NOTE: JMC is actually a music course, not a keyboard class.)  They then pull their kids out of the program and start private lessons.  For 5yrs or 6yrs old kids, sitting for 15min/30min, staring at the music, practice music without really having fun with it is just so darn boring and meaningless.  Soon, piano practice becomes a daily struggle.

I have seen the long-term effect on the kids who graduated from the YAMAHA programs.  Music has been with them since they were 4/5 years old.  It has been a part of their lives.  They enjoy and understand music in a natural way.  Music has become their INSTINCT!

[pianowelsh]

Thanks for that rebecca.  Im not in anyway suggesting I would drag kids off your programmes and stick them in a boring room and make them read pieces that are too hard for them etc etc...please dont think that.  Im just trying to acknowledge taht these methods seem to have a particular strength not perhaps traditionally addressed in one to one teaching. I personally believe that one to one teaching in the 'classical' way offers benefits that a group situation where keyboard dexterity etc is secondary to 'musical skills' is unable to meet.   In my mind at the moment I see that a rounded student would have both kinds of traning in their portfolio of lessons.  I am currently teaching one lady who attended yamaha classes for a year as a beginner and her general musicianship is very good for the ammount of time she has been studying.  I have to say in all honesty though her dexterity was after one year what I would expect to accomplish in a month or less. But the background she has means that she has made quick progress technically and is now quite confident reading in both clefs and in several multi sharp/flat key signatures. I believe principally because at Yamaha she developed extremely good listening skills.  However I wonder about the speed at which motor skills are developed.  Perhaps you could give some more information about technical development on the course you teach and in fact it would be interesting to know the Yamaha policy on graded examinations and how they fit in to the scheme of things...ie does book one take you up to a grade one level in terms of technical level and repertoire?? and are students encouraged to study scales and technical pieces out with the lessons or is this discouraged. For example I know when I was young my parents were chastised by the teachers at my infant school because they had taught me my alphabet and to read a little before i went to school.  Apparently they didnt at that time like parents to do that because it interfered with the current methodoloy!! just as well my parents did mindue because I remember kids in my class who still couldnt read well by the time they went to junior school where as I was reading classics!  They did wait in regards to teaching me maths though and I still struggle with that.  I think this is the danger with methods and class learning..they will work well for 90 percent of people but there will be some who will just not be suited and it is difficult to notice this in a class setting.

With regards to memorising my query was do you have any structured way of teaching it as I know it features extensively in the Yamaha and suzuki programmes.  A way I tend to address it is a 4 stage plan!  1. read through it slowly (as if sightreading) and find all the important things to notice. then break it into very small chunks (depending on level of experinece and ability) 2. play through the passage VERY slowly - with eyes glued to the music and verbalising what you are seeing (noticing if there are scale patterns or jump s or accidentals and where the left coordinates with the RH etc) - so this several times until it can be done confidently with no mistakes 3. Repeat the above, this time the student will not look at the music but will watch their hands and will see how what they were doing looks physically on the keyboard...they still verbalise what they are doing (they may if younger need prompts)..at this stage they are looking for good fingering and they are wtaching for good positioning on the keyboard as well as developing a sense of keyboard geography.
4. The student has now played the passage several times and can tell you a verbal map of the passage without reference to the score and they knwo how it sounds aurally and how it feels and looks when they play it. They now dispense with the music and Still talking through it play the passage looking straight ahead - not watching the music or their hands. because they are disengaging the the visual element they are forcing themselves into relying upon the ear and analytical and physical elements of their playing. Once they can do this three times perfectly they dont have to verbalise anymore and they are allowed to increase the speed.  In simple pieces this means a line or two lines can be leared in about 10-15 mins so a piece can be memorised securely by a young child in a week. It develops their audio, motor, visual, analytical and reading skills and makes them careful observers of their technical habits at the same time.  Whats more when a student works in this way If they make a mistake in a lesson when playing form memory I can ask them 'what went wrong in bar 10?' and without reference to the music they can say I missed the c#and played a C, but I know what it should have been my finger was in the wrong position - so i missed it'  This kind of perception reduces the ammount of lesson time spent on teaching/correcting notes and we can look at expressive and musical possibilities.

Sorry I know that was a tangent but I just wondered whether the YMC had a principal regarding the teaching of memory skills or not? Maybe having explained my own will give more clarity to my question???