I've never played any Romantic pieces before.
Hello,I'm 18 years old and have been playing the piano for 9 years now. I'm grade 8 standard and would like to play something challenging and enjoyable. I heard the Rach 3 concerto in the movie Shine 3 years ago. I didn't pay too much attention to it at first but recently I heard a performance of the Rach 3 ossia cadenza and thought it was revolutionary... For the past 2 years I've been very narrow in selecting composer's works to learn - J.S. Bach was regarded as the greatest composer who lived. However, since listening to Rach, his concerto No. 3 takes me beyond the muddled presence and allows me to touch something timeless and eternal. I've never played any Romantic pieces before. I've always focused on Baroque music and rarely stepped into the classical realm. Although there's something daring me to learn this piece... but... Should I attempt it? I heard only a select few professional pianists have played this successfully with true interpretation and emotion but I believe I can too.Should I?PS: I have very large hands if that's useful.
I'd go for it. Rach 3 (at least just the notes) can be learned by someone at your level in about 2-3 months if you're spending around 3 or 4 hours a day on it. It's the music/interpretation aspect that's the hard part about it.
That's an absurd claim. There's no basis whatsoever for knowing the original poster's level, for speculating that such a project would take "about 2-3 months if you're spending around 3 or 4 hours a day on it," or for predicting how long it would take anyone according to a formula based on hours of practice.
There's no basis for knowing the original poster's level in practical terms, or for speculating that such a project would take "about 2-3 months if you're spending around 3 or 4 hours a day on it," or for predicting how long it would take anyone according to a formula based on hours of practice.
I'm going to learn Rach 3! Am I crazy?
Just do the arithmetic: my edition has 128 pages for Rach 3 with about 14 measures per page, or approximately 1778 measures (not all of them even have notes, because sometimes the orchestra is playing, but let's assume they all have notes). Three months at 4 hours a day is 21600 minutes. 12600/1778 = 12 minutes. Take the hardest measure in the entire concerto. Could you memorize it in 12 minutes if you focused all your energy on that one single measure? Certainly (though of course not up to speed). Ergo, the whole work should be memorizable in around three months, 4 hours a day, even by an average person, provided the chunked it carefully and diligently in this manner. Some people who are naturally better at memorization may be able to memorize measures faster (say, 8 minutes per measure), and ergo would learn it much quicker.
Maybe you can try something easy first, like the Brahms first
Hi Orange. no I dont think it is easy, I was being a brat. Cheers, Becky
"LOL!"^1000Are you serious about this? Like, for real?
Despite everyone in this thread calling me an idiot, fool, retard, ignoramus, etc. for my viewpoint on the matter of memorization, I am pretty sure that nobody insulting me here has ever ....
I'm not aware of any such epithets being used, but I guess the shoe fits.
In my opinion, you're too convinced of your own infallibility to have a clue how clueless your argument actually is.
Even if all your assertions about memorization were demonstrably reliable, memorization does not confer the skills needed to execute very advanced technical challenges with accuracy and musicality.This discussion started out about learning a very long and very complex piece of music. That's a multidimensional process, and memorization is just one component of it. Knowing all the notes doesn't mean knowing how to play all the notes, and by that criterion all your formulas and predictions are baseless. It takes way more than memory!
Boy do I second that. Stevebob has it dead on. I cant even believe how far off in the ozone some statements are. This is the Rach 3. Let me say it again, The Rach 3. Hey maybe one more time the Rach 3. im speechless, and that doesnt happen often. What can I say its no big deal if you want to try it, but you asked our opinion. Maybe you can try something easy first, like the Brahms first or the chopin e minor, or the oh so simple Rach 2 and then try the Rach 3. i apologize in advance if I put off any one. Cheers, Becky
Just practice it for one month and see how you go. If it's something you REALLY REALLY wanna learn, go for it. Then after that, take a step back. You will then KNOW what you need to work on and what you must do to get there if playing Rach 3 is your ULTIMATE GOAL. No you're not crazy, it's going with your desire.
HI Ponken. NO I dont think there easy. Its called Sarcasm to make a point. Cheers, Becky
I've never seen the score of Rach 3, but if it doesn't have any complex cross rhythms like Liszt transcendental etude no12 or Samuel Barber excursion no2, then you should be able to self learn it to the point where you can play it fluently from memory if it's your goal to get the best results from your teacher.
YES!!! I'm 15 and at Grade 8 level and I'm trying to learn it. My plan is to learn ALL of the notes, then inject all the vitality and spirit into it afterwards. I hope that this is the right approach At the moment I'm listening to a few different recordings of it every moment of the day - and following with the score is very helpful. I believe if you are extreeeeeeeeemely precise in your learning, then play it until you cannot put a 'foot' wrong (which might affirm your craziness) there is no reason why you cannot play like katia skanavi (who I discovered on YouTube and I think is pretty swish ) There is no denying that this will take you a lifetime and a half, but it's worth it!It's nice to know that there are also other crazy people too
I was quoting what I think is the longest reasonable time someone should take to memorize it if they have been playing piano for as long as the poster indicates he has and is of perhaps average intelligence (I'm sure some people, due to being incredibly stupid, are probably incapable of memorizing even simpler pieces). Sorry to sound jerky here, but as someone who tried to play classical music in college, but bombed it really, really badly because I was thrown into braille music because the teacher wouldn't let me learn by ear as I had been doing, which doesn't take me long at all, I could take three months just to learn one or two pieces, and I think I am definitely not stupid. I hope I don't come off as rude because I hate internet wars, but sometimes memorization is harder for some people. It doesn't mean they're stupid. I would think if you're playing classical music, you're definitely not stupid.