Question for those who have tried self teaching?

[skt1991]

Hello everyone. The following questions are directed towards those who are self taught, or have attempted to teach themselves.
This is completely unrelated, but Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima really hurts my ears.
Ok back on topic.
I have been learning the piano for about 2 and a half years. Not really serious studies but still half way decent studying. In the past half a year or so, I have sit down maybe once or twice seriously at the piano because of a lack of drive and lack of visible improvement. I know music studies are gradual learning processes but I would like to see, however little, some improvements on a day to day basis. Ok now on to the reason why I made this topic.

First are you completely self taught?
If you had a teacher, did you see notable differences?

Second, can you approximate your skill level in terms of 1-10. 1 being basic mary had a little lamb,and 10 being those who study large scale works (ballades, concertos)

How did you attain the level you are playing at? Perhaps you can name technical studies that you liked(czerny, hanon, etc)or certain group of works (bach inventions) you used.

How long did you practice a day and did you have a schedule you followed?

Ummm.. I had more questions but I can't seem to remember them. I will post them if I remember them.

My story...
I've been wanting to take piano lessons since I was like 5, but my parents never bothered to take me seriously. We even have a piano cause my mom used to play.
Since I never got formal training, I took piano at my highschool freshmen year. I liked it alot, but I never learned anything in that class except for note names. Everything else was attained on my own.
First my first year of piano. My older brother played a little piano, so my first piece was one of his old pieces. It was the theme from the pathetique sonata second movement. It was like grade 3, but whatever. It took me probably a good month or two to learn it. At this time, I knew very little about notes. I played a couple of months of clarinet so I knew basic notes in the treble clef,but I still had to decode every single bass clef note and most of the treble clef. Within the first year I made decent progress. Nothing spectacular, but I liked the pace I was going at. Within the school year, I learned the moonlight sonata first movement, theme from pathetique, and the waltz of the flowers. I learned other smaller pieces, but I don't remember them at all. During this year, I would practice a decent amount, but very inconsistently. Sometimes I wouldn't practice for a week and then practice 3 hours the next day. I had no real problems at this point and I was pretty happy about the piano.
My second year was when everything started to suck, but not until the end. This is where the questions tie in to my story. The beginning of the year was fine. I was still going at a pretty nice pace. The first piece I learned at the beginning of the second year of highschool was the funeral march. I was in advanced piano class this time. it  wasn't actually advanced, but they needed a name for it.  The year went on, and near the end of the second year I learned Schubert Impromptu Op.90 no.4. After that piece I became completely lost. I wasn't able to proceed to harder pieces because my base technique was terrible. When I tried to acquire technique through easier pieces, I became extremely bored.  I tried pretty hard to keep with piano but the complete stop after all my progress was extremely demoralizing.

So now, I still don't have a teacher, and I am unable to progress on my own. I'm not sure what to do now so I would like those who are self taught and are about grade 6 or 7( I would grade myself a 4) to give advice on how to pass this barrier. I am somewhat at a loss on what to ask. Perhaps if I knew the right questions, I could get past this, but I don't.

[thalberg]

The composer originally called it "Study for 52 Strings" or something.

It was the PUBLISHER who named it Threnody for the Victimos of Hiroshima.  Did you know that?  I suppose it makes sense in light of how much it's hurting your ears.

[mcgillcomposer]

The composer originally called it "Study for 52 Strings" or something.

It was the PUBLISHER who named it Threnody for the Victimos of Hiroshima.  Did you know that?  I suppose it makes sense in light of how much it's hurting your ears.

Yep - and that is what made the work famous...



... but in all fairness, Penderecki is a very good composer.

[gyzzzmo]

1 No, im not completely self-taught. I had lessons from my 4th till my 12th.
2 Im on grade 8/9 lvl (i think, LRSM).
3 I mainly used the chopin etudes for my technique. Altough i can't play them all, most of them are on performance lvl now (took me like 7 years  ).
Also used abit of Hanon, for scale training.
4 No real schedule. I play an average of like 2 or 3 hours a day (easy to maintain since i play in cafe/restaurants alot) and i try to do some slow etude practise every day. Thats my schedule i gues :p

[term]

First are you completely self taught?
If you had a teacher, did you see notable differences?

Yes, i'm completely self taught. I had a teacher for 2 months, but i quit.
Noteable differences: More repertoire with a teacher. But also more conflicts^^
And more useless and only partly true things learned. I rather stick to my methods.

Second, can you approximate your skill level in terms of 1-10. 1 being basic mary had a little lamb,and 10 being those who study large scale works (ballades, concertos)

I'd probably be a better pianist with a teacher, but less creative. Skill level: Don't know. Where would you put the Bach Busoni chaconne? ("hardest" piece i can play).
I can do quite a number of technically difficult stuff, but just in spontaneous improvisation, when it comes to learning a piece which is approx. of the same difficulty it's something else. As soon as i play written music and know exactly how i want it to sound, i suck. When i improvise, it just comes out beautifully.

How did you attain the level you are playing at? Perhaps you can name technical studies that you liked(czerny, hanon, etc)or certain group of works (bach inventions) you used.

I never did any, everything i can do just came with improvisation.
There's an exception however, i believed (and still do) that being able to do fast trills/tremolos between any fingers and in any interval is the basic element from which one can derive many difficult techniques. Both hands together in symmetrical practise or individually; also combine different fingerings, like 45 trill with the left, 12 with the right at the same time etc...i think, if you can do that with good control and at high speed you're well prepared for pretty much everything. I haven't tried out however because i'm very lazy when it comes to learning new pieces.
I also practise fast repeated 5 note chords (with jumps).
I think if you like the challenge and think it's fun doing the liszt on the piano, technique comes naturally and automatically.

How long did you practice a day and did you have a schedule you followed?

I think i spent at least one hour at the piano, even if i was not really doing something productive. Often enough i stayed away from the piano for weeks, so no daily drill or much discipline really. Sometimes i improvised 8 hours through like on amphetamine^^
So no schedule at all, i just do what i want. That's why i'm not a good pianist at all 
But when it comes to improvising i'm ok...in short, my pianistic skills are sufficient for what i do.

[m1469]

Hello everyone.

Hello, skt .

I have been learning the piano for about 2 and a half years. Not really serious studies but still half way decent studying. In the past half a year or so, I have sit down maybe once or twice seriously at the piano because of a lack of drive and lack of visible improvement. I know music studies are gradual learning processes but I would like to see, however little, some improvements on a day to day basis.

This is very reasonable, I think.  However, you will want to define your own way of measuring improvement/success.  You will want to be as specific as you can be in defining for yourself how you measure success.  As you become specific about this, you will find that your goals and aims will want to be more specific and obvsiously they will want to be geared toward your definition of success and improvement.

First are you completely self taught?

I am always a bit of a funny interpretor of things, I think.  I think in some ways everybody can consider themselves entirely self taught, and in other ways nobody can.  For practical purposes, though, I would say "no" that I am not completely self-taught.  However, as it turns out, all of my years in the piano world have been very self-motivated, and most of those years have been without a formal teacher in the classic sense.

If you had a teacher, did you see notable differences?

hmmmm... this is a good question.  Yes, there were noteable differences, I suppose (though I am not sure where to attribute these differences). 

1.  Repertoire :  I generally learned bigger pieces during this time, however, I am not certain this has been a "good" difference since I also acquired a lot of "negatives" along with my repertoire acquisition.  Also, I never *really* did this repertoire true justice by my own standards.  I could more or less play them, and if I didn't always get in my own way I probably could have played them better, but I just wasn't satisfied; I knew something was still missing (but I really had no conscious idea what, exactly, that was).

2.  Technique :  I actually had NO idea what "technique" meant and this didn't become any more clear for me during my years at Uni.  All I knew is that so-and-so down the hall or in the room next door could play such-and-such at this and that speed and that I ought to compete with that if I want to make/maintain a reputation or spot in my teacher's studio and among the student-body.  This led to inefficient and hap-hazard practicing "methods" for me, among other things.

3.  Attitude :  I still am working on some things related to this, but my attitude was definitely very affected during that time (and, again, my Uni studies are my main thing I can compare to).  I often felt *very* insecure and quite inadequate.  Plus, the entire environment felt quite contrived to me, and the environment we learn in can make a very big difference to our learning process, regardless of the teacher.  My teacher would sometimes remind me that music was the goal, that playing was not about ME but about the music and so forth.  But, I really had no idea what that actually meant, though I was willing to learn.  I just knew, though, that I had to get myself ready to play a jury by the end of the term and things similar to that.  Music first ?  Sounds good, but I was on a time pressure and just had to get things into my "fingers."  As wonderful as "music first" sounded, that was not the outcome of my practicing, in most cases.

Bear in mind that a lot of this also has to do with my particular reactions, thoughts and feelings to formal institutions and "settings" that I feel or sense are uncomfortable for me (for whatever reason).

4.  Performance :   I performed more, and more often had pieces "performance ready," but these performances were not confidence-building at almost any one particular point.  As a matter of fact, they had an opposite effect for quite awhile.  This is very related to my practicing habits and concepts, of course.

5.  Practice :  As I mentioned above, this particular area was pretty hazy and haphazard for me.  Sure, I "practiced" more, at least in the classic sense of the word, but what I "gained" from it was definitely questionable.  I basically had NO idea how to practice.  Sure, things like "practice slowly" or "one hour of concentrated practice is better than 3 hours of unfocused practicing" were said ... but, what does that really mean ?  Well, I did eventually start to develop some clear concepts of practicing toward the end of my senior year, but I didn't necessarily even recognize them as such at the time because my head was so filled with other stuff that I wasn't sure which way was up and which way was down.  If I could sum up, most of my practice at the time was fairly aimless (still need to work on that), nervous/anxious, haphazard, competitive, insecure and clueless -- and, I also had little idea what to do about that even though I sensed all of these things were present.  Of course, this is very tied to my own particular attitudes.   

Of course, if I were truly honest with myself, I would say I still have a lot of work to do in these areas.  Writing them out has been a bit illuminating for me.  However, I would say that there is some "improvement" at this point, and I have not had a "teacher" in the classic sense for a few years now.  So, how do I measure improvement ? 

Well, I observe that I have more of a sense of ease at the instrument now than I did back then. 

I know how to develop very specific motions for anything that I play.

I know how to be more specific with regard to practicing (doing what I know to do, however, is a bit of a different monster .. hee hee).

Because I know how to be more specific in these areas, my practicing is capable of being much more productive.

My attitude has somewhat "relaxed" since then (though I still need work in this area).  At least at the time I do not have certain pressures to learn a certain piece by a certain time.  What that means is that I take more time exploring subjects that I find to be important and of interest to my growth -- and I pay more attention to really doing it "right" since nobody is listening to me practice and I am not preoccupied with trying to sound a particular way for them. 

Second, can you approximate your skill level in terms of 1-10. 1 being basic mary had a little lamb,and 10 being those who study large scale works (ballades, concertos)

This has always been a very funny thing to me.  My skill level ?  I haven't any idea and find it very comical to try to attach a number to this concept (though, okay, I "get" it).  I find it a bit silly to even try to actually "evaluate" it in the classic sense (this is just my opinion at this point in my life).  When I was in Uni and directly following that time (I had another teacher following Uni, for a while), I played bigger pieces -- ballades, concertos, Chopets, some wild and crazy Liszt and so on.  On a sheerly surface level, one could probably say I have played those "decently," though I, myself, could actually not live with even describing it as such.  There was *always* something missing to me.  So, was I actually "at" that level ? 

A couple of years back, I believe I actually reached an utter crisis in my concept of playing.  I felt I could not even play a SINGLE note with satisfaction.

At this point, I would rather play much smaller works and have these live up to my own standard, and that is exactly what I have decided to do.  I have gone "back" to the Anna Magdelena Buchlein by JS Bach (okay, there is speculation that he did not actually compose this collection ... but I guess that's another subject), for example.  I played one menuet from that collection up to my standard, and this is the first piece in my entire life that I have ever felt I truly have done any form of justice to by my OWN standard.  Playing that one little menuet is more satisfying to me than all of those other works I have "learned" in the past, combined.

As far as what I would like from my "skill level" -- it is pretty simple.  I would just like to feel free in expressing my musical intentions whether it be through pieces, improvisation, composing, teaching ... whatever.  My current standard is freedom, comfort and ease.

How did you attain the level you are playing at? Perhaps you can name technical studies that you liked(czerny, hanon, etc)or certain group of works (bach inventions) you used.

hmmmm ... through a bunch of heartache, suffering, and pain ... hee hee (sorry for any of you whom this bugs, but it's true for me).  Okay, there has been some pretty happy times in there, too.  But, there has been A LOT of trial and error.  A LOT of "do overs" -- A LOT of "restarts" -- A LOT of thinking, processing, research, and a HUGE desire to learn and grow.  I could say it has been through playing through as much music and studies as I could get my hands on, but those have only been a certain element and not even the most important one (as far as I am concerned).  What has mattered the MOST to me (at this point) is becoming much more kinesthetically aware of my movements, learning how to balance and center myself at the instrument, and learning some very specific motions and concept of motions that can be applied to nearly anything I am playing.  Some of this I have learned from a specific (wonderful) person, and some of this I have learned from reading books -- in any case, I have "made it my own" only through my own application and study of the concepts.

How long did you practice a day and did you have a schedule you followed?

When my first priority was being at the piano for as much time as possible (that was the only thing I "knew" to do to improve), I would practice religiously ( ) for 5-7 hours a day.  And, yes, I did this at more or less the same time everyday.

Well, I have written a lot more than I intended to write ... LOL.  I hope it is somewhat helpful anyway.  I will just add that we always have some sort of teacher and learning experience happening at all times.  Whatever/whomever we are learning from IS our teacher, however, yes, certain people can be extremely helpful.  Also, I have learned a lot from the things that did not work for me, too.  One can learn from anything.  I will need to come back to address your story .

[nyonyo]

If I were you, I'd rather get a very knowledgeable  piano teacher (at least master or doctorate level)  but do not take lesson regularly. You need somebody who can guide you so that you will not have bad habits. It is hard to break bad habits.

In the past, I had piano lesson here and there but never been consistent. My background was playing electronic organ. I was pretty advance, competed up to national level. I basically like to compete. Therefore, about 6 months ago, I made a decision to compete in an amateur piano competition when I am ready. I searched for the best teacher whom I can afford and willing to teach me. Fortunately, I found one without any problem. I was afraid that nobody wanted to teach me. I have taken lesson for the last 4 months. By taking lesson and paying kind of expensive, it forces me to practice. I practice 2 hours a day, and for the last 4 months I improve tremendously due to his instruction and more importantly because of my consistent practice and the willingness to improve.

There were times I was kind of wanting to give up especially when I could not do certain thing. But after practicing the same thing for several days, I am always able to do what i need to do. For example: I could not do many trills in Mozart K330. But after practicing for several days, I can do all of them beautifully.

The key is that you MUST want to improve and practice hard. Ideally, a good teacher will help to solve the problem. There is a problem, however, to have a teacher who is a concert pianist. Everything is easy for them, therefore, they cannot understand why we cannot do certain things. We need to work ourselves to overcome our shortcoming (be creative and think a lot on how to overcome certain things). They just like to teach the interpretation of the music that we learn but not really teach the mechanic of playing the piece. They expect that we can do every single little things written in the book. Basically, they just want to shape our playing.

The good thing about having knowledgeable teacher and concert pianist teacher, we most likely will not have incorrect interpretation.

In addition, you need to be active, ask a lot of question on how to improve your playing. For example, in the past I was not able to play a scale evenly and fast. I asked him to teach me on how to play a scale smoothly and fast. He showed me what I did wrong and also showed me how to practice. Within several days, I was able to improve the quality of my scale playing ability. Basically, you need to drive the lesson because everything is too easy for this kind of piano teacher.

[m1469]

If I were you, I'd rather get a very knowledgeable  piano teacher (...)

I think this is ideal, but even if a person has the fortune of working with a teacher who is truly a right fit (which matters more than particular degrees and so on), this particularity should never actually replace a student's independent study, but it would rather compliment it.  I think a  "good" teacher helps an individual learn how to have independent study, but then can also wildly compliment and heighten it. 

I think it is probably better for a pianist to study independently than it is for a pianist to study with a teacher whom is a wrong fit.  However, if you happen to be a person who thinks along the lines of what I just said, your standards are probably such that finding a teacher whom you feel is truly a right fit for you may pose a bit of a challenge.  And, I think it is time-worthy to pay attention to this challenge.