Assigning advanced music sooner rather than later

[fleetfingers]

Teachers, do you think it's a good idea to take a youngish student - roughly 10 years old - and assign him advanced repertoire before he has mastered lower levels? Let's say he could read and decipher the music on his own (or figure out parts by ear), but doesn't have the technique to play it yet. Let us also assume that the teacher knows he'll end up butchering the piece; at least it will be obvious to any knowledgeable musician that it was too hard for him in the first place and that the student wasn't really "ready" for it. Is there any value in this? Does tackling something so difficult and making it half-way help to improve a students' overall playing? Will it propel him forward in any way? When he eventually masters the piece he previously butchered (years later), will he have mastered it any sooner than had he stayed on appropriate levels and gradually moved up?

I'm also interested to hear what students and parents would have to say about such a plan if it was presented to them by the teacher.

Thanks in advance.

[ted]

I speak as a rank musical outsider at the best of times. I say not if difficulty itself and competitive achievement, for either teacher or pupil, are the principal motivations. However, a young person with a genuine musical passion for a particular piece is going to play it anyway whether the teacher likes it or not. I know I did and it brought me no harm that I know of. I do not have the experience to know if deliberately assigning advanced pieces, whether the pupil likes them or not, actually causes harm. Let us see what the teachers of the forum say.

[lostinidlewonder]

Some links that might be of interest:

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=7899.msg80466#msg80466
https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=19023.msg205669#msg205669
https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=28051.msg325205#msg325205
https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=30662.msg355465#msg355465
https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=34031.msg395290#msg395290

[fleetfingers]

Thanks for those links! I've only read the first one so far but wanted to make a quick comment about it before I move on.

Most of the discussion was about daily lessons and I agreed with everything you said. I mentioned about 6 or 7 months ago that I was teaching a neighbor's son on a daily basis because I wanted to try it and see if he would progress faster. At the time, it seemed like a great idea. But now I can say that I agree with everything you said in that thread. I recently switched him to weekly lessons - like a normal student - and the progress is the same, if not better. I guess if you had someone who practiced a ton each day and had something new to bring to each lesson, it might work.

OK, I'm going to read the other links now . . .

[fleetfingers]

Quote from lostinidlewonder (from the last link in his post): "Sometimes we like to study pieces that takes us a long time and to which there is a slow learning curve. I believe this is a slow way to approach your musical study. You should be learning more easier pieces than one large difficult piece. The process of learning is no different in an easy piece than in a difficult piece, the technique and what the fingers have to do is more difficult but the way in which our brain learns music is the same in all instances. We must practice this learning multiple times and as many times as possible instead of simply focusing on "difficult" pieces.

As you improve the pieces that might have been difficult for you 3 years ago now are a normal level for you. Then you can go ahead and learn these efficiency and with control. This is why Quality and Quantity is a reflection of an advanced ability at piano learning. As you heighten the bar which you consider "difficult" music you are improving yourself as a musician. If when you play you consider much of what you play difficult, then you are somewhat lacking in your abilities."


I think this applies to what I am wondering about, and it has somewhat confirmed my suspicions. There is the subject of stretching ourselves or our pupils by giving them parts of difficult pieces in addition to what they're studying at their current level. But, then, there is the idea of assigning a piece to a student that is several levels above what they've done before. My questions are related to the latter method, where you push a student to spend months and months on just one really, really hard piece.

This is not a hypothetical situation; my son's teacher is doing this with him. I was on board with the first jump - even though he never mastered the piece, he seemed to improve. I was thinking that the next step would be for him to work on more pieces at that level and maybe slightly below - to increase the quality and quantity of music he can play where he is now at. But the teacher just gave him another piece which is 2-3 levels above the one that was already difficult for him. This is meant to be the one and only thing he is working on. I thought I liked this teacher, but now I'm questioning his method and considering leaving. Just wanted to see what others here think about it.

ted, my thinking is much like yours. Part of my worry is that my son didn't choose the piece. He is only on board because his teacher flatters him by saying how awesome he'll be if he is able to learn it - and tells him that he "can" and that he's "ready". I am worried that my son, who started to play because he loved it, is now being motivated by future acclamations instead of the love of learning the music. But, I don't know . . . as long as he's willing to do it, for whatever reason, should I just let him do it?

[ted]

On the face of it I'd be inclined to treat the whole thing lightly, remove the serious aspect and let him have a try if he wants to. He obviously has sensible and supportive parents so I cannot see any harm arising out of it whatever happens. Sometimes kids understand a lot more about these situations and themselves than we give them credit for. If he really loves his music the outcome regarding one piece isn't likely to matter.

In the end though, the opinion of a parent counts for much more than advice from strangers on the internet. 

[mcdiddy1]

There is something to be said about giving student's challenging music that will increase their technical ability. It just depends on how it is approached. In my opinion the student need to have a burning motivation to practice and play it if the piece is going to assigned. If not the progress will slow and unmotivating.

The plan of assigning a piece with the knowledge the piece will be "butchered" is bad teaching. You would want to set up the student to achieve success. Students know when they are not playing well and will be unmotivated to struggle and have so many multiple pieces unmastered. Everyone with piano technique knows when your technique is strong, playing piano is effortless. If you are constantly taught to not master a piece, not develop the technique to play the piece how is this going to set the student for success? Wouldn't the student being to accept lower standards of playing?

Students need teachers to guide them in the right direction. Where is this teacher leading this student too?

There is much better ways to employ a strategy to challenge students to higher technical abilities. Have the student learn a large number of pieces that are appropriate for him and after 3 or 4 of these pieces, add a more challenging work. This way the student has a chance to build repertoire, achieve success, learn a variety of technique, practice strategies (which will help challenging pieces) learn musical concepts, memorization, fingering etc without being overly demanding in the technical abilities. When the challenging piece arrives, the student is armed with a variety of tools to tackle the piece with or without the teacher.

I find it troubling that people feel all it takes to achieve technique is to play challenging music. That is a misunderstanding of technique. Technique comes when you learn how to use your body to achieve musical results in a variety of settings. People with strong technique have a wide repertoire of music. They did not decide to pick up a difficult piece and butcher it and then they magically could play everything below it better.

The student does not need a teacher who will give music that is beyond his/her level. That is the student's job. It is the teachers job to set the student up for future success and to know how to progress sequenciatlly based on what the student needs to learn.

[gerryjay]

Dear Fleet,
I think balance is the answer. If you keep your student attached to things s/he can handle, boredom is the most likely scenario; on the other hand, pushing her/him too hard is a recipe to failure and injury.

If your student is currently, let's say, level 5, center your approach at level 5 repertoire, but use a couple of pieces from level 7 or 8. This will develop his/her confidence, and speed up everything.

One word of caution: this "level +" repertoire must be choosen with very much attention. If your student is struggling with left hand chord figurations, giving a "level +" sonata movement that digs deeper into that is a bad call. Explore your student's best feature.

Best regards,
Jay.

[bachbrahmsschubert]

I've never agreed with the quality over quantity argument in regards to music. It should and only be quality with quantity.

I know teachers that assign several small pieces, let's take first movement of Mozart K. 545, first movement of Haydn HXVI: 5 and maybe a Bach invention, and allow the student to butcher these works all based on the assumption that progress will be made because they are playing Mozart, Haydn and Bach or any piece/composer of the student's level. The fingers may get faster, but the brain does not develop (my very problem with technical exercises). There is no effort from the teacher to really develop the student as a musician and human being, only prepare the student for more difficult repertoire. The quality aspect is missing.

Now, let's take a teacher who assigns a student with great potential and the willingness to learn something like Chopin Ballade 2. Let's assume this student learns it in 4 months and plays it well. I don't see how this hurts the student at all, besides the fact that there is a serious gap in repertoire. The quantity aspect is missing.

The key is finding the perfect balance between the two, which is something a good teacher will do easily. From an educational standpoint, assigning one large work (assuming it is played well) as opposed to several small works (assuming they are played below average) is both damaging. However, at no point should the student only be given works that he/she can handle. An appropriate challenge is very necessary. If you don't mind my asking, how old is your son and what piece was he assigned?

Best wishes,

[fleetfingers]

My son is 10. I was trying to be vague because I wasn't referring to piano music. He plays the violin. I am not a member of a violin forum and hoped it'd be OK to ask here - I think that my question about assigning difficult repertoire is applicable to any instrument. I'm actually interested in hearing more of people's experiences on this subject in regards to good piano teaching, as well. So, keep the comments coming.

Sorry it's not piano music - I know that would be more fun to talk about. The piece he was assigned is Kreisler Preludium and Allegro. From searching the Internet, I've learned that it is around level 9; some say 10. My son has been playing the violin for 2 and a half years and I think it's a stretch to think that he can play a level 9 piece. I'm afraid we'll be wasting a lot of time and money trying to learn it. The pieces he's worked on in the past year with his current teacher are within the range of levels 4-7. He plays them OK but has a lot of room to improve on intonation.

Thank you all for your comments. I find myself agreeing with what's being said about balance, quality, quantity, and setting the student up for success. For now, I'm going to go along with the teacher to see where he's going with all this, but I'm skeptical.

[gerryjay]

Dear Fleet,
at the light of your last post, I think that you have a preety simple situation: either your trust your son's teacher, or you don't. There is no half way.

Let me explain why. Although it may seem obvious, it is not.

I am a teacher myself, and I'll assume you are dealing with a prepared teacher, with appropriate background and formation. That said, the reason behind this choice may be other than your son playing it. Sometimes, a piece like that acts as a diagnostic tool: you give your student to actually "see what happens". Music is not rocket science, and teaching it requires ingenuity, because there are no two students exactly alike (in more than 15 years teaching, I never noticed an equal path shared by two students. They are similar, but never the same.)

So, it gets to expectations. If your expectation is not informed by your teacher's actual direction, you may frustrate yourself (you are already talking about wasting time and money) and, as a colateral damage, frustrate your kid. I saw that happen more than once.

Of course, I am not an advocate of "let your teacher do whatever pleases her/himself". Quite the contrary! Talk to him/her and start to develop a clear relationship, where every goal is informed, the results are shared, etc. If music is not rocket science, it is not voodoo as well (although many teachers act as it was).

Best regards,
Jay.

[mcdiddy1]

I play both violin and piano and have played Preludium and Allegro. The piece is not that hard. The really difficulty is the last page when it goes up to 6 th and 7th position. Violin is a much more complex instrument to learn due to multiple coordinations going on at the same time. There is so much more repertoire out there that is more appropriate for improving intonation. If the student is having trouble playing 1st position in tune then it is a waste of time to attempt the other positions.

[jzp93]

Teachers, do you think it's a good idea to take a youngish student - roughly 10 years old - and assign him advanced repertoire before he has mastered lower levels? Let's say he could read and decipher the music on his own (or figure out parts by ear), but doesn't have the technique to play it yet. Let us also assume that the teacher knows he'll end up butchering the piece; at least it will be obvious to any knowledgeable musician that it was too hard for him in the first place and that the student wasn't really "ready" for it. Is there any value in this? Does tackling something so difficult and making it half-way help to improve a students' overall playing? Will it propel him forward in any way? When he eventually masters the piece he previously butchered (years later), will he have mastered it any sooner than had he stayed on appropriate levels and gradually moved up?

I'm also interested to hear what students and parents would have to say about such a plan if it was presented to them by the teacher.

Thanks in advance.

Hi Fleetfingers, I am a parent of a 13 yo boy who plays piano, guitar and sax. When you say he'll end up butchering the piece, do you mean like he'll memorize the piece but play it bad or not interpret it correctly? Or do you mean like it's hard for him to sight read? I personally think it depends on how much the child is willing to work on the piece and if he likes it. He's 10, I think children around that age who plays very well do so because of consistent practice but the interpretation is not really theirs it's their teacher's, they learn from that and slowly put in their own interpretation little by little. My son skipped several levels because his reading is so fast.  She gives him difficult pieces and I'm always surprise at the end product. Has he butchered a piece? Of course. They are given a recital piece 2 months before the recital. He memorized and played Berceuse in 2 months when he was 10...note perfect but it was so boring. Why? Because he never worked on it the way his teacher wanted. He's too busy w baseball and soccer and refused theory classes. He practiced 30 min- 1 hour 3-4x/wk. In other words it was bad habits and lack of interest that caused it. But if he really likes a difficult piece, he works on it until his teacher is satisfied that he's playing it right. This is just my own opinion.

MJ

[cranston53]

Hello Fleet,

I'm new to these boards, and, as it happens - new to teaching aswell. I have around 10 students who range from complete beginners to ABRSM Grade 6 - 7.

This is a question I'm accutely aware of as one of my more enthusiastic students is always bringing along pieces that he wants to play that range from Debussy through Chopin to Scriabin (!). The most important thing, I believe, is to make sure that I maintain this boy's enthusiasm. I would feel ashamed if I made the young chap feel like he no longer looked forward to sitting down at the piano.

Anyway, to answer your question, I tend to break pieces down into the technically challenging and the musically challenging. This is, of course, a terrible generalisation, but it has a certain amount of truth. Under no circumstances would I teach a youngster a Chopin Etude or, say, a Scriabin sonata. I don't care if they can just about 'get it under their fingers', it would be slow, grinding stuff, would reduce keyboard practice to a building site and very possibly damage their fingers or wrist. I don't actually think this is too bad as a teacher can almost invariably find a simpler piece by the very same composer which will feed their appetite.

Musically challenging pieces are a different kettle of fish. The very same student loves, as most people do, Debussy's 'Claire de Lune'. It's a piece that I believe has been taught at Grade 7 level. I actually disagree with this! It features all the same techniques that we see in Debussy's more advanced piano repetoire (say his Ballade), needs to be played at a good rate to bring out the melodic line and requires a refined musical touch.

There's a very good chance he will butcher it! But the thing is, I don't think that matters. If we explore the piece, he will learn all about Debussy's approach to the keyboard, and even if it doesn't sound quite right, he will start to accumulate the experience that will hopefully turn him from someone who plays an instrument into a musician.

A long winded answer, but I hope it helps.

[lostinidlewonder]

I think advanced music has its use. Certainly to stretch the student, to make them aware of more advanced difficult movements. It also helps if they have the ability to attempt to sight read difficult scores since when they revert to easier pieces their brain often can be tricked into  reading more and faster. It is almost a similar analogy as a baseball batter swinging a weighed bat before going up to bat. The heavy bat is many times heavier than the bat they use to play with, but swinging the heavier bat can trick the muscles into generating more power when using a lighter bat. Speed reading techniques also use similar principles of saturating the senses then slowing things down and you can do it faster because you pushed yourself to abnormally uncomfortable rates beforehand.

It is essential however NOT to make difficult music a main focus in ones musical study. It is has good purpose for continual usage in sight reading development but as for repertoire/technique development it is really something you should avoid.

[gerryjay]

It is essential however NOT to make difficult music a main focus in ones musical study.

Dear Wonder,
And how often it does happen! I was there myself in my guitarist days (impossible programs with major works), but I'm glad I realized it is meaningless.

Best regards,
Jay.

[keypeg]

I think there is a mistake in googling a piece, finding out that it is "level X" and then finding that the teacher has made a wrong choice.  Exams need to organize things somehow so they have to put pieces in levels.  Method books also have to decide what to put where.  But music teaching is more than that, and a piece can be seen and used in different ways to teach things.  You have to know what your child's teacher has in mind.  You need more than knowing how the piece is categorized.

Supposing that the teacher sees particular strengths and weaknesses and is trying to get some things going - he has a direction in mind.  Supposing that this particular piece has aspects to it that will let him bring out some things in his student.  You need to know what he's thinking rather than just going by posted levels.

Since this is violin I have an example from my own experience.  At a certain point my teacher chose the Saint Saens Swan for me.  At the time we were working on left hand technique and shifting.  With these piece you constantly shift every few notes, but never past 4th position as I recall.  It doesn't matter what "level" it was at, or even whether or not it was a student place.  It was perfect for me where I was at because of that skill that it stressed at that time.

Now if your child's teacher is giving advanced pieces because he thinks you or your child will be impressed by how fast he is advancing then that is a different situation.  In any case you should be talking to the teacher, imho.

[fleetfingers]

To answer some of the questions:

He sightreads well, but relies on his ear in certain ranges. When he gets to the higher-pitched positions, he can tell you the letter name he's reading, but he doesn't always know where the placement of his fingers should be and has to figure it out.

He has a good ear and will adjust his fingers quickly to match the piano when I'm accompanying him. This is one reason I want to switch him to another teacher...someone who will go back and teach him where to place his fingers so he is not so dependent on the piano. Also, if he learned theory it would help. For example, when he plays Pachelbel Canon without the piano, his F's and C's are the only notes that are flat. He's not reading them as sharps. But, if I'm accompanying him, he can hear he's flat and will adjust his fingers. His teacher doesn't teach him about key signatures - just wants him to hear the notes and play accordingly.

Not sure if butchering was the right word to use, but what I mean is that non-musicians or his peers listen to him and are impressed. Those who are accomplished violinists and musicians who can hear the details recognize potential but also notice that there are things to clean up. It's hard for me to know if his technique is good (as a non-string player), but other violin teachers have told me that his posture is poor, they suggest that he learn finger positions, and they tell me that the pieces he plays are too advanced for him.

From attending all of the lessons, I've gathered that his teacher's plan is to focus on technique and movement. He stresses accurate rhythms/tempo, staying along with the piano, and playing by ear. He does not care so much if the notes are off by a half step. He believes that my son will correct his intonation on his own, in time. I believe he is trying to introduce all of the positions and movements that can be played on the violin. He is an exceptional musician himself and does teach my son to play musically. Even if it's sometimes slightly off key.

Preludium and Allegro is the only piece my son is currently assigned. He also is supposed to work on scales and an etude. I am more of a work-on-pieces-to-build-technique kind of person, so I am a little turned off by the approach. My son likes the etude, but never plays scales unless I yell from the other room, "Play your scales!" What he seems to enjoy doing without being told is to play older, easier pieces. He tries to play them musically and perfect details. He doesn't work so dilligently on the hard ones, only the old ones.

Thank you all for your thoughtful replies to my questions! I have genuinely found all of the comments made on this thread helpful as I weigh my options.

[kelly_kelly]

I'm reasonably familiar with violin repertoire (I play violin and viola) and to be frank, I agree with you that your son should not be playing the Kreisler yet. It is the kind of piece that is often given to students very early, before they are ready to play it well, as it seems is true in your son's case. Two of the best violinists I know, who have studied with very highly reputed teachers since they were 10, didn't play it until age 12-13, after having played the violin for 8+ years. It would be one thing if you said your son was playing his easier pieces brilliantly, then I would be willing to believe that he is exceptionally talented, but if you've noticed that his intonation has been weak throughout this is unlikely. Bad intonation is a VERY hard habit to correct, and the fact that your son's teacher isn't emphasizing its importance while giving your son advanced pieces is a red flag to me. But that's just my two cents.

[keypeg]

One thought that I had involves this playing along with the piano in practicing.  Imho, that would create a certain dependence, and what you describe seems actually to suggest it.  With every type of instrument we associate some different physical thing with the notes.  On piano you have the black and white key pattern.  Brass players have the harmonic series that come out through the physics (the way someone explained it to me) so that for example Bb might be a significant first pitch that you go out from.

On violin one of the most elementary association is finger groupings: two fingers touching for a semitone. That's why you get scales like D major, where 2,3 are touching, because the middle finger and ring finger are bound physically by that tendon (discussed in piano as well) while B major, where all fingers are spread on the G string, comes later.  D major and A major have that same physical pattern so they come first.  This is one association with notes.  Another is that first position is close to the scroll, while third position brings you to the body, and the other positions you start shifting the angle of the hand and arm etc.

In ** listening ** you have the open strings to listen to (which piano interferes with).  When playing a G major scale, the open D,G,A and E strings are all reference points where you can hear whether you are still in tone.  You also learn to hear relative pitch, since E after open string D is a whole tone away, F# is a semitone from the G you are about to play, E to F# is a whole tone.  You listen for these intervals.

Another thing to listen for is sympathetic resonance.  If you play a fingered D, then the D string above will also resonant.  Your fingered D will have a rich and full sound.  Eventually other notes get some of this resonance too when they are totally in tune, because of the partials.  (assuming the violin is well tuned).  It's almost like you are listening for qualities of sound and not just pitch, and if the pitch is on, those qualities will also be there.  If you are listening to the piano, how can you listen to your own instrument? This won't develop.  It is also magical.

There is also the small matter that pianos are perpetually out of tune because of equal temperament.  As the ear develops, the tuning of the piano can be disturbing.  Can the ear develop if one is constantly listening to a piano?

(Btw, there are a couple of violin forums which might be helpful.)

[fleetfingers]

Hi keypeg,

Your post was so helpful. What you are saying about whole steps and half steps is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. I taught myself to play some scales on the violin and noticed the finger patterns you menion, which helped me to remember how to play them. So, I have wondered why the teacher has never pointed this out to my son. The concept of testing your pitch by playing it against an open string is new to me as I read your post; but now that I consider it, it seems so basic. I am not aware of my son doing it - I'll have to ask him if he does.

Playing along with the piano at each lesson and at home every day in practice has developed great collaborative skills. But I have been worried about dependency on the piano for pitch. I have stopped practicing with him at home for this reason, as well as others.

Can you recommend a violin forum - either here or through PM...thanks. 

[fleetfingers]

I'm reasonably familiar with violin repertoire (I play violin and viola) and to be frank, I agree with you that your son should not be playing the Kreisler yet. It is the kind of piece that is often given to students very early, before they are ready to play it well, as it seems is true in your son's case. Two of the best violinists I know, who have studied with very highly reputed teachers since they were 10, didn't play it until age 12-13, after having played the violin for 8+ years. It would be one thing if you said your son was playing his easier pieces brilliantly, then I would be willing to believe that he is exceptionally talented, but if you've noticed that his intonation has been weak throughout this is unlikely. Bad intonation is a VERY hard habit to correct, and the fact that your son's teacher isn't emphasizing its importance while giving your son advanced pieces is a red flag to me. But that's just my two cents.

Hi kelly-kelly,

Thanks for your comments. I appreciate your frankness, because I really wanted to know what someone else would say who knows enough to have an informed opinion. My son started with this particular teacher a year and a half ago at the age of 9. At that time, he was playing basic pieces in level one method books that he used in the elementary school orchestra. His teacher snatched him out of a class because - according to him - my son IS exceptionally talented. Maybe he was trying to play catch-up because my son started at an older age, but he has been skipping levels and throwing all kinds of difficult pieces at him. But when he gave him the Kreisler piece, the red flags went up and that's when I turned to the forum to ask this question about the value of assigning difficult repertoire. Talent can only take you so far; training matters even more. His bad intonation tends to be only in certain places - like when he doesn't understand the key signature, or when he's playing a fast passage and estimates incorrectly where to place his finger. It happens in the same spots each time, which leads me to believe that if a teacher would take the time to work on those spots and explain how to improve it would make a big difference. Overall, he does have a beautiful tone and sound to his playing - he just needs someone who will help him iron out the wrinkles. And I can't help but feel that that should happen BEFORE he moves on to yet another hard piece.

[keypeg]

Fleetfingers, Maestronet is a level headed forum.  In regards to finger patterns, playing scales (recommended by your son's teacher) will do that.  If his first two scales are G major and D major, then you have one pattern right there, since they both have the pattern of fingers 2 & 3 together .

[kelly_kelly]

Hi kelly-kelly,

Thanks for your comments. I appreciate your frankness, because I really wanted to know what someone else would say who knows enough to have an informed opinion. My son started with this particular teacher a year and a half ago at the age of 9. At that time, he was playing basic pieces in level one method books that he used in the elementary school orchestra. His teacher snatched him out of a class because - according to him - my son IS exceptionally talented. Maybe he was trying to play catch-up because my son started at an older age, but he has been skipping levels and throwing all kinds of difficult pieces at him. But when he gave him the Kreisler piece, the red flags went up and that's when I turned to the forum to ask this question about the value of assigning difficult repertoire. Talent can only take you so far; training matters even more. His bad intonation tends to be only in certain places - like when he doesn't understand the key signature, or when he's playing a fast passage and estimates incorrectly where to place his finger. It happens in the same spots each time, which leads me to believe that if a teacher would take the time to work on those spots and explain how to improve it would make a big difference. Overall, he does have a beautiful tone and sound to his playing - he just needs someone who will help him iron out the wrinkles. And I can't help but feel that that should happen BEFORE he moves on to yet another hard piece.

I was probably too harsh when I said that your son couldn't be "exceptionally talented" - he probably is, but I was thinking more in terms of being nearly a prodigy I was in a very similar position to your son. I started in my school orchestra and didn't make much progress since we got very little instruction. But I started taking private lessons at age 11.5, and from there flew through lots of repertoire so that by the time I was 14 I was playing relatively advanced repertoire (this was on viola, but think the equivalent of, say, the Bruch violin concerto). But after that point I found that there were many, many holes in my technique, and the task of fixing all the bad habits which had by then become ingrained left me very discouraged. As a result I haven't played seriously for the past 2-3 years (since I was 16 or so). I'm not saying your son will be the same way, but I personally wish that I hadn't been allowed to let things like intonation, etc. slip, even though my initial progress would have been slower. It would have given me a more realistic idea of the work involved to really polish a performance, and bad habits would have been corrected at a more gradual pace. Instead, they accumulated to the point where they seemed to become an insurmountable obstacle. Again, this may not happen for your son, but what you say sounds very similar to what I experienced. At any rate, best of luck to both of you

[fleetfingers]

I was probably too harsh when I said that your son couldn't be "exceptionally talented" - he probably is, but I was thinking more in terms of being nearly a prodigy I was in a very similar position to your son. I started in my school orchestra and didn't make much progress since we got very little instruction. But I started taking private lessons at age 11.5, and from there flew through lots of repertoire so that by the time I was 14 I was playing relatively advanced repertoire (this was on viola, but think the equivalent of, say, the Bruch violin concerto). But after that point I found that there were many, many holes in my technique, and the task of fixing all the bad habits which had by then become ingrained left me very discouraged. As a result I haven't played seriously for the past 2-3 years (since I was 16 or so). I'm not saying your son will be the same way, but I personally wish that I hadn't been allowed to let things like intonation, etc. slip, even though my initial progress would have been slower. It would have given me a more realistic idea of the work involved to really polish a performance, and bad habits would have been corrected at a more gradual pace. Instead, they accumulated to the point where they seemed to become an insurmountable obstacle. Again, this may not happen for your son, but what you say sounds very similar to what I experienced. At any rate, best of luck to both of you

No, you were not too harsh! I was being sarcastic. I should have included one of these  when I mentioned that the teacher thought my son was exceptionally talented (he actually did tell me that he had prodigy-level talent). You could say that he is "musically-inclined", but he is no prodigy and needs proper instruction just as anyone else. I appreciate your post. I am afraid my son is on a similar path to the one you describe. Thanks again for your insight.