The inventions - learn them all or not?

[hikky]

Hello, I'm learning the 1st invention by Bach at the moment. It's still quite difficult for me as I've been learning piano for a bit over a month now but I'm managing.. going 1 hand then 1 page at a time.

If it gets easier as I go, as I imagine it will, to pick up the next invention, is there still a fair benefit improvement-wise to learning all 15 inventions? Or should I just pick out a handful and learn them?

It's not as if I don't like all the inventions.. but I imagine even if I was going at a good pace they would probably take 6+months at least to learn in entirety (The 1st one is shaping up to be a month or so on its own at this rate) and I'd like to be learning some other music as well.

[m19834]

Well, it seems there are a couple of different pedagogical views on them that basically amount to a student learning them all.  One group knows they should be on a person's list, since they are considered to be fundamental within the repertoire.  From what I observe, this group has their students learn them all by playing through them, maybe memorizing a few (maybe all of them ?), as some kind of hoop to jump through and then be over and done with.

Then, there is another group that thinks of them the way that Bach meant for them to be thought of  .

[arumih]

Hmmm...inventions after one month of learning piano...that's very brave! After having read these forums for the past year and a half or so I'm starting to feel that I'm not that ambitious...well if you think you're making good progress on the first one, stick with it. Personally, right now I'm on my third invention (number 8 )...first one I learnt was no 13 in A minor (might have been a mistake! lol), then number 4. What I can say is that if you love them all, why not learn them all. Learn 1 invention and another piece at the same time.

Number 13 I think is great for practising broken chords...I think I learnt a lot more from playing that than doing the silly ABRSM broken chords exercises. Number 4 of course has those truly terrible long trills...and so far number 8 has some tricky fingering on those scale fragments and some other tricky fingering in other parts. So basically for me, each of the inventions I learnt so far had some specific pedagogical  lessons within them along with the usual hand independence and contrapuntal thinking of Bach. I don't think I'll learn them all personally. And perhaps a few of them might be difficult for you at this stage (having said that, I have no idea about your ability except that you said here you've been learning the piano for one month...), but remember...you have all the time in the world anyway, learn one or two now, give yourself sometime and come back to them later. Personally they get easier to the point now where I'm absolutely loving learning no. 8.

Also remember...hands together and at a reasonable speed is much more difficult that hands separate! If you search on the IMSLP for the inventions, there's an instructive edition which sort of gives a breakdown of each invention and the difficulties and value which can be gained in playing each one. Good luck!

[mike_lang]

As far as I am concerned, the inventions are études, both digitally and aurally, and as such, can be most benefited from in an intelligently-chosen sampling. 

Please excuse my audacity in comparing Bach to Czerny, but one would not dream of playing ALL of the études of the latter - op. 740, 299, etc.  Even for Chopin, it is not necessary to study all 24 - in fact, to study simultaneously 10/2, 25/6, and 25/11 gives a surprisingly broad view of Monsieur Chopin's technique, in that they represent his own three general categories of technique: adjacent notes (scales - diatonic & chromatic), double notes (thirds, sixths, octaves, etc.), and non-adjacent notes (i.e., arpeggi, broken octaves, etc.).  That having been said, if not all is understood from these three, or the example is too dense/complex technically (as is often the case at the beginning), then it is necessary either to derive exercises from said étude, à la Cortot, or to study another which works with the same idea on a simpler level.

Furthermore, we have in our collective consciousness this legend, which is nothing more than that, of a Russian technique founded upon hundreds of weekly exercises and études when, in fact, it is based upon relatively few carefully selected studies, worked on in depth.  We see the results (at least technically speaking, assuming the musical worth) of such an in-depth approach, and to me it could not be clearer that there is no reason to study thirty inventions when a few inventions, a partita, and some preludes and fugues could bring much more progress, both musically and technically.

So in answer to your question, I think the wisest solution is "a handful."

Best wishes,

Michael Langlois

[hikky]

Well, thanks everyone for the replies. I think based on what you guys said, I'll try and learn them all but overtime as opposed to back-to-back. I do really enjoy them.. I just began putting the hands together (for just the first page right now) a few days ago and I realized once I had a good bit playable that playing this music is just plain fun! I have to purposefully stop practicing at some point because I always want to play what I know once more.

michael_langlois, you mentioned a partita and some preludes and fugues, do you think those would be accessible skill-wise to someone who had just gotten to the level of playing inventions? I am open to the idea of playing songs above my level (The inventions certainly are right now or were until recently) because I think that's the best way to progress, but would that be too much of a leap?

[mike_lang]

michael_langlois, you mentioned a partita and some preludes and fugues, do you think those would be accessible skill-wise to someone who had just gotten to the level of playing inventions? I am open to the idea of playing songs above my level (The inventions certainly are right now or were until recently) because I think that's the best way to progress, but would that be too much of a leap?

Why don't you continue to play the inventions that you enjoy and that help you, and perhaps by the time you have worked through a few and spent a considerable amount of time, you may wish to tackle something different, like the Prelude and Fugue in c minor from WTC Book I, or a French suite.  My point is that it will offer you more variety and afford more progress in Bach, character differentiation, inner hearing, etc., than to do 15 of, more or less, the same thing.

Best,

ML

[m19834]

Well, thanks everyone for the replies. I think based on what you guys said, I'll try and learn them all but overtime as opposed to back-to-back.

hmmm ... well, I don't necessarily agree with Michael in so many words, but I don't agree with what seems like your approach, either.  I think that it would be silly to go through them all just to go through them, as in, without some kind of deep study over them.  However, a deep study over just number one (with the right guidance), for example, would already make the rest of them --and all of Bach's counterpoint from there on--  become more clear.  If you are grasping the compositional concepts behind something like the first invention, and then how that relates to the subsequent inventions, then in some sense, you may gain almost instant knowledge on the rest.  The study of the rest of them would be from a different perspective, and involve a different learning curve than the first. 

If you approach the inventions just like you would those pieces which are meant as studies to develop physical coordination (ie, Czerny and the like), without the knowledge gained from a deeper study of the first one, the learning curve for each of them is almost the same, more or less, and it can make little sense to learn them all then.  You may as well not learn them all and it is just as well to learn all of the Czernys.  Studying the first one in depth, and then truly studying the rest, only deepens the knowledge of each, including the first. 

Also, the knowledge gained from the deeper study of something like the inventions, which were composed as a "set" for a reason, really lays the groundwork for something like his WTC, or any counterpoint.  Playing/studying something like the Shostakovich Preludes and Fugues, for example, becomes a different animal after a good foundation in baroque --and especially JS Bach's-- counterpoint writing.

Anything that is gained physically is a benefit on the side (something like a garnish on the plate of an amazing meal).  Of course, that is true of all music really.  The purpose of coordination and technique in playing an instrument is to express musical ideas, but without a knowledge on what the musical ideas actually ARE, there is little point in developing technique and coordination.

Okay, NOW it's back to the 88's for me.

[hikky]

Why don't you continue to play the inventions that you enjoy and that help you, and perhaps by the time you have worked through a few and spent a considerable amount of time, you may wish to tackle something different, like the Prelude and Fugue in c minor from WTC Book I, or a French suite.  My point is that it will offer you more variety and afford more progress in Bach, character differentiation, inner hearing, etc., than to do 15 of, more or less, the same thing.

Best,

ML

Yeah, I see what you're saying. I guess I'll have to see how I feel once I've learned a few then. I still have no idea if they'll be within my reach anytime soon but I can hope, I guess 

hmmm ... well, I don't necessarily agree with Michael in so many words, but I don't agree with what seems like your approach, either.  I think that it would be silly to go through them all just to go through them, as in, without some kind of deep study over them.  However, a deep study over just number one (with the right guidance), for example, would already make the rest of them --and all of Bach's counterpoint from there on--  become more clear.  If you are grasping the compositional concepts behind something like the first invention, and then how that relates to the subsequent inventions, then in some sense, you may gain almost instant knowledge on the rest.  The study of the rest of them would be from a different perspective, and involve a different learning curve than the first. 

If you approach the inventions just like you would those pieces which are meant as studies to develop physical coordination (ie, Czerny and the like), without the knowledge gained from a deeper study of the first one, the learning curve for each of them is almost the same, more or less, and it can make little sense to learn them all then.  You may as well not learn them all and it is just as well to learn all of the Czernys.  Studying the first one in depth, and then truly studying the rest, only deepens the knowledge of each, including the first. 

Also, the knowledge gained from the deeper study of something like the inventions, which were composed as a "set" for a reason, really lays the groundwork for something like his WTC, or any counterpoint.  Playing/studying something like the Shostakovich Preludes and Fugues, for example, becomes a different animal after a good foundation in baroque --and especially JS Bach's-- counterpoint writing.

Anything that is gained physically is a benefit on the side (something like a garnish on the plate of an amazing meal).  Of course, that is true of all music really.  The purpose of coordination and technique in playing an instrument is to express musical ideas, but without a knowledge on what the musical ideas actually ARE, there is little point in developing technique and coordination.

Okay, NOW it's back to the 88's for me.

I know I'm going to get chewed out for this.. but no, I am not currently studying it in-depth. I would like to, but I don't specifically know how to. I plan to give Bernhard's posts a thorough read-through soon enough here, but I do not have a teacher yet, so I don't exactly know how to study the concepts and theory behind it. I want to say I can at least partially understand the concepts in a musical sense, even if I can't put a name to them or explain them, but I know that would probably be naive of me. The learning did at least get faster as I got used to the sort of feel of the song though, but that's for the first invention in particular, so I guess that wouldn't necessarily carry over to future ones.

[m19834]

I know I'm going to get chewed out for this.. but no, I am not currently studying it in-depth.

*inserts hikky into mouth and begins chewing like bubble gum*

hee hee ... not really.  Anyway, there will be stuff that is of course learned intuitively.  So, yes, there would be some natural sense of them getting easier as you get a feel for them just playing through them.  But, for me personally, with the inventions in particular, I always suspected there to be so much more to them than what I could wrap my head around just playing through them.  I did as much as I felt I could on my own at one particular point in time, and I also searched through libraries (literally), to find some kind of handbook or guide on them, and I found one book, but it covered them only so thoroughly and I developed questions that made me stop, as I didn't have a teacher I could ask at the time and it ended up just making me angry.  So, I very much understand the feeling of not knowing how to address them. 

For some reason I feel inclined to say that I feel similarly when trying to read portions of the Bible (which I don't try to do all that often).  It took me a long time (most of my life) to realize that my sense of resistence to it wasn't just that I didn't understand it or didn't want to read it, necessarily.  It was that sometimes even reading one sentence, I would find myself instantly having tons of questions ranging from the deepest parts of myself to the least deep.  And, interestingly, I was almost completely unaware of these questions.  All I knew was that I felt resistance.  Somehow it can be similar for me with something like music, and something like the inventions in particular, for some reason.  They so far strike me like no other set of work, not even the preludes and fugues.  Anyway, my point is, maybe it's not that you don't know how, maybe it's that you need to actually sort through legitimate questions that arise from just thinking about them ?  I don't know.  If it is though, write them down, even if you have no idea whether or not you will ever find an answer.  At least it can clear your head a bit.

The thing is, with the inventions, I think there are probably endless ways to explore them.  There are endless ways to look at them, perhaps, and in a sense, you can lable things in a way that makes sense for you.  However, if you are anything like me, having somebody say that to you doesn't help in the least until you have some kind of (smart) model of A way, to help structure your thoughts and questions.  In that sense, I think Bernhard's posts can be quite helpful.  At the same time, just reading about them can only go so far.

Well, regarding the first invention in particular, it is actually a perfect place to begin because of the structure of it.  So, I am not talking physical technique here, but compositional structure and techniques.  Number one is unique in that its structure is almost "perfect" or the most tight, whereas from there on, the structure gradually becomes more loose.  Having the model of the first firmly within grasp is a great way to explore and get some perspective on the ones that follow.

Here is Bach's order (as quoted from Bernhard in another post) :

No.1 – C
No.4 – Dm
No. 7 – Em
No. 8 – F
No. 10 – G
No. 13 – Am
No. 15 – Bm
No. 14 – Bb
No. 12 – Am
No. 11 – Gm
No. 9 – Fm
No. 6 – E
No. 5 – Eb
No. 3 – D
No. 2 – Cm

[go12_3]

Hello, I'm learning the 1st invention by Bach at the moment. It's still quite difficult for me as I've been learning piano for a bit over a month now but I'm managing.. going 1 hand then 1 page at a time.

If it gets easier as I go, as I imagine it will, to pick up the next invention, is there still a fair benefit improvement-wise to learning all 15 inventions? Or should I just pick out a handful and learn them?

It's not as if I don't like all the inventions.. but I imagine even if I was going at a good pace they would probably take 6+months at least to learn in entirety (The 1st one is shaping up to be a month or so on its own at this rate) and I'd like to be learning some other music as well.

Then go for it, in learning what you want to play.  Just keep setting the goals you have in mind  on what you would like to learn.  If you love Bach, then go for it.  You can learn some sonatinas, sonatas, waltzes, and etudes.  Pick a variety of music to learn.  Music adds the spice in our lives and you can do that and make leanring a new piece enjoyable.  best wishes,  = )  go12_3

[mike_lang]

Yeah, I see what you're saying. I guess I'll have to see how I feel once I've learned a few then. I still have no idea if they'll be within my reach anytime soon but I can hope, I guess 

You'll see as it goes - just listen to yourself.  If you get to the point where you've had enough inventions, don't force yourself to do all fifteen; but if you have done a few and are still hungry for more, then you should do it.

I just want to make sure you are aware of the variety of Herr Bach's output and know that there are many other different sorts of pieces that would be within your grasp after mastering a several of the inventions and sinfonias, if you should decide to try something different.

Best wishes,

ML

[scottmcc]

invention 1 and fugue 1 from Well Tempered Clavier I are very similar motivically, and share the same tonality of C major.  but the latter is in 4 voices, as opposed to 2, and the fingering is much more complex (although the generally accepted tempo is slower).  however, I find it easier to make myself work on fugue 1 than the first invention because the finished product sounds so much more like real music than the invention, which sounds like an exercise.

I think this whole thread is an example of the adage "ask 10 people how to do something, and you'll get 12 answers."   

[beethoven_fan]

Hi, everybody !

hikky,

I have wondered also about this. I have learned a few inventions : no.1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 13, and 14. These are the easiest. I have not yet learned any sinfonia. Indeed I have learned so many things with these pieces. Technically, they will make your fingers smarter, you will gain in dexterity, especially if you play them fast. But for doing so, you must first practice slowly. In my country (France), there is a saying : "Before trying to run, you must be able to walk". Keep this in mind, when you play music, especially playing Bach, because there are several voices. We 've got to hear all of them distinctively.

Have you got to learn them all ? I really don't know. I have played 7 of them. I have really improved in terms of movement, fingering, strength. But I still don't think that my technique is perfect. Do I practice them wrong ? Maybe. But, I think there is something to learn from evey invention.

But, don't spend your life time playing them, you must see them as a step which opens doors to you to so many pieces, the pieces you really want to play, : if you like Bach, the French Suites or the WTC, or some Beethoven (easy) sonatas, some Chopin nocturnes...

I have learned this inventions because I love them of course, but there was another :  I needed good technique for a piece I loved to death and wanted to play. But, this piece was way ahead of my level : it was the "Pathétique" sonata by Beethoven. I know they are not of the same grade. But I don't understand grades. I think that the inventions helped me a lot. I have worked hard the sonata itself also, but nevertheless, I think that I had not played the inventions, i would not succeded in playing the sonata.

Play them as long as you enjoy them, you won't regret it.