But Is it wrong?

[steveolongfingers]

I have found a way of teaching scales, i read it in a book about chopin, so im pretty sure that alot of people use it. Teaching scales with many black keys, D flat, B major, ect?  Should i use this method or not?  

[ayahav]

the first scale I learnt was E major...

[schnabels_grandson]

I was taught scales in this order:
C
G
D
A
E
B
f#
Db
Ab
Eb
Bb
F Major.

[bernhard]

I have found a way of teaching scales, i read it in a book about chopin, so im pretty sure that alot of people use it. Teaching scales with many black keys, D flat, B major, ect?  Should i use this method or not?  

Yes, you should.

Start with the three “black keys” scales: B major, Db major and Gb major. The reasons to do so are as follows:

1.      They fit the hand very well: the thumbs will have no problems passing under or over, and the fingering is completely natural: 23 on Db-Eb and 234 on Gb-Ab-Bb with the thumbs on the white notes. There is never any confusion about when to pass the third or the fourth finger. And it is very easy to ingrain the alternative passing of the 3rd and 4th finger.

2.      They get the student used to play in the “grey” area of the piano, if they start only playing white keys (as is the case with most beginner methods) they will get the habit of playing at the edge of the keyboard with the thumbs hanging in the air. By starting with these scales, they must bring the hands forward.

3.      They start straight away to feel the geography of the keyboard in terms of touch, since they are dealing with black notes and referring to them in order to find the white notes. This will have far reaching consequences in regards to sight-reading later on.

4.      Since these scales are usually perceived as “difficult”, mastering them first will be a big boost in self-confidence.

5.      It gets the student used to flats and sharps straight away.

6.      By getting used to this fingering (thumbs on white keys, 3rd and 4th on black keys), using the unorthodox (but very efficient) fingering I described elsewhere, becomes a piece of cake.

But it is important to teach not only how to play the scales, but also their tone-semitone structure, and the naming of notes. (Teach Gb major as F# major as well).and only start on minor scales once all major scales have thoroughly mastered.

Apparently Beethoven also used to teach B major from the very first.

The majority of piano teachers I spoke to were very surprised about this, so I do not think it is a very common method.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[faulty_damper]

I love the B major scale because it fits my hands so easily!  The black keys just fall into place and makes playing easy as well.  That has to be my favourite scale, too bad it isn't the best sounding one.

The C-maj scale I would avoid teaching at first because when I was younger, I had no idea the black keys were supposed to be played!  I didn't even know you could play them or why they were even there.  It was only the white keys that were focused on.  So emphasis on all the keys is best - both the black and white ones.

[comme_le_vent]

yep b major is the easiest - but i never practiced scales at all, except c major - to get the basic thumb under movement mastered.

i dont believe in practicing scales outside of pieces...

[ahmedito]

I NEVER start with C major. Typically I teach B major for the right hand and E major for the left. Starting B major in both hands always brings me problems beacuase the left hand crosses over the 4th finger and I usually like to cover crossing the tumb under the 3rd before the 4th.

I start scales like this: B major up with right hand, E major down with left hand, B major down with right hand, and E major down with left hand.... with the kids, I actually like to have them combine both scales simultaneously after some time...

[belvoce]

comme_le_vent, I'm relieved to find another pianist that
doesn't practice scales outside of pieces.  

[lc3606]

Regarding not practicing scales outside of pieces --

This is heard quite often now-adays.  But I just don't see how a student can run off the scales that occur within pieces of literature if they haven't prepared for them.  It seems to me that it isn't the most effective and efficient method to practice scales only as you run across them in literature.  What happens when sightreading?  A pianist who knows their scales well can run them off instinctively - but if you've never studied them?  What then?

[bernhard]

Regarding not practicing scales outside of pieces --

This is heard quite often now-adays.  But I just don't see how a student can run off the scales that occur within pieces of literature if they haven't prepared for them.  It seems to me that it isn't the most effective and efficient method to practice scales only as you run across them in literature.  What happens when sightreading?  A pianist who knows their scales well can run them off instinctively - but if you've never studied them?  What then?

You have a good point there, lc.

I think that there are two very different meanings attached to “not playing scales outside pieces”. One is simply not to practise scales at all, and simply tackle whatever scale run/scale fragment may appear in a piece. I have little use for such an approach. Ultimately it is motivated by laziness.

The other meaning to which I subscribe wholeheartedly is to practise scales, but to practise them as they relate to a piece. This means for instance to practise scales in all the keys that appear in a piece. Or if a piece is based in wholetone scales (e.g. Debussy’s La fille aux cheveux du Lin) to practise such scales as preparation to learn the piece. The aims of such an exercise are not simply limited to physical dexterity, but also – and more importantly – to get one’s ear used to the tonality of the piece, to the ways the composer uses the degrees of the scale to structure the piece, to the harmonic and melodic relationships. Therefore I submit that scales should be practised only in relation to pieces – this second meaning being taken for granted .

But there are another two reasons to do so, and they are better understood if we examine the alternative: to practise scales by themselves.

Most people who practise scales as an end in themselves do so either because they are convinced of their value as a technical exercise, or because they have to perform them at examinations. The problem is, if you practise scales for these reasons, it will be very difficult to keep it going. The boredom of it will eventually get to even the most self disciplined individual, and as soon as you start getting any good, you will stop doing it since the motivation to do it has been fulfilled. This means that your scale practice is going to be ultimately inconstant: you practise until you start getting good at which point your motivation to do them decreases at the same rate as you are getting good. Ultimately practising scales in themselves has no meaning and human beings are basically fuelled by meaning. Take the meaning away and whatever interest might there be will vanish quickly. This is reason number one.

Reason number two, is that practising scales outside pieces is very limited, and will eventually become mechanical. Most people who practise scales routinely practise only the diatonic scales (minor and major) and chromatic scales. But there are much more. Nicolas Slominsky “Thesaurus of scales and melodic patterns” list over 1300 of them.

Therefore, practising scales outside pieces is pretty much self defeating/meaningless.

On the other hand, if you let the pieces guide your study of scales, not only you will be giving meaning to the whole enterprise (and learning a lot about your piece) as you will end up learning far more scales than you ever thought possible. But this is not an approach for the lazy or the mechanically minded.

Best wishes,
Bernhard