There are no good teachers, only good students.

[ahmedito]

And the reason that wont work is because JS is an arrogant little pubert who believes he knows everything even if he is one of the most stubborn ignorant people I have seen!

Is it really worth arguing with him?

[BajoranD]

You're right, Amedito, it's not. I got carried away. And sank rather below the level of good taste and decorum, perhaps. I apologize. Newbies shouldn't let themselves carried away, right?   from now on, as regards this thread.  

[J.S.Bach]

Super fun happy man

It would REALLY do justice to the amount of good information here if everyone would just shut the *** up (flame-wise) and focus on contributing ideas that will help J.S.Bach better understand the flaws in his post, instead of turning this into personal bullshit.

I was going to say something like this, but if I did, most of you would probably take it in a very “inflamed” manner and bend the subject even further away from the topic. Since finally someone from your own circle had the guts to attempt to bring you back to your wits, I will once again swallow hard all your “comments” and will only address those very few persons in this entire forum who had said something intelligent and worthy of a debate. I must add that my patience is beginning to end. Several of you even insult me for “whining” about not wanting to get personal. Ok then. I won’t say anything about that any more. You can be as rude as you wish to be. But I will add that if you keep that going just a little bit longer, it would mean that all you really want is to fight. As such, I promise, I will give you one that is really worthy of you. After that the debate will be over once and for all, and some of you will really wish that my comments were more personal than general. I always keep my promises. You have the choice of finding out about that yourselves. Those of you who do not agree with what some of these teachers write in this room, please make yourselves heard even if you do not agree about my topic in the least. My words might not seem very significant as of now, but if the manners of the “musicians” in this room do not change, it will become very significant, and very soon.
After routinely wasting another paragraph, I will finally get to the debate:

Since your “honorable” protector is not with you anymore, I will take his role in your favor. Some of the few intelligent postings made me realize that maybe you are so angry because there are actually many students reading what I have written and if you should not be able to fend off my encroachment, you will be left functionless and jobless. Here is one of the comments by one author that was very useful:

Swan said: “If we teachers agreed with you - "THERE ARE NO GOOD TEACHERS", we'd all be a burden to the tax payers while we look for a different job!”

I completely understand that. Since there are hundreds of people who are reading the contents of this room, I think that it would be wiser for me to issue a disclaimer first. I can’t say that I was wrong to not do so in the beginning because this is my first time in this forum and I thought that since my posting will be in the teachers “lounge,” I would be able to discuss it privately with teachers. Since I have seen several amateur students like B minor and mark1 hurl themselves in a hurried manner into our conversation as if it has anything to do with them, I think that this is the best time to add the “disclaimer.” I also sincerely hope that it will help to mend some of the misunderstanding among the teachers since I am not doing so for the sake of the students (it is their job to find out what concerns them and what not on their own), but the teachers.

DISCLAIMER: Those students who had a rapture after reading this room’s topic because they finally found an evidence that they can’t play the piano because “there are no good teachers” and hence could blame their inferior piano skills on their teachers are utterly wrong. The truth is that my opinion has nothing to do with as much as 99.99999 percent of you. So before hurrying back to your teachers and saying that they “suck,” consider just the very few of my questions just to see where you are standing yourself:
1. Do you love piano so much that you practice 3 to 12 hours a day (as your schedule allows, excluding parties, drinks, MTV, etc and including time spend studying or working) without your teacher saying a single word to you? (This is where 100% of you will answer no).
2. How many books have you read on the musical theory, the biographies of composers et al?
3. Do you listen to any classical music without someone telling you to do so? (It does not count if you spend just 3 hours a day listening to classical as background noise, i.e., passively and without any feelings).
4.Can a classical music touch you so deeply that a piece might be able to make you cry and laugh?
5.Would you spend all your money to buy a good piano instead of a car or a stereo system (or drugs)?
6.Do you always follow the fingerings in the written text or do you first analyze intelligently whether it would suite you well (this is where the non-technical books come in)?
7.Would you ever complain that you can’t achieve something because you have a crappy teacher? (Although many teachers are crappy, it would not be an obstacle for a studious student. Again most of you will sure say yes to this one).
8.Would you ever think to study a piece that your teacher did not assign you or would you wait for a spoon feeding?

I can go on forever. There are no rules for a talented student. In fact, talent is not only synonymous with interest, but can be actually replaced by “extreme eagerness.” These are just sample questions to show you that my article has nothing to do with students like you. I will also add: have you ever thought that just as “There are no good teachers, only good students” is true, it is even more true the other way around? Namely, “THERE ARE NO BAD TEACHERS, ONLY BAD STUDENTS.” Why? Because every student has the power to educate himself even better than his teacher can. Thus, when the student is not studying, it is not the teacher’s fault but the student’s eager choice. Also, teachers are EXTREMELY important when dealing with regular students, as already described, because a student who only “loves” to play and does not care much about reading will for sure develop so many bad habits that his case will become a hopeless one. This is so since if one does not study with a teacher, one also needs intelligence to make right choices. For example, if you study alone and are not talented (the same definition already described above), you will tend to choose the easiest fingering so that you can cut down your work. A talented student not only will choose the hardest fingering, but also will take the hardest passage from the hardest piece and will play it in every single key with various variations (forget Hanon, for as you can see you can make your own exercises).
Thus, a teacher cannot make from a student a virtuoso. A good teacher still can make you as good as any other performing and recording artist. For example, Murray Perahia and Evgeny Kissin are excellent pianists. Even virtuosos. However, as Marcus Cicero says “In virtute sunt multi ascensus,” the virtuosity of Kissin and Perahia are nothing compared to the Giants like Richter, Serkin, Busoni, or Rubinstein. To reach their level, one needs A LOT more than a conservatory education.

Disclaimer to the disclaimer: If you suddenly decide to follow my above recommendations in order to become a virtuoso, please realize that they are but the very view and simple aspects of a “virtuoso.” It also won’t work simply because someone had to tell you what to do and it was not in you innately (i.e., you are talented to try to follow the instructions and reach great heights, but not talented enough to become supreme). It would be the same thing for Czerny to tell Liszt “Here is the list Liszt, if you follow the list and practice a lot you will develop a transcendental technique and achieve great fame!.” It is as simple as I can get.


As for the teachers, I have already tried to give an example to Bernhard. He was unable to grasp it. Thus I will give the same example again, but this time step by step:
1.Bach, along with his numerous family members and other German students goes to church to study.
2.All of them have the same teachers and study the exact same material.
3.All of them have the same opportunities to study (in fact, some have more opportunities that Johann)
4.After graduating, some students never make it to become anything close to an artist, other become regular musicians, while Bach becomes an excellent keyboard virtuoso, and a good composer.
5.Bach eventually becomes Kapellmeister and secure a good salary.
6.Many people love his work, but many don’t realize that he is going to become the greatest composer every lived and rather regard him as too stubborn since he refuses to follow the regular church rules.
7.Every single great composer after Bach studies most of his available works (including Mozart and Beethoven). His peers are given to oblivion, but many people still break their heads over the mathematical complexities of Bach’s “Die Kunst der Fuge.”
8. Question: If Bach and his peers had the exact teachers and got the exact education, why was it only Bach who became so great?
Answer: He learned something extra that others did not.
Q: But how? Didn’t he get the same education as others?
A: Yes he did. But what sets him apart from others is that he gained a lot of extra knowledge not taught in the regular church.
Q: What was that “extra knowledge”?
A: I can’t possibly know all of it, but here are some: he searched for and studied composers as far located as Vivaldi and Albinoni (he has transcribed many of their works). He also studied old masters like Giovanni Palestrina and would travel for days on foot just to see Dietrich Buxtehude perform on the organ.
In addition, he was a well rounded person not only musically, but as well as philosophically and religiously - he rigorously studied all the works of Martin Luther, illustrating his rebellious spirit. Not only that, he disregarded the general belief that the thumb should not be used during playing which enabled him to compose his beautifully complex fugues. In addition, perhaps he was the first person to cross his fingers during playing (e.g 4 over 5 and 3 over 4). Now this is something that many modern “teachers” think is wrong and would punish their students if they used it.

I think that now I have made myself perfectly clear. I can’t get any simpler than this. If this example does not prove to you that I am correct, I would be very interested in hearing your counter-evidences. An answer like “You are wrong” without presenting any intelligent arguments won’t work. I hope that this will clear all the misunderstandings and will silence the ignorant. Since I have seen almost everything in this room, I would not be surprised to see some irascible genius begin another fight just because he thinks that my remarks contain “something” offensive.

Just in case, I will also give some individual responses:

Swan

I think you'd get a more 'open minded' response from the STUDENT'S forum.

Not anymore.

I'm not going to tell a potential student when they ring to have lessons, "Well, you know if you're talented, then coming to me really is a waste of time, because you'd be better off learning by yourself." And it's not because I'm after their money - it's because I really do believe I can help them progress much quicker than on their own.

Here’s the deal: As I have shown you above, you will have many talented students, but not as talented as I meant for my topic. Actually many teachers will see as talented students as I am talking about. Thus money wise, you don’t have to worry. As for knowledge, if someone takes up lessons with you and already knows everything that you can teach him (e.g. a young Horowitz), would you still keep him or would you pass him on to a more knowledgeable teacher (if there is one)?

I do understand (I think!) where you're coming from. Because I also believe that every teacher is also self taught. Each day, we teach ourselves, "well that didn't work, let's try something different," and each day we are faced with new challenges (including repertoire) that we need to find the solution to ourselves. Some of us do that by enrolling in courses, others do it by reading a lot of books. So teachers are self taught in many ways. And I believe a 'good' teacher is one who conitnues to 'self-teach' him/herself for the rest of their lives.

Exactly. And what did I tell earlier? A really talented student will read as many books as he can. As a simplified example, let’s assume that the student is so talented that he has read almost all the books that you have read yourself. What can you teach that student? I agree that you can still GUIDE him to give him moral support since you are more mature, but that has nothing to do with actual knowledge and is something that can be also done by a friend or a parent. In fact, by any one (many teachers are not very mature themselves as this room shows). Again, such prodigies are rare, but those are exactly the people I am talking about. And the difference is that while you study the trial and error for your own hand, the student who gets the primary information himself and makes his trail and error for his own hand is much, much better off. After all, most of the information is coming from a single source. However, as the information passes from generation to generation, that information is getting modified and not always for the better. Even though I believe that everyone has to discover his own technique, the direct study of a source as an example would be much better than to learn its interpretation by some author who couldn’t play the piano well enough himself (Hanon come’s to mind).

Willcowskitz

J.S.Bach said that this doesn't make him American, and we don't know the reasons why he chose so, but he was at heart Jewish, just like Rachmaninoff was Russian although he lived in America.

Thanks. At least one more person saving me some words.
Shagdac, I am not getting upset for asking questions, only ignorant insults. As such, you can ask any questions you would like and that would not make you ignorant. Let me add that Vivaldi was Italian, Handel was German, and Liszt Hungarian. Although it is more complex to explain Bernstein’s “reasons,” I am skipping him because he had nothing to do with keyboard virtuosity. I merely added him and Copland because for some strange reason Bernhard mentioned “modern music,” although it didn’t have to do with anything I told him.

Super fun happy man

I just gave this thread's link to my piano teacher last night. I called her this morning and she said "I haven't laughed this hard since the time I heard about Monica Lewinsky and cigars.

Your teacher is far from being the only one laughing. I myself have fun reading some of the especially dazzling postings. Nevertheless, due to the lack of information in those postings, they are becoming more and more banal.
This one is going to be a make or break.
J.S.Bach

[J.S.Bach]

This forum is beginning to malfunction. Although I edited my article, the forum still published it in an unedited form. I think it should still be understood. Here is one that I had to re-write:

“Actually many teachers will (never) see as (highly) talented students as I am talking about. Thus money wise, you don’t have to worry.

J.S.Bach

[J.S.Bach]

In the hope of finding out something useful in this forum, I did some research. Before giving any reponses, please read https://www.pianoforum.net/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=teac;action=display;num=1082333900. That is exactly my idea why a teacher has a lot of limitations. Unfortunately, some teachers, especially Bernie, gave a lot of misleading advices even in that room. I was truly surprised that Green said the exact same thing that I did: technique has to be discovered by a student. Thus I assume that my ideas are not easily swallowed only because of prejudice since I am not a teacher. Well then, Green is actually your "fellow musician." It wouldn't hurt you to learn something from him.

J.S.Bach

[janice]

I'm glad to see that you are significantly less verbal in your last 2 posts.  I was beginning to worry about your diahhrea of the mouth that you have had all along.

<hands J.S. Bach some Pepto Bismol>

[Rhys_00]

Hello all,  
I have been reading this forum the last few days, I was pointed to it by one of my customers (Coopes) who has posted on here about me a few weeks ago.

https://www.pianoforum.net/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=stud;action=display;num=1088596650

And to those of you who replied to his post with some helpful advice id like to thank you for doing so.
Anyway, I have been following this topic for a few days and I must admit I do see what JS Bach is trying to say. Although I DO NOT believe that teachers are useless! I do believe self-taught people can accomplish alot.

I have never had a piano lesson in my life, and although I would consider myself as a Good pianist I do believe I would benefit from some professional tuition, but on the same note I don’t feel that I have done too badly on my own. What JS is saying is that someone with “talent” and determination can achieve a high standard of playing with or with out a teacher.
I don’t want to sound like I’m blowing my own trumpet when I say this but I am a  very good pianist, I have had Teachers come up to me in the past and ask me where I studied, and are genuinely shocked when they find out the answer. I will not pretend that I have not worked at it though, I mean…. I put in some hours, but never the less I have never needed a teacher as of yet. Maybe some day I will seek tuition because I do believe that teachers can help, but then again there are some things that just cannot be taught.  

[f0bul0us]

Students who are self-taught (because they don't want a teacher, or feel they don't need one) are depriving themselves of the valuable knowledge that only a teacher can give. Why is this deprivation? Self-taught students just "go after the piece" without doing technical exercises (not scales, actual strength and endurance building exercises) that will save them a lot of fatigue, wrist and forearm pain.

[f0bul0us]

Add to that, you don't know the true background of the piece and what kind of mind set you want to have while performing it. Try and tell me you can't be taught any of that...

Good luck!

[J.S.Bach]

Rhys_00

It’s a shame that you are too late. If you have been reading the postings in this room all along, it would be really great if you said what you have just said in the beginning of the debate. As you can see, the debate, or even the battle, is over and it is not difficult at all to say who’s carrying the torch.
Your case is an amazing evidential coincidence with my topic. I read the link you provided and I will make some additions. As the case was with this room, many people, or should I say Brits, just loved to contradict not for the sake of the argument but for the sake of contradiction itself. Here are few examples:
faulty_Damper

What he is doing is not amazing. Anyone can do it just as anyone can talk.

When confronted with his thoughtless idea, he adds:

That's not the point. I haven't any practice doing it. He has had 3 years of doing it and that's the only way he's been doing it.

I’ll give you 13 years. Come back and show your talent. Also note that if it was as easy as to talk, you should have been able to do it right away, not even in a year. You can’t just gain talent when you want it, you either have it or you don’t. The definition of talent is the same as I have said before.

Coopes

Yeh I just wanted to know what other people’s views were on this, but it seems to have now turned into sort of competition!

Don’t you just love this forum? I also came here just to see some abstract ideas from mature teachers. It turned out not even into a competition, but some really ugly battlefield lead by 10 or so against one. Of course, as you can see now that obviously did not help since it is not the quantity but the quality that matters.

Rhys_00

Although I DO NOT believe that teachers are useless!

As I have shown, neither do I. Although I am having a lot of doubts about the teachers in this forum - with few exceptions - there are still many teachers from countries like Germany not represented here. Nevertheless, no matter how good the teacher is, he still can’t make a virtuoso out of you. That’s my point and not that a teacher is useless. So even if you hire a teacher, it is still you who has to work on yourself to achieve something.

Maybe some day I will seek tuition because I do believe that teachers can help, but then again there are some things that just cannot be taught.


You must be very careful who you choose as a teacher. I would like to point out that although many teachers have seen your talent, none of them has agreed to give you any free lessons. Here are my conclusions: they either don’t have enough knowledge to teach you anything more or they don’t care to do it for free. By teaching one very talented student for free for just one hour a week or a month or even every 6 months won’t make them loose any money. And yet some dare to claim that they teach for the sake of passing on knowledge and not solely for the gains. When I say "gains," don’t think about it in millions or even in thousands or cents. This is a moral idea, not a numerical. That is why if you choose the wrong teacher, it is very possible that you will be ruined. Although a teacher can’t make you a virtuoso, she sure can ruin you with facility.
I have a feeling that you live in England. If you decide to try to study with an excellent teacher, it is very possible that you will have to look towards Germany. Keep studying yourself, and when you believe that the time is right, try to contact some teacher in Germany or Russia by a letter describing your repertoire and situation. Then send them a tape. I hope you will have a warhorse by that time to include. I am confident, that if they believe you are very talented, they usually know it when they hear it, you will sure get a free education, especially if you can’t afford it.

As a biology major, I can say that you are in luck if you are under 30 because after 27 it is downhill. By that I man that just as many animals, Homo sapiens were not designed to live long and it is not only that metabolism slows down after that age, but also all the bone growth and the ability to recover from injuries disappears. In other words, to be less artistic, you are rusting due to the loss of the electrons from your tissues. If you get injured while playing a difficult piece you might recover the injury with difficulty due to arthritis and other problems. I think that that’s why Liszt said that Schumann’s Toccata in C major, Op.7, can be learned the right way only while the person is young. So give it all you can while you can. I don’t mean the Toccata, but a large repertoire in general.

Super fun happy man

Thanks for your remarks several postings ago. It really helped to get this room back to its right track. It was likely that if you didn’t silence those unworthy commentaries, I was going to erupt on a national level, despite the fact I was confident that there has been a misunderstanding and that once I cleared it out, many would agree with my point of view or would not be able to present any contradicting evidence. What’s interesting is that since you mentioned you have a teacher, that must mean that you yourself are a student. Talk about more mature students than teachers in here. Of course, that is also true the other way around as some students in this forum demonstrated.

Self-taught students just "go after the piece" without doing technical exercises (not scales, actual strength and endurance building exercises) that will save them a lot of fatigue, wrist and forearm pain.

You have to mention what kind of student are you talking about. Your average student can’t achieve anything much by himself so it is useless to even mention the exercises. Such a student needs a teacher to play even a simple piece like Fur Elise. On the other hand, a really talented student has a choice to make whether to bother with exercises (Liszt) or not play even a single one (Richter) without any ill effects.

Add to that, you don't know the true background of the piece and what kind of mind set you want to have while performing it. Try and tell me you can't be taught any of that...

You are talking about interpretation. Yes, a teacher can easily teach it  and in fact much better than she can teach technique. However, there is again a drawback: you are correct about the regular or the moderately talented student, but if we again talk about a prodigy, he can learn about the mindset by reading the composer’s biography. In fact, that will be much better because a teacher who explains the student how to interpret Beethoven is not REALLY teaching the student how to interpret Beethoven, but rather gives the student HER OWN INTERPRETATION regarding as to how she has understood Beethoven when she has read about him herself. In science, this is called secondary observation and it is ALWAYS BIASED. Again, this is not an insult to the teachers, but an absolute truth that I can prove on many levels.
     A regular student REALLY needs the teacher’s interpretation because he is not capable of making his own, but a greatly talented student will read about the composer’s life and will have a privilege of a pure or primary observation which will be FREE of someone else’s interpretation no matter who that someone else is. Nevertheless, there is more. The author who wrote the biography is still somewhat biased because he still will interpret Beethoven’s life the way he sees it. Conclusion? No one can be completely sure about what Beethoven wanted to say in one piece or another. Meaning? Although one must know at least something about Beethoven to interpret him, it will eventually come down to one’s own interpretation. I loved it when Claudio Arrau said that many people don’t realize that they don’t have to worry about what everyone thinks how a piece should be interpreted, but rather how THEY think it should be interpreted. “You have your message, and that’s it!” The public will either love you or hate you.
     Again, all this concerns to very few students. 99.9 % still have to be spoon fed. I can go much deeper and bump into philosophy and psychology simply because I very well can. But given that my comments are not properly appreciated in here and knowledge is taken as arrogance, I don’t have the desire to do so.

I thank some of you for your helpful comments.

J.S.Bach

Janice, don’t waste your money on buying drugs for me. I am sure you can find many others far worthier than me who actually can use your help. I might have a lot of acid in me, but I sure lack in bile. Your kindness would be welcomed two days ago, when I needed something for a terrible headache.

[Hmoll]

  

 What JS is saying is that someone with “talent” and determination can achieve a high standard of playing with or with out a teacher.

No. What JSB said is no matter how good a student is, a teacher has no role in that student becoming a "virtuoso." He used several examples: Bach, Gould, Rubinstein, Richter, etc. All of his examples are erroneous because none of them were self taught.

However, the fatal flaw in his assertion is there is  no precedent for what he is talking about. There are simply no historical examples of someone becomng a virtuoso player as a result of having been self taught.

JSB then complains about the 10 to 1 nature of people ganging up on him. Sorry, but if you post wrong information, and try to back it up with incorrect facts, you will be challenged.

Most people with a bit of experience teaching and playing the piano  can see the many holes in JSB's logic. Unfortunately, this forum is visited by a lot of people with varying degrees of experience.  That's why it's important to expose misinformation when it's posted. What he's said here might point a less experienced player in the wrong direction whether it's not seeking out the guidance of a good teacher or the respect good piano teachers earn and deserve, and the role they play in the development of all pianists.


BTW, Rys_00, the odds are against your scenario - quoted above -  too.

[willcowskitz]

Both sides have some truth to them.

In the example of Paganini inspiring Liszt, there was an outer force that ignited something in Liszt - this could as well be a good teacher that knows how to inspire and motivate the student. However much you know about piano playing's technical side, there is something that you can learn. Piano and the positioning of it's keys is anything but ergonomic for the human hand - one can always benefit from trials and errors made by others.

"Wise man learns more from his enemies than a fool from his friends."
--Baltasar Gracian

On the other hand, if there is nothing to ignite, regardless of the efforts of the teacher or Paganinis of the world, there will be no sparkle. In this sense, it always comes from within the learner. There must be determination led by inspiration.

"Education is an admirable thing but it is well to remember from time to time that nothing that is worth knowing can be taught."
--Oscar Wilde

[Rhys_00]

Quote:
Yeh I just wanted to know what other people’s views were on this, but it seems to have now turned into sort of competition!


Ha ha ha …yes.. This does seem to be a very competitive forum, but saying that, in my short time of playing the piano I have also realized just what a competitive instrument the piano is! Everybody wants to show off how good they are/ how hard the pieces are they play ect….. And if someone like myself comes along and claims they are self-taught the first thing out of most other Teacher/pianist’s mouth is- “you must not have the interpretation right” or “you’re technique will be poor” That is until they hear you play! I have found the best way to shut people up who say this is to let my playing do the talking! Unfortunately, on here I have to do it the hard way and try to prove it in words!

I find it quite insulting when someone who has never heard me play assumes that I do not understand interpretation/expression or lack technical ability just because I have had no “professional training” although nobody in here has directly implied this to me! From reading previous replies to other post, I can see that this is the general believe of most of the teachers on this forum.  

So you probably want to know what I can play before you will even take me slightly seriously, so here goes –

Rachmaninov
Prelude No.2 C-sharp minor
Flight of the bumblebee
Prelude No.5 G- Op.23 (this one is not quite polished yet, I still sometimes slip up on the last passage, I’ll keep at it though)

Chopin
Prelude Op.28-15  
Waltz Op.64-2  
Etude Op.25-1    
Etude Op.10 No.12 Revolutionary (this is also new to my repertoire, its same as the Rach prelude it needs abit of polish)

Debussy
Clair De Lune  
Doctor Gradus Ad Parnassum  

I know that this is not a very big repertoire but I spend time on perfecting them once I have learnt them (5-6 hours per day) I do play others which I don’t feel is worth mentioning (Fur Elise ect…)

As you can see, I’m not talking about chopsticks! In addition, like I said before I do think that a teacher could help me improve, but I do not think a teacher is always necessary as long as the student has the drive to educate him/her self. In most cases people like me are the minority, but it makes me wonder how many people who are like me never get anywhere with it, because if you don’t have a teacher nobody will take you seriously.


One more thing, in my experiences with teachers (I encounter a lot in my profession) I have had more bitterness towards me than positive feedback! And in response to you J.S, funnily enough I’ve never had a teacher offer their services to me for free!  

[jeff]

Hmoll:
you said
"What JSB said is no matter how good a student is, a teacher has no role in that student becoming a "virtuoso." He used several examples: Bach, Gould, Rubinstein, Richter, etc. All of his examples are erroneous because none of them were self taught.

However, the fatal flaw in his assertion is there is  no precedent for what he is talking about. There are simply no historical examples of someone becomng a virtuoso player as a result of having been self taught."


i think you have been misinterpreting this part of J.S's argument (he probably didn't make it clear enough, or word it in the best way), and i think Willcowskitz almost showed in his last post the point that J.S was trying to make.
when J.S said "a teacher has no role in that student becoming a "virtuoso."", i believe he meant that a teacher can (and does) play a large role in a student becoming a really good pianist, but not necessarily a "virtuoso" - a virtuoso being in a different class to someone considered a "very good pianist"...
people like richter, rubenstien, gould, etc, they became successful as well-known and well-loved performers because they had something(s) unique about them, something very special which was part of their character, which they didn't learn from a teacher, and which the teacher in fact couldn't have taught them.
so i think one of the main points J.S was trying to get at is about the difference between a high-class performer and a 'virtuoso'.

[Hmoll]

Hmoll:
you said
"What JSB said is no matter how good a student is, a teacher has no role in that student becoming a "virtuoso." He used several examples: Bach, Gould, Rubinstein, Richter, etc. All of his examples are erroneous because none of them were self taught.

However, the fatal flaw in his assertion is there is  no precedent for what he is talking about. There are simply no historical examples of someone becomng a virtuoso player as a result of having been self taught."


i think you have been misinterpreting this part of J.S's argument (he probably didn't make it clear enough, or word it in the best way), and i think Willcowskitz almost showed in his last post the point that J.S was trying to make.
when J.S said "a teacher has no role in that student becoming a "virtuoso."", i believe he meant that a teacher can (and does) play a large role in a student becoming a really good pianist, but not necessarily a "virtuoso" - a virtuoso being in a different class to someone considered a "very good pianist"...
people like richter, rubenstien, gould, etc, they became successful as well-known and well-loved performers because they had something(s) unique about them, something very special which was part of their character, which they didn't learn from a teacher, and which the teacher in fact couldn't have taught them.
so i think one of the main points J.S was trying to get at is about the difference between a high-class performer and a 'virtuoso'.

I understand what he's saying. I just don't agree with it.

Late Beethoven is very unique and individual. Nothing was written like Gross Fugue, Op111, 9th symphony previousl to Beethoven. However, you can't have middle and late Beethoven without early Beethoven. You can't have early Beethoven without Haydn.

Likewise, you can't have Liszt without Czerny. You can't have Gieseking without Leimer. etc.,etc.

It's obvious that there are things about Gould, Richter, Pogorelich, Horowitz, etc. that are individual. That individuality manifested itself from within the artists, but it never would have happened without a teacher providing the basic and advanced training to get them to the point where the departure occurred.

As far as what JSB is saying, at this point I don't know if he knows what he's saying. He started out saying there are no good teachers only good students. When he was challenged on that, he quickly backed down.

[Hmoll]

Quote:
So you probably want to know what I can play before you will even take me slightly seriously, so here goes –

Rachmaninov
Prelude No.2 C-sharp minor
Flight of the bumblebee
Prelude No.5 G- Op.23 (this one is not quite polished yet, I still sometimes slip up on the last passage, I’ll keep at it though)

Chopin
Prelude Op.28-15  
Waltz Op.64-2  
Etude Op.25-1    
Etude Op.10 No.12 Revolutionary (this is also new to my repertoire, its same as the Rach prelude it needs abit of polish)

Debussy
Clair De Lune  
Doctor Gradus Ad Parnassum

 



I think it's great that you were able to make so much progress without a teacher. It sounds like you have a lot of talent.

You are probably at the point where you would benefit from lessons with a good teacher though.
Don't be surprised if they aren't tripping over themselves to teach you for free, though. You get what you pay for.

[J.S.Bach]

Willcowskitz

Piano and the positioning of it's keys is anything but ergonomic for the human hand - one can always benefit from trials and errors made by others.

Yes, but not always. Carl Tausig was a remarkable virtuoso but yet he had very small hands. Thus, his fingering was very different even from his teacher, Liszt. If you take a look at his “Tägliche Studien,” you will see how he provides a separate different fingerings for small hands for the same exercise. This work is of course forgotten by today’s “well educated” teachers who think that the only important books are by modern authors who can’t play anything satisfactorily themselves.
     This was an extreme example, but still, every student has different amount of various types of muscles in his hands and different lengths of finger bones (all determined by genes). So even if the external physiology of the student’s hand is similar to the teacher’s, there is still a myriad of internal differences. The trial and error of the teacher might work for the student, but it will rarely be the optimal solution. Nevertheless, it really does not matter for over 99% of the students. Therefore, what you said is right for the majority.

On the other hand, if there is nothing to ignite, regardless of the efforts of the teacher or Paganinis of the world, there will be no sparkle.

And the sparkle initiates self-education. I liked your quote by Wilde: simple statement; deep implications.

Rhys_00

Everybody wants to show off how good they are/ how hard the pieces are they play ect

Those are not pianists and will never become a worthy artist because they play not for the sake of the playing or because they like it, but merely to show off their skills. I have read about many cases of great artists who preferred to play especially when they were alone. Playing for such people is very personal, instead of a pedantic show off.

I find it quite insulting when someone who has never heard me play assumes that I do not understand interpretation/expression or lack technical ability just because I have had no “professional training” although nobody in here has directly implied this to me!

That is blind jealousy. As for the implications, there are too many. Many people in here imply a lot of things, but when you bring them up front they do not like the exposition.

In most cases people like me are the minority, but it makes me wonder how many people who are like me never get anywhere with it, because if you don’t have a teacher nobody will take you seriously.

That’s a beautiful statement. In science, such precise and yet simple statements are called elegant. When teachers talk about their importance, they completely forget about show business. It is more than obvious that if someone is asked “who is your teacher” and that someone answers “no one,” then that someone will himself become a “no one.” The dominating aspect in here is prejudice and the history books are filled with such examples. When Arrau’s mentor in Germany died, Arrau immediately became the scum of the earth. People forgot that he was that same prodigy with the only difference that his supporter had passed away. I can say that Arrau was so much affected by the general coldness and cruelty of the public, that even when he was a greatly accomplished virtuoso well over 60, one could still observe his pains when he talked about that difficult and cruel period of his life. If anyone of you in here, especially the teachers, want to learn about the misery of the human beings and the majority of the artists in general, you will only need to read Liszt’s biography. Then you will see that although Schumanns and Brahmses, and Wagners are considered better composers that Liszt, as human beings they are so inferior to that kind man that they don’t even deserve to drink the dirty water in which Liszt has washed his feet.

One more thing, in my experiences with teachers (I encounter a lot in my profession) I have had more bitterness towards me than positive feedback! And in response to you J.S, funnily enough I’ve never had a teacher offer their services to me for free!

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that there is a general coldness in England. It is true that all nations have their own imbecile sons and daughters, but I think that judging by the comments in this room and in the others, one can see that the artistic prejudice in England must be superior to that of the other countries. Strangely enough, I can say that England was the most disrespectful country toward’s Liszt’s tremendously gifted skills. Unbelievably, Liszt only achieved success in there because the Brits have heard about his successes in other countries. He got the respect that he deserved when he returned to England many decades later. But too late! At that time he was around 70, and although he still played something for the Brits out of politeness, his skills were nowhere near to when he was 20 or 30 and Brits never got the chance to listen to the real Liszt. The question is how can a country create virtuosos if it does not endorse them? The answer is in the artistic history of England. That’s exactly why I told you that if a German or a Russian artist saw your skills, they would offer you free education because they value the passing of their knowledge above the material and the numerical (mentioned or implied too many times in this room by various teachers).
Your advantage is that you don’t play for others but for yourself, and as such won’t be affected by what others say. My topic for this room was not for no reason - it infuriates me when 99% of the teachers feel that it is ethical of them to attack those 1% of students who can achieve a lot without any teachers.

Jeff
Thanks again for bothering to explain. But as you have seen the response to your explanation, you might probably understand my exasperation when I had to repeat myself not only to just one person, but to a room full of people.

B Minor
I don’t know how long will you be able to keep the mature content of your posts, but as long as you keep them that way and as long as your comments remain more or less relevant I will address them. I feel that I should address them because there might be some students reading the contents of this room and they might also need more explanations.

That individuality manifested itself from within the artists, but it never would have happened without a teacher providing the basic and advanced training to get them to the point where the departure occurred.

You should replace “individuality” with virtuosity. All artists are individual, but very few are virtuosos. Now, your statement reads: “That virtuosity manifested itself from within the artists...” That is the same what I said before - virtuoso creates itself. As far as your second statement goes, I won’t use anymore historical evidences because I think that in order to understand them well enough, you must first either know a lot about history or be one of the students that I am talking about. Thus, I will take as an example Rhys_00. He has never had a teacher. He gave you his repertoire. Forget the basics, are you trying to say that such a repertoire is not “advanced”? Also forget about being able to read the notes because either you or most of the students that you know who can read notes very well are never going to play Chopin etudes satisfactorily.

Here is more

"What JSB said is no matter how good a student is, a teacher has no role in that student becoming a "virtuoso."

Did you read my “Disclaimer” at all? I said exactly the opposite of what you claimed. My comments concern only perhaps 0.1% of all students and yet you include all 100% of them (“no matter how good a student is”). My comments are not about you and thus you don’t have the need to defend your teachers. I do agree that you absolutely have to have teachers and that without them you can’t achieve ANYTHING at all. I can even prove that myself. But what I said has nothing to do with you, so essentially, I agree with everything you say, excluding 0.1% of the students.

As far as what JSB is saying, at this point I don't know if he knows what he's saying. He started out saying there are no good teachers only good students. When he was challenged on that, he quickly backed down.

I never backed off from anything. Everything I ever said still stands. As for the disclaimer, I added it merely to show the teachers that I don’t mean that they are useless so that we could get over those details about money and self-worth and discuss my topic in the abstract. I think the teachers have already understood it, but you still haven’t because you still continue stating the same statements.

Don't be surprised if they aren't tripping over themselves to teach you for free, though. You get what you pay for.

If I had to comment on that, it would be very, very ugly.

J.S.Bach

[J.S.Bach]

m1469,

I am not trying to achieve anything. It took me a lot of studying to arrive to my current conclusion about the roles of the teachers and it is only now that I was interested about what some mature teachers think about it. I am not surprised about the opinions of the teachers since they obviously would like to defend themselves. What I am surprised about is the manner in which the mature teachers responded to my comments. I live in USA and almost everyone agrees that the educational system in USA is very poor and that the people are not educated enough. Although I have many well educated friends, I still wanted to hear the opinions from the teachers who were educated in Europe regarding my views on teaching.
     I think you will agree with me that the educational standards in Europe are much higher than in USA. So when I started the debate, I expected a good “bang” either for or against me. I got neither (of course, Bernhard was great at the beginning, but as his knowledge failed, he began to “fight” instead of keeping it cultured, as all educated people do). In fact, I got a lot of immature responses unworthy of European education. Now that’s what I am surprised about.
     I have not presented a question simply because I am confident in what I say. If I was not, then I would open a book instead of a debate. You are saying that I backed my debate. What else should I have done, just state what I think is right without any factual evidence? That’s not my method.
     My goal was to reach the teachers. As for teaching, I certainly didn’t or don’t want to teach anything to the people with whom I am debating because otherwise that is not a debate anymore, but a lesson. So I obviously did not come to teach, but rather to debate with very well educated people who already know or should know everything themselves. Every good debate stimulates people’s minds and no matter who is winning or losing, everyone learns something. Don’t you agree?

Simply, what am I supposed to gain from any of your statements? Furthermore, what can I possibly gain that I cannot find out for myself?

You can gain whatever you like.
     I don’t know what is your learning style, but when I hear a good debate whether among teachers, on Discovery channel, or anywhere else, I don’t say to myself that I can learn everything that they know by simply asking them for Bibliography. I just learn whatever is available. So the answer to your second question, whether rhetorical or not, is that there is absolutely nothing that you can gain that is impossible for you to find out by reading many books et al. You must also realize that different people have different analytical skills and what one person might miss from a reading, another might gain. Thus the answer can also be “everything.”

Cordially,

J.S.Bach

[Swan]

Quote:

funnily enough I’ve never had a teacher offer their services to me for free!  

I went to the doctors yesterday, and you know he made me pay for it - and I was REALLY sick.   And when I got my hair cut - I had to pay for that too - and those dog washers with their vans and blowdryers -  they're not free!  In fact it seems that the entire world is made up of money hungry, self-interested people just out for a quick buck to pay their bills.  I ask you, what is the world coming to?  :-/

[J.S.Bach]

m1469,
When I said that I am not here to teach, I did not mean that I don’t care whether other people understand me or not. I don’t know everything, but if you ask me a question, I’ll answer it if I can. Please also note that I am not a piano teacher.

Swan
Maybe you missed what I wrote. The point is that if a student is indeed very talented and has no resources to pay for her education with a teacher, then a good teacher would offer a free guidance or education (just as many in Germany and Russia have done, not excluding Liszt). Obviously, a teacher should not do it in such a manner as to get harmed financially, but during a spare time, perhaps once a week or even once a month or more (depending on individual situation) it would not hurt a teacher to pass on his knowledge to a very talented student. You might say that it is not enough, but such students might understand what you tell them in an hour what others won’t grasp for weeks or more (if ever at all). Such students are almost extinct today, so what I am talking about is more like a moral idea rather than financial. It is not difficult to imagine that teachers wouldn’t make any money if they taught all moderately talented students. You just did not understand the statement correctly.

J.S.Bach

[jeff]

Hmoll:
"It's obvious that there are things about Gould, Richter, Pogorelich, Horowitz, etc. that are individual. That individuality manifested itself from within the artists, but it never would have happened without a teacher providing the basic and advanced training to get them to the point where the departure occurred. "

i honestly think that that's precisely (or at least very close to) the point J.S. has been trying (but obviously failing, in part) to make.

"As far as what JSB is saying, at this point I don't know if he knows what he's saying. He started out saying there are no good teachers only good students. When he was challenged on that, he quickly backed down. "

i haven't been taking a lot of of what J.S. has been saying literally, because i don't think it has been neccessary to. i think he probably makes those generalistic and inflammatory statements like "there are no teachers" just to draw people's attention to what he saying, or to make people consider things from a very unfamiliar point of view, or perhaps even because the particular statement he uses sounds poetic/grand/inspiring, however factually inaccurate it may be. unfortunately, that sort of device is just really working against him (it would be ideal if he could deliver his message in a direct and precise manner, so that no mistakes could be made as to what his intentions/ideas/opinions are).

[Swan]

) You just did not understand the statement correctly.

J.S.Bach

I was quoting Rhys, not you J.S. Bach.

[Rhys_00]

I went to the doctors yesterday, and you know he made me pay for it - and I was REALLY sick.   And when I got my hair cut - I had to pay for that too - and those dog washers with their vans and blowdryers -  they're not free!  In fact it seems that the entire world is made up of money hungry, self-interested people just out for a quick buck to pay their bills.  I ask you, what is the world coming to?  :-/

Hmmm….. well, I went to the doctors the other day also, but I live in the U.K so I didn’t have to pay for that…..My dad cuts hair for a living…so I don’t pay for that either….and when we wash our Dog we let him walk around the garden to dry off….so that’s free too!!

Thanks for the input Swan  

[faulty_damper]

I continue to have nothing relevent to add to this thread but would like to point out the Student version of Kulahola.

[Swan]

Hmmm….. well, I went to the doctors the other day also, but I live in the U.K so I didn’t have to pay for that…..My dad cuts hair for a living…so I don’t pay for that either….and when we wash our Dog we let him walk around the garden to dry off….so that’s free too!!

 

aahhh, that's why you expect something for nothing... you're used to it  

Don't leave home in a hurry - it's a wonderful place to be.  

[Rhys_00]

aahhh, that's why you expect something for nothing... you're used to it  

Don't leave home in a hurry - it's a wonderful place to be.  

If only someone had of told me that about 10 years ago eh! ….oh well….

[J.S.Bach]

m1469
There are several reasons why opening a new topic on the exact same idea is unreasonable. The first and foremost is that in a new room people will start asking questions and bringing in arguments which have already been addressed in this room. Since I really do not want to answer the same questions and/or arguments over and over again, it would be reasonable to continue the topic in the same room thus avoiding any complications associated with the ramifications.
     In addition, if everyone started to create new rooms out of this one, then I would have to divide into pieces to answer them all (I have already done it to answer numerous people at the same time right here and it is very time consuming). I hope you will understand.

Swan

I was quoting Rhys, not you J.S. Bach.

I know. However, it was me who suggested the free lessons and Rhys_00 was just responding to what I said to him.

Jeff
I tried to keep everything as simple as possible. To make the room topic more precise, it would take a whole paragraph.



Overall, the debate was ok, but it could have been much better. I assume that it is over now since there are no more arguments against what I said. Of course, I believe that the debate was actually over much earlier. If some aspects of the debate should inspire new topics detached from the main topic of this room, feel free to open new discussion rooms. Nevertheless, if what you say has anything to do with the current topic, please keep it concentrated in one area to avoid banal repetitions.

J.S.Bach

[rlefebvr]

I wouldn't say the "shut up" was out of line, but it wasn't really necessary.  I don't think there's anything that this J.S. Bach (more of an insult to the composer than an homage) has said that anyone here would take seriously.  And if you do take this guy seriously, evaluate everything he has said here, and see if he makes any sense.

- Saturn

I agree with Saturn here. I can't believe the number of members I respect who have responded to this thread that was only put in to get a rise out of all of you. If I did not know better I would have thought it was April Fool's week.

Shame on you for wasting your valuable time responding to this thread and making me read thru it and wasting my own time.

Oh oh...Shame on me now for responding to this thread after promising myself not to even look at it.

Shame on Janice for telling to come read it.  

[J.S.Bach]

rlefebvr
I see you have been practicing abstinence.
You are too late. The feast is over. Your quote is also very old and irrelevant. As for Janice, I agree that she is misbehaving, but I am sure you will find a way to forgive her, since compared to many, she was actually much better behaved.

Oh oh...Shame on me now for responding to this thread after promising myself not to even look at it.

As for that, don’t worry, it’s just a weak will which you share with many. You can get over it by taking some Yoga classes. Afterall, everyone likes to sin once in a while, espceially those practicing abstinence.

J.S.Bach

[rlefebvr]

rlefebvr
I see you have been practicing abstinence.
You are too late. The feast is over. Your quote is also very old and irrelevant. As for Janice, I agree that she is misbehaving, but I am sure you will find a way to forgive her, since compared to many, she was actually much better behaved.
Oh oh...Shame on me now for responding to this thread after promising myself not to even look at it.

As for that, don’t worry, it’s just a weak will which you share with many. You can get over it by taking some Yoga classes. Afterall, everyone likes to sin once in a while, espceially those practicing abstinence.

J.S.Bach

That was quite funny actually.

[J.S.Bach]

Since I have two stars now, I thought that you would not be too offended if I added some graphic designs. (Sorry, no one teacher again)

[/glow]      
<sup>Before making general observations, I wanted to look over at some other rooms of this forum to get a more or less accurate view about the quality of the knowledge circulating among the teachers and students in here. It is not hard to conclude that the vast majority of you are from England.
     Just as I expected, the quality of the knowledge was the same in all the rooms that I looked over, thus illustrating that the lack of good arguments in this room was not associated with the personal dislike of me but rather with the lack of knowledge. Almost everything in this forum is regular and banal. As such, when a highly educated person comes to look over what you write and becomes bored, he will obviously not become a member. This is the explanation that I came up with regarding to the question of why aren’t there many educated people in this European forum.
     It is also obvious that many like to talk for the sake of talking and the amount of the points they collect under their names. Bernie is especially good at that. Not only that, he is also so knowledgeable that you can give him the name of any forum member and he will probably tell you about them more than you would like to know, going back to old archives and dates of birth. If the countless hours that many of you devote to this forum was actually used towards reading and learning, then all of you would probably have your doctorates and would actually have something to teach your poor students.
     It is really hard for me to put my thoughts together in an organized manner on this last post simply because this forum has become very boring for me. I would rather just leave, you are right Bajoran about wasting time, but unfortunately for me I have a terrible habit of finishing my tasks till the very end. This comes in very handy in many areas, but in here it is useless I fear. Those of you who talk about ego, first analyze your pathetic selves since you think that you are the most important factor in the student’s education. You would be very surprised to find out that several teachers to whom I talked to in person agreed right away that everything achieved is not my the teacher, but by the student. I didn’t even have to argue to prove my point. In here it was obviously different. To talk about ego, also remember that many of your honors consider yourselves better teachers than Liszt (not ONE of you disagreed what that charlatan Berjuan said). Thus, next time you talk about ego, first look at yourselves. As for me, compared to most of you in here, I have a lot of things to be proud of. If someone whose specialty was in arts came to a biology forum and “kicked everyone’s ass” (language worthy of this forum), I would be enraged. Not at the debater, but at myself for my ignorance. Here is where my ego would come in and “kick me in the ass” to leave the forum and go study until I have something worthy to say. That is not an ego anymore, but a much needed ambition. However, you won’t understand this because your honors don’t believe in self-education. I can bet, that almost every single one of you has gained all of your knowledge as a result of a spoon feeding in some university and have not learned anything by yourselves. If any of you had, then you would understand where I am coming from. Bernhard was the only one who more or less knew something, however, it is not because he is especially smart or studious, but rather that due to his age he has been so many years in musical profession that has collected scraps of information (perhaps involuntarily) making them into a whole. He shines only because his background is absolutely black. Although seemingly mature, he gets offended like a kid just because someone points him out his mistakes.
     Also note that none of you, the great teachers that you are, could point at even a single virtuoso student that you have created. Actually, B minor (aka Hmoll for those who might not know) is the only exception and can be considered a pretty good virtuoso. Bernhard taught him well. Afterall, one can only teach what one knows well enough to teach. I thought that b minor has learned something from me too, but I overestimated him. It will take him to read the contents of this room many times over to understand at least something. Even though Germany rejects such a virtuoso as b minor, he still prefers to keep his name in sophisticated German. I am assuming that it is too dear for him to loose all his 600 or so valuable points under his name. By the way you thankless wannabe German, maybe after you are done polishing Berjuan’s (he is such a Don) toenails, you can begin to wax the boots of the Germans. That will include not only the teachers, but also the old, the layman, and even the women and the children. At least then, it would be ok to keep your name in German as a valuable German shoe polisher and serviceman. Maybe it would be unfair to judge the entire English artistic/pianistic society just by the quality of this forum. However, this forum certainly does not bring any respect to the country. Next time when an Englishman opens his mouth to trash the American educational system, I will for sure shut him up for good. I do not claim to have been taught in America, but many artists in this country are uncomparably more educated than the mature english teachers in this entire forum. Nevertheless, England is still a great place to be for a biology student.
     I really don’t care to write more. You certainly can go ahead and finally talk bravely since you are not going to get a response from me and as such don’t have to be afraid of being corrected and reprimanded. This forum should be renamed “Regular teachers with their extraregular students with subaverage cognitive skills” club. I also saw some especially bright personas who have written “Co-president of berhnard fan club” under their most illustrious messages. Now that was funny and made me realize that I am simply dealing with servants. However, I still don’t think that I have completely wasted my time in here since at least I hopefully improved my essay writing techniques. Maybe if I ever need to improve my essay skills without any significance regarding to the contents, I’ll just drop by.
     Before leaving I’ll try to help you a little more. Since I value time a lot, I have done some research and calculated the amount of time wasted per life. Here is some of the data assuming that you live to be 75:
Sleep 7hr/day - by the end of life - 23 years slept
TV 3hr/day    - 9 years (about 3 years only commercials)

Even if you waste just 30 minutes a day doing nothing useful, by the end you will have wasted about 2 years. For someone who cares, this is a very depressing fact and should make you better manage your time. You can estimate how much time each of you wastes by just figuring out how do you spend your days. A simple observation: even if you tie your shoelaces in just 10 seconds, by the end of your life you would have wasted over 9 days just tying shoelaces. Every 3 seconds per day equals an entire 24 hours by the end of you life. You can figure out the rest by yourselves.
     I will add that I spent sometime to find out the best Bach biography available. In case if any of you is interested and is willing to spend some productive time, it is Christoph Wolff’s Johann Sebastian Bach. I find out that if the book was anymore detailed, it would include Bach’s laundry list. Spitta is still the ultimate Bach authority and Wolff relies on him a lot, but the newer book contains more news and corrections since new Bach archives have been found in Kiev. I got the book from the library, and I assume that you can do the same in England. That’s what is great about USA, they might have a poor educational system, but the libraries are so full of resources that one might loose track of what he wants to read when he visits such a facility. Again, this would not help anyone who waits to be fed by a teacher. Had I come to USA a little earlier, I would know much more than I know now (though it is still enough “to kick ass”). The summer is beginning to end. Enjoy it while you can ladies and gentlemen. (Same can be said about our lives).</sup>

Farewell,

[shadow=blue,left,1000]J.S.Bach[/shadow]
P.S.: I am not German, but you  confirmed my hypothesis:

[shadow=blue,left,300]
Die Fahne hoch, die Reihen fest geschlossen
S.A. marschiert mit ruhig festem Schritt
Kam'raden, die Rotfront und Reaktion erschossen
Marschier'n im Geist in unsern Reihen mit
Die Strasse frei den braunen Bataillonen
Die Strasse frei dem Sturmabteilungsmann
Es schau'n aufs Hakenkreuz voll Hoffnung schon Millionen
Der Tag für Freiheit und für Brot bricht an
Zum letzen Mal wird nun Appell geblasen
Zum Kampfe steh'n wir alle schon bereit
Die Knechtschaft dauert nur mehr kurze Zeit [/shadow]

[size=8]Deutschland, Deutschland über alles, über alles in der Welt[/size][/color] [/glow]

[/font]

[BajoranD]

And in case anyone is wondering what that last bit in German is (the bit that was claimed as JSBach's hypothesis), it was the official anthem of the Nazi party. It is currently banned in Germany.

[Hmoll]

at least I hopefully improved my essay writing techniques.

Guess again.

[lostinidlewonder]

*lostinidlewonder mumbles an incantation*

Necropost!!!!

This was a provocative post. The user J.S Bach seemed to believe that if teachers are to be of any use at all they should be able to produce virtuoso students out of anyone at all. Since this is not really a reality any virtuoso pianist thus gets can get to that point without any teacher at all.

I could imagine if everyone was paid $10,000 an hour to study the piano and they need to become virtuosos to be able to claim all the money, you would have a world full of virtuosos. I say this because I have seen a few students grow from nothing at all to excellent pianists simply because their worked diligently and consistently (not a common work ethic to come across in itself). However to see improvement in the quickest time possible the majority of people need to study with those who are more experienced than themselves or at least someone who they can bounce ideas off from.

All pianists need to learn to learn on their own in some manner and work/develop tools that make sense to them. As a matter of efficient study however we also can also get help and "stand on the shoulders of giants" and learn from others experience. This allows you to learn things you perhaps didn't know was important and see further than you normally would be able to on your own. You can deal with more correct answers rather than have to experiment through errors on your own. You have someone to help you focus your attention and you have someone to answer to which is very helpful since studying completely on your own can allow you to become too complacent.

The vast majority of people who are studying the piano these days do not have reasonable potential to become virtuosos. Thank goodness that music doesn't just revolve around impressive playing, the world of music is far more diverse than that and people with all sorts of skill levels can enjoy music to their fullest no matter what level they play at. How do you help people develop a healthy relationship with the piano? Most people starting out at the piano might have a huge amount of inspiration to start out with but what happens once this honeymoon period ends? How do you deal with progress plataeus and deal with your limitations?

All these online courses I've seen don't really help you develop a relationship with the piano, it is just exercises, tasks, music games, worksheets, pieces to get through. That is the nature of courses themselves, they are impersonal, there is no human side to it and it cannot address the most efficient solution to the countless issues each individual may experience. I've taught a lot of early beginners over the years and first and foremost I want them to love piano music and enjoy studying it. It doesn't matter how well they can play they need to play and study in a way which brings them challenge but also joy as they succeed.

A good teacher can help their students on a personal level which helps them connect to music and become curious about the possibilities. I had some bad teachers as a kid who obsessed about theory, Italian term memorization and pronunciation, made everything feel like an uphill battle without any imagination, strict regimented courses. Even though I loved piano they made me hate it when studying with them. Thank goodness they didn't crush my personal relationship with the piano I already had before going to them. I have had a few students who I taught many years ago who are now piano teachers or performers at a professional and amateur level. One who is a professional teacher I only taught when he was 5-7 years old but he had told me many years later that it was the joy for piano I instilled in him when he was very young that encouraged him to take piano up as a career as he got older.

I had a young student who didn't excel in piano playing at all but the benefits from having a successful piano journey helped her in other ways. She was a very naughty student at school and often was sent to the headmaster, she was so used to being "told off" by teachers and adults that she felt it normal. I even had one of my other students who was in the same school as this girl ask me if I was teaching her and when I said I was he went ahead describing how badly behaved she is.
   In our piano lessons although she was naughty I refrained a great deal from correcting her attitude and made the lesson as enjoyable as possible to met her needs. She needed some activity where she was not told off, where she could only succeed. It took a few tough lessons but soon enough the thick negative energy that once always surrounded her seemed to gradually fade more and more each lesson she attended. She was learning to relax and enjoy the learning process. This helped her in many ways in her schooling and her guardian came up to me at the end of the term with tears in her eyes because this little girl was behaving so well in school and it was thanks to her piano lessons.

So teaching piano is not about producing virtuosos but helping others create a healthy relationship with music which allows them to work in an effective/enjoyable manner and thus encourage them to have this life long journey. And then on the other hand the study of piano with a teacher can bring benefits which are not directly connected with piano itself, that is a wonderful mysterious power.

[flanker27]

To come back to the topic, I think there are actually good and bad teachers, as much as there are talented and talentless students. If you're lucky, you're talented and learn with a good teacher, and if you're not, well...
I'm saying it from the point of view of someone who's just beginning to be able to play something on the piano, with an average level of skill, let's say; but the issue is that I've only learnt how to play with online tutorials.
And I can tell that there are some people who are much, MUCH better at explaining and guiding beginners, even through the filter of a video, than others.

[anacrusis]

Of course there are good an bad teachers. A good teacher - or let's call it a teacher who is a good fit for the student - can help the student accomplish more in one year than a onether teacher cannot in three years.

But it also depends on what you define as a "good" teacher. For some people, it's a teacher who explains everything in detail and holds the student's hand every step of the way, for others, it's a teacher who is very hands off and vague, forcing the student to figure out things for themselves, to mention two extremes. There can be merits to using both approaches at various points. But none of it is an absolute truth and it depends on what your metrics and goals are.