To use music or not????

[Shagdac]

I was hoping that some of you who have competed, or even more so, have been judges could possible advise on this subject. Let's say for a competition, it is stated in the rules, that you MAY use your music while playing.
The competition provides a page turner, so the same person is used for all performers.

I'm wondering, even though they say its "OK", does it matter. I know they can't take off points, if it is permitted, but if you have 2 performers, that say, play equally as well, but one uses music, and the other plays from memory....WILL it matter.

What do you think is best? To use music if permitted, or don't if at all possible. I appreciate your help.

Thanks,
S

[donjuan]

I was playing in my city's Kiwanis Festival in the Recital class, and this one girl came out and played everything with the music.  She was the only one to do so in the class of 5 people.  The adjudicator mentioned this and suggested she play in the future by heart- after all, it was a recital class, and you dont recite by reading off of something.  I always memorize everything.  It takes you away from the rules and allows you to do what comes naturally, something adjudicators (good ones, anyway) find compelling.

I dont like how pianists like Sviatoslav Richter have the music out at concerts..It kind of makes him seem like a performing monkey spitting out ancient music, instead of coming up with something original.  
donjuan

[Hmoll]

  if you have 2 performers, that say, play equally as well, but one uses music, and the other plays from memory....WILL it matter.

I've heard of instances where judges have approached runners up and said they would have been judged higher if they had played without the music.
Unfortunately, judged take that into account conciously or unconsiously.

[Clare]

Yeah - I played in a competition a couple of days ago, and I was subconsciously more impressed with the people who played without the music than the people who did - especially the people who had big red writing on their music.

I know that in the Sydney International Piano Competition you MUST play everything without the music in front of you.

P.S. Richter only used the music when he was older, I believe. Many other famous pianists went back to having music in front of them in their later years.

[faulty_damper]

No, as long as you play behind a screen.  Real judges close their eyes.  Those that don't, they think they are able to see music as it is played.

[Hmoll]

 
I dont like how pianists like Sviatoslav Richter have the music out at concerts..It kind of makes him seem like a performing monkey spitting out ancient music, instead of coming up with something original.  
donjuan

I doubt that Richter ever played like a performing monkey, especially when you contrast him with the competition pianists around today who really do play like trained monkeys.

Playing with the music does not take anything away from a performance for me. I actually have more respect for people like Richter, and Peter Serkin who break with tradition by using music. It's blindingly obvious, if you watch them, that they have the music momorized. They just choose to play with the score.

It just so happens that we now have a tradition where solo piano recitals and concerto performances are performed without the score. Pianists who play chamber music play with the score. The piano parts of chamber music pieces oftem match or exceed the difficulty, hand-eye coordination, and physical demands of solo works by the same composers.

[JK]

Piece of useless but interesting and related information;
Sait-Seans was the performer who introduced playing from memory! (Ithink!).

[Hmoll]

Piece of useless but interesting and related information;
Sait-Seans was the performer who introduced playing from memory! (Ithink!).

Nope. Clara Schumann was doing that long before him.

[donjuan]

Im sure geniuses like Mozart didnt need to use the music.  It was like he was born with the piece already finished in his head.

[Shagdac]

Thank you very much, I appreciate your feedback!

I had decided along time ago never to use music as one time I did when performing (was turning my own page) and the whole score flew off the piano....what a disaster!

But then when I saw it was allowed in this competition, and knew how nervous I would be, I began to wonder....

Thanks,
S

[Motrax]

I recently gave my big senior recital and used music for a little over half of my program. I had a page turner, as one should when playing from the music.

After the concert, not a single person mentioned the fact that I played with the music, not even my teacher. I brought this up later to some of my friends and my teacher, and nobody seemed to care at all.

The statement that one can't play with true feelings when the music is in front of them is one of pure ignorance. As long as you hear the music inside of yourself, and are able to amply express it with the piano, it does not matter what you have in front of you. The music is a guide for your hands so you don't miss keys.Your emotions are completely seperate from the technique... bah, I haven't explained myself clearly. Perhaps I'll give it a stab another time. Suffice to say, having printed music in front of you in now way detracts from the sound you produce.

If you had not so far noticed, I'm am greatly in favor of people freely performing with music. And that's that.

[jr11]

I believe that at competions, festivals, etc they should openly state their policy with respect to this, though they rarely do. Either music should be permitted or not, or it should be stated what kind of reduction in marks will apply to those who compete with music against those who don't.

I have been absolutely livid to find my competitors were allowed what I think is a considerable handicap when I went to the trouble of memorizing my piece. Can you imagine going to a play where the actors are reading their lines from a script?

[faulty_damper]

That's different.  Actors use their entire body to show something.  Musicians just make music.  And the last time I checked (fos) you don't hear with your eyes.

[Saturn]

I have been absolutely livid to find my competitors were allowed what I think is a considerable handicap when I went to the trouble of memorizing my piece.

The handicap works in your favor, then.

Musicians play better when they don't have to concentrate on reading notes!

[Spatula]

The handicap works in your favor, then.

Musicians play better when they don't have to concentrate on reading notes!

That's very true.  My teacher said that even I should memorize my studies for the piano exams, even though I'm allowed the score.  The reason for memorizing something is to allow you to express yourself even more vividly.  The score is a double edged sword.  For one, having it usually decreases your marks in competitions etc, and as well on the other hand, since if you're using the score, your brain doesn't fully recognize where your hands go but is so dependent on the score that you have to keep looking up and down to get your queue where your fingers go.  Even if you memorized your piece and played with score, it's still not as efficient as playing sans score.  

[sharon_f]

My teacher who studied with the great Seynour Bernstein told me he use to tell his students it was okay to use the score, but only after the piece was memorized.  

[pseudopianist]

I have only been playing for a bit over a year and I am a crappy sightreader so when looking at the notes it doesn't really tell me anything except where I am but that doesn't help me.

I memorize everything... can't look at the notes even if I wanted to cause I'm too darn busy watching my hands.

[jr11]

That's different.  Actors use their entire body to show something.  Musicians just make music.  And the last time I checked (fos) you don't hear with your eyes.

I disagree. If that was true, then you could dress in a clown suit for your performance, but I doubt the adjudicator would see the humour. Music IS visual... the concert grand centre stage, the performer's expressions and gestures, the tux's and evening gowns, the orchestra, the audience dressed in their finest.

I agree that having the music in front of you is a pain, and probably detrimental. However, to me a performer with music in front of them and an assistant to turn pages (joke: how many _____ does it take to play a piano?) = unprepared to play this gig; come back when you know your material better.

I do not expect everyone to share this opinion, however I think it would be of benefit to both those who use the music and those who don't to have the policy stated up front. Some judges obviously don't care, but when my turn comes to adjudicate, the policy will be that those who choose to use music will receive a critique, but no mark.

[Joseph_Hoffman]

I can't not memorize.

I can't understand people who need to use the score after they have learnt the technicalities of a piece. Do they sightread through it even when they know it or somthing?

What purpose does using the score serve when you already know the piece?

[Spatula]

I can't not memorize.

That's a double negative, so you CAN memorize!  

[DarkWind]

Although I've only used sheet music once for a piece I really didn't want to play and was more or less forced upon by my teacher, I think that it doesn't matter. JR11, No one is seriously going to play piano dressd up as a clown, except for maybe John Cage. Anyways, I always thought that having the music there even if you had it memorized was good for looks. I have thought it always looks a little more elegant with a clean sheet of music right before you, as that is how most people imagine a performance, even though its not. When I think of performing, I see a piece of paper right in front of me, with lots of complicated notes, voices, etc. just to have a nice appearance. Thats my opinion, and I'm sorry if I restated myself too much.  

[f0bul0us]

I was playing in my city's Kiwanis Festival in the Recital class, and this one girl came out and played everything with the music.  She was the only one to do so in the class of 5 people.  The adjudicator mentioned this and suggested she play in the future by heart- after all, it was a recital class, and you dont recite by reading off of something.  I always memorize everything.  It takes you away from the rules and allows you to do what comes naturally, something adjudicators (good ones, anyway) find compelling.

I dont like how pianists like Sviatoslav Richter have the music out at concerts..It kind of makes him seem like a performing monkey spitting out ancient music, instead of coming up with something original.  
donjuan

Errr! Damn Kiwanis, I came in 2nd 6 times over the past 2 years (3 classes a year). You're lucky though, in Toronto use of the score is strictly forbidden if you want to be considered as a competing performer. If you do use the sheet music, you get an adjudication but no mark.

To the original question. If you're still using the sheet music I'd say you're not even ready for the recital because the piece(s) simply isn't in your repertoire. You're not doing yourself any favours no matter how well you think you play the piece. Why? Your eyes can't monitor the score while at the same time trying to watch your hands. If this competition is like most others, you can't play the same piece twice at any two competitions. So you if mess this up because you couldn't memorize it, you would've wasted all the time you spent learning it. That, and there's next to no room for you to deliver a decent interpretation, which will in the end *** you over.

Good luck!

[xvimbi]

Several people in this thread have postulated that playing from memory enhances the quality of the music, e.g. because it "allows you to express yourself even more vividly", as Spatula wrote, whereas someone who uses the sheets looks like a "performing monkey spitting out ancient music" as donjuan stated.

Is this really true?

I don't think so!

First of all, chamber and symphony musicians use the score all the time, as Hmoll correctly stated, and nobody would seriously assume that it does diminish the emotional content or the quality of the music. So there is a double-standard. In fact, playing from memory is purely a convention in solo recitals and concertos (I believe it was in fact Liszt who established it). It is not a technique, in a way that mastering it will boost your level of playing.

I rather believe that it is the other way around: playing from "internal sheets" comes off like a monkey spitting out ancient music. A certain amount of freedom is lost, because one must rely to a great extent on finger memory, so a lot of the music is simply "recalled" as it was practiced many times.

Many soloists, not just the old and forgetful ones, use the score in concertos (Joshua Bell is a good example). It is a misconception to assume these musicians would in fact be sightreading the music. As Seymour Bernstein correctly said "one can use the score, but only after the piece has been memorized". Soloists know their pieces, they use the score only as cues.

[Saturn]

Several people in this thread have postulated that playing from memory enhances the quality of the music, e.g. because it "allows you to express yourself even more vividly", as Spatula wrote, whereas someone who uses the sheets looks like a "performing monkey spitting out ancient music" as donjuan stated.

Is this really true?

Maybe not for some people, but it is for me.  If I understand the music, then it's automatically a part of my memory.  Then, playing it from memory becomes as natural as singing a tune from memory.  If I don't really know the music, then I have to read it, and can't be as expressive with it.  The two are (somewhat) mutually exclusive for me.

First of all, chamber and symphony musicians use the score all the time, as Hmoll correctly stated, and nobody would seriously assume that it does diminish the emotional content or the quality of the music. So there is a double-standard.

There isn't really a double standard.  When a person plays solo, they're expected to know their music.  When an orchestra plays, their leader (the conductor) is expected to know his music.  They usually just keep the score to give them cues, they don't need to read it.

A certain amount of freedom is lost, because one must rely to a great extent on finger memory, so a lot of the music is simply "recalled" as it was practiced many times.

Hence why musicians should "memorize" through knowledge of the music, not merely rely on muscle memory.

- Saturn

[xvimbi]

Maybe not for some people, but it is for me.  If I understand the music, then it's automatically a part of my memory.  Then, playing it from memory becomes as natural as singing a tune from memory.  If I don't really know the music, then I have to read it, and can't be as expressive with it.  The two are (somewhat) mutually exclusive for me.

Granted, it might be a personal preference of a performer (I prefer to play from memory myself). But it should not matter to the listener, and the listener should not make assumptions about the difference in the quality  of the performance depending on whether a performer uses the score or not.

There isn't really a double standard.  When a person plays solo, they're expected to know their music.  When an orchestra plays, their leader (the conductor) is expected to know his music.  They usually just keep the score to give them cues, they don't need to read it.

But that's exactly what I am referring to. Performers are SUPPOSED to know their music or not, depending on the situation. It doesn't have anything to do with the quality of the performance. Why is a pianist supposed to play from memory in a solo recital, but not in a duo? There are certainly different standards, i.e. expectations here. Playing from memory in solo recitals is a dress code rather than a musical technique. Did you ever play chamber music, and if so, did you memorize your part?

Hence why musicians should "memorize" through knowledge of the music, not merely rely on muscle memory.

"Knowledge of the music" is a very abstract concept. It doesn't say exactly what notes to play at what point. It helps memorizing a piece, but it doesn't really help performing it, unless one gets lost and needs to whip up a cadence on the fly. If one had the score, though, one would not get lost.  

[Shagdac]

I have seen other performers use the scores and I don't feel it really took anything away from the performance. Alot of people seem to feel that the pianist will not be as expressive if they have to concentrate on looking at the music.....but on the same hand, concentrating on what you have memorized, or worrying that you may forget, may also cause one not to be as expressive as they might normally be.

I guess I can see if from both sides.

S

[faulty_damper]

It doesn't take anything away from the performance.  The real reason why these judges don't like seeing sheetmusic is because they are seeing it and it is a distraction to them.  Their focus starts to wander toward the page-turner and how attractive she is... my, she has nice hands while reaching for the edge of the page... she's an even better page turner than I thought!... the pianist looks at the page...

- Okay, stop here and analyze this -

Ever see someone turning their head to look at something?  You don't know why they turned their head so you turn your head in the direction they turned to.  But you don't see what they are looking at - nothing seems out of the ordinary - so you become confused.

- And now back to looking at what the pianist is looking at -

The judges start looking at the sheetmusic instead of the listening.

- Stop here -

The brain cannot do two things at once with its full attention.  Hearing will mean listening, but looking will inevitably mean seeing.  These are two tasks that the brain must split its attention to.  Then Mr. Libido comes along and notices how attractive the page turner is.  Now two things have just become... two things! The judge stopped listening.

See why judges are perverts?
But my point was serious.  Judges should be listening, not looking... which innevitable leads to the generalization that all judges are perverts.

[Shagdac]

I can't help but to agree with Faulty for much of what he said. When I saw my last competion, the ones that used page turners...my thoughts were...Hmmm.wonder if she's as nervous as he is?....I wonder if she knows how to play the piano?...Does she even know how to read music?...If not, how does she know when to turn the pages?...I wonder if they practice turning the pages prior to the performance?....Is that his personal page turner or one that is supplied to all?.......What signal do they set up between themselves to know it "time"?

All of these questions went thru my mind as I saw the
page turner, so I definately agree that others must be thinking the same thing. However, the judges hopefully will know this information before hand, IF page turners are listed in the rules as being allowed.

Joseph Hoffman wrote:

I can't understand people who need to use the score after they have learnt the technicalities of a piece. Do they sightread through it even when they know it or somthing?

What purpose does using the score serve when you already know the piece?

I guess I was thing that some may use it as "security"....just in case....as again, I'm referring to a competition, and one may tend to get nervous. You may not need the music there, nor have to look at it...but I HAVE seen, several times competitors that have completely forgotten the score. OR....what they were playing next, after finishing the first piece. Sometimes they have been okay after a brief pause, other times I have seem them actually leave the stage because there was nothing else they could do. You might have piece down perfect, but when you get in front of 100 or 1000 people and are being judged, that's a whole different ballgame.

S

[rhapsody in orange]

I guess I was thing that some may use it as "security"....just in case....as again, I'm referring to a competition, and one may tend to get nervous. You may not need the music there, nor have to look at it...but I HAVE seen, several times competitors that have completely forgotten the score

Precisely what i felt. I've had no experiences for competitions, but for the grade 8 exam which i took yrs ago, I brought in my music, even though i could memorize the pieces for security purposes. I could play without the score when i was practising and playing in front of my friends. Maybe after a few times of overcoming stagefright/nervousness/playing under pressure, playing without the music would feel less insecure

[Sketchee]

For my own playing, I prefer to play without the music. I get nervous and the music being right there just makes it worse.  If I'm playing an accompaniment, I'll use the music only because I can follow along with the soloist who is in control of the performance for the most part.  I turn the pages myself in that situation and practice this just like the rest of the music.

I don't consider it part of my repertoire if I can't play it from memory. If someone requests me to play a piece--which happens suprisingly often-I can just go and play it without fumbling through music. I always have my music with me when I'm at school though; my bookbag is filled with it.  With music memorized, I can play through a piece or two in just the time between classes.  Even if I'm practicing with the music, I can concentrate on the various sections that need work and just look ahead to the next section as I play.  I just like sitting down at the piano and playing.  When playing from memory it feels like I'm breathing.

I'm sure that a lot of people can play with music very well.  I've seen it.  That's fine but I wouldn't do it.

It was Franz Liszt who started the tradition of playing without music in a solo recital.  He also started and popularized the solo piano recital itself.

[Rockitman]

what a fabulous thread.   

Even though most of my reportoire is not memorized, (just picked up playing regulary again after a 25 year drought) I've played most of these songs so many times that even though the sheet is needed in front of me, I find myself using it more as a security blanket than something I really need to refer to as I'm playing.   
But I am brand new to this forum, having picked up playing again after such a long spell, and I have learned so much in the last week of just reading past posts.  (Bernard,  you are a gem, I am already putting your memorization methods to use).
I have come to the conclusion that the extra effort involved to memorize a piece is inconsequential to the results it will give you.  ONCE IT IS MEMORIZED,  it is with you forever for the most part.  I still have a bunch of songs that I learned as a child that are still with me today even though I haven't played them in over 20 years.  They of course need a bit of touch up, but it's so weird, the notes just play without any real kind of consious thinking.
To be able to throw down and play the song from your heart , will bring out the highest form of emotion and feeling one is capable of.   
I'm not saying that one cannot play a piece with great passion with the music in front of his/her face, (dammit, I challenge anybody to Chopin's Nocturne 9-2 Ebmajor for the passion I put into it, with, of course, the sheet) but I believe that the piece would have even more passion and emotion when played strictly from a confident memory.  And after reading many posts here, mostly Bernard's,  I am confident that I can take this relatively simple piece, (Eb major), and commit it to total memory within a weekend's time and make it part of my permanent memorized reportoire. 

Bottom line is, as a soloist on a stage or whatever, it is so much more impressive to just sit there and play with nothing else, no sheet, no turner, no nothing but you in all your glory or ugliness.  Everything else is a distraction to the audience and to the performer as well. 

Again, I am new to this forum and relatively new to playing piano again.  (took lessons religiously as a child/teen and left it alone for a long time until now, 40 years old.  Been playing for last year and a half average 1 hour per day).  Saw a guy 2 weeks ago from Armenia, Sergei Babayan, who played Leighton's Study Variations, Liszt's Sonata in B minor and finally Bach's Goldsberg variations, all of them, without the music of course, and I was just dumbfounded.  The level that people like this have taken piano playing to, is just mind boggling.   What is more mind boggling is how much our brains are capable of memorizing and retaining.  I have found new meaning in my life this last month and I so look forward to the next opportuninty to sit down and PRACTICE!!!!  (for memory of course).

Should the judges ding you for having the music in front of you???

Not at all.   Like somebody else said,,,, they should have their eyes closed so that the physical distractions do not taint their judgment.  But dammit, memorize it anyways.  You'll thank yourself in the end.

[BoliverAllmon]

I prefer memorization. If I had a choice I would memorize it.

[kempff]

one thing concerning Richter:

He started using scores after he had a very nasty memory slip in one of his concerts. He definitly knew the pieces by heart, there is no doubt about it. He says in his Enigma DVD, that you can't memorize all the details on the score, so using one makes your performance more honest.

[Shagdac]

I have come to the conclusion that it SHOULD not matter if a person uses a score in a competition. However, I think realistically it does. I recently have memorized a piece I've been working on for months (Union). I have to admit that playing it thru without the music, I was surprised how much differently I heard...(or maybe listened) the piece. I wasn't focused on reading the music to know where my hands went. Hence, I don't think it would probably make that much difference AFTER you have the piece memorized if one DID use the music. But for me personally, I probably would not.

Thanks for all you imput guys!
S