A Foundation of Success = Pianistic Confidence?

[m1469]

This concept is very important to me, in that it is my assumption that many people who develop into confident artists have built this upon a foundation of success.  Yes, there are always times which are better than others, but somewhere within they build their mental concepts of their own abilities on this foundation of success.

In my own teaching, when dealing with beginners especially, I feel it's very important for my students to experience success - for this purpose.  And, to some degree, I feel it's actually my responsibility as their teacher and as a guiding factor within their lives to help this occur.  To me, one of the big factors is recitals (though I'm a bit burned out on them) and studio classes, where students can begin to build this foundation ... IF they experience success!  But, what if they don't?  Sometimes I feel then that this is even building the opposite concept for an otherwise potentially musical individual.

I would like to know what are your thoughts on this?  Do you even think that confidence comes from this, or at least that an aspect of confidence comes from this?  I've had this idea that somebody who grew up in a very supportive family, and had many opportunities along the way to develop themselves as a public pianist, that these are irreplaceable ingredients to a person's pianistic confidence.  Maybe that is not all there is to it, though, and there is something more fundamental than circumstance which can provide this confidence for an individual? 

What do you do as a teacher to help this along?

[m1469]

Well, I am going to just go ahead and add to this topic on my own so far, because I always am thinking and working out equations ... and such  .

Confidence has always been a very elusive thing to me.  It's this intangible thing that people apparently need, yet what to base it on in a world of sandy grounds has always been the conundrum to me.  What's the rock?  There's loads to that, but I won't get into detail.  

Here is what I think now, at least what has "come to me" in the last couple of hours:  Confidence is a demonstrable blend of skill, courage, and hope.  For some reason, that's something that I am just starting to be able to grab onto a bit more.  Skill is something tangible to me, at least it can be and it is becoming more so in general.  Not long ago I had to define to myself what "skill" means, too, or how it develops.  I realized something that made sense to me, in that skill is the result of lessons learned through experience.  Lessons learned involves conscientiousness and awareness; and a scientific mind in approach and demonstration.  And, it really needs to be that lessons have been learned!  Skill is the fruit of the labor.

So, "success" alone (whatever it means to be successful), is not necessarily thee foundation on which to build confidence.  I once had a singing teacher say something to the effect of confidence being born through experience, whether that experience is good or bad - so long as you keep going!  I could somewhat wrap my head around it then, or at least I really liked it and it resonated with me, but to keep going is sometimes pretty tricky if the confidence to do so needs bolstering!

Questions like "have I got the skill?" seem answerable to me.  Have I got the courage?  Have I got the hope?  I think that if I can answer yes to those, then I've got confidence, whatever has happened before!

To help students build that, I think for somebody who deeply cares (because I think they are the trickiest ones), is then to help in the awareness it requires for lessons to be learned.  If lessons are being learned, then skill is being gained.


What do you do with a very disappointed student?  Nothing?  

*endlessly curious but in deep thinking and seeking*


*hits "go" on compound time and runs to ... an instrument*

[keypeg]

Based on my experience as a student so far, one of the foundations of confidence is having foundations.     This begins with simple things like learning to sit in a well balanced way, getting a proper handle on things like reading music, physical actions etc.    If you are floundering and feeling your way through in the dark then doing well is hit and miss.  Even knowing whether you are doing well is unsure.  You can't always tell if you played a piece well in practising, but you can tell whether your timing was off or whether you hit the wrong note, if you've been taught something about this.  It is why, as an adult student, I dislike shortcuts and instant success of the wrong kind.  It doesn't serve us in the long run.

I've heard that crashing in a recital can scar a student for a long time.  Probably when doing well in a recital is seen as important, and you don't know why you crashed, it would be even worse.  I once once allowed to participate in a recital when I had been running into difficulties during lessons and it was hit and miss.  Somehow I got at whatever was causing it during my last practice, and I went on stage still not knowing whether I'd manage.  Either way would have been fine since I half expected it not to work.  But I did manage, and even did well.  This was very important for me, because I was given the chance to face that fear, and push through.  I think it depends on the student and the circumstance.

[m1469]

Based on my experience as a student so far, one of the foundations of confidence is having foundations.  

Okay, well, I equate this with having skill, and an awareness that you have it!

It is why, as an adult student, I dislike shortcuts and instant success of the wrong kind.  It doesn't serve us in the long run.

My perspective is different at the moment than it was several years ago.  But, yes, having a true skill is different than superficial success.  I think this means different things to different people, and different things at different times within one's life.  

I've heard that crashing in a recital can scar a student for a long time.  Probably when doing well in a recital is seen as important, and you don't know why you crashed, it would be even worse.  I once once allowed to participate in a recital when I had been running into difficulties during lessons and it was hit and miss.  Somehow I got at whatever was causing it during my last practice, and I went on stage still not knowing whether I'd manage.  Either way would have been fine since I half expected it not to work.  But I did manage, and even did well.  This was very important for me, because I was given the chance to face that fear, and push through.

 

I think these are good points!

I think it depends on the student and the circumstance.

I think this is always true, of course, depending on what a person considers as success and such.  And, some people are perfectly satisfied with a percentage of development compared to what another is.

(PS- I still do mean to write to you in PM!)

[danhuyle]

It's belief in oneself and the people you surround yourself with.

[m1469]

It's belief in oneself and the people you surround yourself with.

Thanks for chiming in!  I would agree, and I'm interested in the practical applications of that.  How does one come to believe in themselves?  How does a teacher create situations that promote this?  And, if it's about who one surrounds themselves with, what is it about that which practically applies?  In your opinion, of course .

I recall watching some short video from some famous-today teacher, from some big school, talking about students.  One comment that has stuck with me was a brief comment about adult student's and one of the reasons learning and developing (and maybe into an artist) is challenging, is because "they lack confidence" (so he has said).  While I wouldn't necessarily disagree with this, I am interested in something deeper regarding it.  Are adults supposed to somehow very magically have from the very beginning of their journey, the confidence of a well-trained artist?  Sometimes I think people expect this of them, and/or don't want to deal with it if they don't.  I can understand this to a large degree.  

But, I've thought about it over the years since I've seen that video.  Of course children in certain circumstances believe in themselves ... if they show a glimmer of talent, in some situations they are just nurtured and supported until they want to throw up ... haha.  Ok, actually, I don't know that.  And, plenty of kids are tossed aside in their early years by somebody who thinks they know everything, as not having talent or potential, too.  And, in many cases, that shapes a person's view of their musical abilities for the rest of their lives!  Which is partly why I'd like to delve more into the subject, as a teacher, but also as an individual who didn't have the typical professional upbringing.

So, practical applications, in your opinion.

[m1469]

One other thing.  Something I personally have felt interested in (we'll say it that way), is that there can also develop a false confidence for people, especially as they mature, to seemingly make up for whatever might be otherwise missing - at least I feel I observe this.  Personally, I don't want this for myself and that's part of why my own sense of confidence has been something constantly in the making, when it comes to my pianoing.  I think there comes a time, or perhaps especially some adults who decide to start out learning the piano, when they just decide that everybody's way is equal and all they need to do is "believe in themselves" and everything will be fine.  So, people can take on an attitude of unwillingness to listen to anybody else, to ever have any kind of guidance, etc., because for some reason that equals something which resembles confidence to them.  Well, I won't outline a certain rule for what is what, but sometimes I do feel I see people being confident over something they *think* they are demonstrating, when in fact they are not demonstrating as they think they are.

And, to make that more practical, I think sometimes people are missing some of the actual skill and try to make up for it by deciding that what they are doing is just "their way" and they just need to believe in it enough to stand up to what anybody else might say!  Well, there is something to the need to be able to stand up for oneself, obviously, but skill is something that is either there or it is not, no matter what a person believes about themselves (and skill can be learned if it needs to be).

Well, I'm just exploring things here, not setting things in stone and I'm certainly not trying to outline my own life.  I can say that I personally felt that my skill was very lacking several years back, and I personally can hear and see that it's truly starting to develop into something I can -let's say- count on.  Because of this, there is a big difference in how I can start to believe in myself.  I could always tell something was missing and it wasn't just about believing in myself or not, though I felt that some people (and some of them very well-intentioned) had tried to convince me that's all it was.  haha ... that is a very tricky subject, actually, because in fact I had to believe in myself enough to know that I was truly looking for something else that was more concrete to me than just believing in myself, if that makes any sense .  

While courage is necessary, what's been helping me the most is when I am in my lessons (or at home, but especially in my lessons, right now), and I can see with my own eyes and hear with my own ears certain things happening.

Okay, bye bye!

[keypeg]

I'll try to speak to some of what you wrote, m1469, and address it to the adult side.  There is actually something very reassuring, if we manage to catch on.  That is, that getting the foundations to playing will bring us far, and that these foundations are derived in steps that are "simple".  If every day you try to press a key down at the right time and release it, and the next and the next, after a while you will get one basic element that turns music into music.  It is possible for anyone, even a small child, to press down one key, then another, and then another.  Try to do it in synch with steady counting and over time it becomes automatic.  But that is not where we're at if we've never done music (formally).  We try to play a piece of music so it sounds nice, instead of aiming toward such a simply thing that I described.  We don't know that musicians are illusionists and craftsmen, who craft their performance from simply elements.  We try to play it the way we hear it played as we practice in a way professionals don't.

The other side of this same coin is that we don't know the importance of those same simple things.  "Even a toddler can count to three" so if we can't then there is something seriously wrong.    We discount counting as being childishly simple - or taking the time to recognize that D is between two black keys and being able to aim for it each and every time - so we don't take time to develop what are in fact foundations to good playing.  At the same time we are horrified that we mess up counting or getting the right note, because "it is childishly easy".  To truly pay attention, truly hear, truly be in the moment are skills that those first things we learn can teach us.  You don't even know these exist until you have a foot in the door.  How can you dance with confidence if there is no floor under your feet, or if you're wearing wobbly shoes?

[mcdiddy1]

I think is a pretty interesting topic in regard to success because what changes is to what the different degrees of success. I believe every student should can achieve excellence and have a "successful" performance for their level. I believe all students should be required to participate in recitals to achieve success because of what they learn.

I had recitals the other months and they went well and my students were at the end because it was assumed they would be advanced. One of the teacher remarked , we should not have put them in the end, I wasn't impressed. Both students sounded well to the listener may have sounded average but between me and the student it was a huge success for them. One of the students barely practiced ever and had virtually no ability to read. The other student learned the piece all on their own and decided on the day of the recital that they wanted to play that instead of their recital piece. So what may have been nothing extraordinary for the audience was highly successful for the students in one learned they have the ability to achieve a musical performance despite the difficulties the student had before and the other learned how to prepare a performance on their own without a teacher and achieve success.

I think there are benefits for students who do not do well at performances also. Until you actually experience stage fright, you will not understand how potential crippling it can be on a performance. When they know what to expect they can be better prepared to over come it next time. Also having mistakes in a performance is a great learning opportunity to discover what they need to work on and can be a benefit as long as the teacher acknowledges what they did well and what they should take away from the experience to get better next time.

For the stronger students, success is very important for them too. The best students I have noticed are more critical on themselves than you ever dreamed of being. That is why I don't think beating up a student  mentally does not help them in the long run. I would discuss their past performances with the students and it never fails the best one never feel their performance was a success and often appear to view the performance in a completely different light than the teacher and the audience.

That being said I don't feel just being confident in your abilities will make you a great player. Some people have physical detriments that will prevent them from having fine motor control to have success at the highest levels of the repertoire. But that does not stop them from achieving success on different levels and with different pieces. In my opinion what makes great students is awareness. When a student is aware there is something they could be doing better and improving on and actively does something to change this fact then they can get better. When they get better and achieve success in their lessons then with that confidence will follow.  So in my opinion a large part of a students success and confidence level comes from the knowledge of the teacher to make students aware of their problems quickly and efficiently and from that they will find success. 

[m1469]

(...)as long as the teacher acknowledges what they did well and what they should take away from the experience to get better next time.

Well, I don't necessarily agree nor disagree in this context, but I do wonder how many people -especially matured artists- grew up in this condition?  I mean, I don't assume that "nurturing" necessarily equals being praised.  

I did want to add that confidence -and in the way I defined it above, too- can definitely be relative to the desire for achievement (as I think you are saying, too).  There are things that I feel confident about because I have less desire for overall achievement than other things which I might have more skill in but a desire for higher achievement.  But, learning is a skill, too, and even if a person is not demonstrating a particular skill to match the eventual desire, it's possible to be a confident learner if the student hones the skills to learn!

[keypeg]

The most crippling thing is to believe that good playing comes from some magical inner ability, that if you play badly it is because you are lacking this magic, that good playing is instant and a whole entity by itself.  It creates enormous fear and anxiety.  While we do have varying degrees and types of musical instinct, and that should not be killed, there are other elements.   No good musician draws entirely or solely on "inner feeling".  He has spent years getting the craft, and knowing what to do to shape his music, and what to draw on when recovering from a spill.

The first obstacle that an adult in particular faces happens in the studio.    We watch you watching us playing, judging our "talent", judging the "performance" as a whole.  Instead, we should be paying attention to what we are playing, and particular things in our playing.  You will be seeing the various components and seeing what needs to be worked on, and we should be focusing on the same thing.  If we are busy trying to prove we have talent so you won't drop us, we will not be focusing on the thing that will make our playing come together.

Recitals are not performances.  Recitals are a means for learning something.  We are learning to play in front of others.  If we can go into it as a learning experience, then that debilitating anxiety will be much less.  Also, failures can be embraced as a learning experience.  We may also decide that we want to communicate something about the music, rather than we are being judged as being better or worse than others.  TO communicate this something, we have to focus on the music, including technical details.  If your attention is on the music, then it will not be on other people's judgment, and that alone helps you play well.

Here is a learning experience that I had in my last ever performance to date.  There was a naughty little boy in the audience who had been disruptive through much of the recitals.  At some point when I played he noisily scuffed his feet on the ground, and it sounded like there was sand attached to his shoes.  I registered this as impatience.  What do you do socially when you're talking and someone indicates he's bored?  You talk faster, or you stop talking.  So I felt myself rushing and having the impulse to stop, and I lost my right hand - recovered three measures later while the LH kept dancing its story.  So later I asked my teacher about this:  "How do you relate to the audience?"  It wasn't about how well or badly I had done, but what could be learned from this.  Btw, his answer was quite interesting.

[mcdiddy1]

Well, I don't necessarily agree nor disagree in this context, but I do wonder how many people -especially matured artists- grew up in this condition?  I mean, I don't assume that "nurturing" necessarily equals being praised.  

I did want to add that confidence -and in the way I defined it above, too- can definitely be relative to the desire for achievement (as I think you are saying, too).  There are things that I feel confident about because I have less desire for overall achievement than other things which I might have more skill in but a desire for higher achievement.  But, learning is a skill, too, and even if a person is not demonstrating a particular skill to match the eventual desire, it's possible to be a confident learner if the student hones the skills to learn!

I wonder how many matured artist grew up this way also. It would be interesting to see what percentage of artist grew up where music process was a learning process or where they achieved based on pressures from parents, teachers and such. Ultimately I think is both avenues the motivation starts with the parents and transfers to the student

I think it would be even more interesting to think if the percentage of mature artist would increase it their learning was approached more thoughtfully because we know there are many teachers who are not like that and there are few concert artist now. Personally I think we should teach toward getting the best out of every student regardless of their current level because even if they are not concert artist their influence may give birth to one and help the quality of music education in general.

I think honing the skill of learning is critical for students to get out of music lessons and should be one of the prime goals of teachers. There has been a great deal I learned about music that were not necessarily taught to but I learned because I allowed myself to absorb what is around me. Learning to listen and learn is a skill that transfers well beyond music and I think you make a very good point about how important it is.

[keypeg]

A huge element to learning involves what we do between lessons.  Not just what we practice, or even how we practice, but how we practice how we practice. 

[mcdiddy1]

The most crippling thing is to believe that good playing comes from some magical inner ability, that if you play badly it is because you are lacking this magic, that good playing is instant and a whole entity by itself.  It creates enormous fear and anxiety.  While we do have varying degrees and types of musical instinct, and that should not be killed, there are other elements.   No good musician draws entirely or solely on "inner feeling".  He has spent years getting the craft, and knowing what to do to shape his music, and what to draw on when recovering from a spill.

The first obstacle that an adult in particular faces happens in the studio.    We watch you watching us playing, judging our "talent", judging the "performance" as a whole.  Instead, we should be paying attention to what we are playing, and particular things in our playing.  You will be seeing the various components and seeing what needs to be worked on, and we should be focusing on the same thing.  If we are busy trying to prove we have talent so you won't drop us, we will not be focusing on the thing that will make our playing come together.

I agree with what you said. There is no "magic ability" to perform. The ones put the most effort are the ones who achieve the most. Stage fright is just one aspec of performance that has to be practiced and learned.  For me there is balance of knowing when to feel an emotion and when I need to concentrate on making sure I execute a section right. I dont feel you should be overally emotional and lose yourself in the music or you risk losing your pulse and tempo. I also do not think you should play without the emotion or the playing becomes dry and detached.

I think it it is interesting reading what you said about an adult student perspective. I often talk to adults about the main differences between adult players and children. By the time an adult comes into a lesson they already have previous conceptions, feelings of pressure, and judgement before they even play a note. Children have much less of that and are more likely to experiment and learn more freer rather than the adult who feels things are right or wrong and you as the teacher are labeling them of all the things they do wrong.

I like to give adults the opportunity to bang on the keys and make the ugliest, worst sounds they could ever make so they can realize wrong notes are allowed in the classroom, free them from judgement, and get back to the more child-like state of learning about their bodies, sound, without inhibition. Many times are desire to not make a mistake and to play perfectly creates us to form tensions in our bodies and as a results creates a whole set of problems. Like the other post written was about, the focus should be on learning and discovery rather than on perfection. After the learning and discovery process, we can refine out discoveries into a performance that is musical, free of tension, and will stand up during performance. A perfect performance filled with tension in a lesson will not necessarily translate to a successful performance in front of others. So in my opinion it is better to work towards eliminating the problems from the beginning.

[keypeg]

It's quite a balance and it probably also depends on where that particular adult is at.  We also need the tools, without the obsession.  What and also when.

[nyiregyhazi]

"I like to give adults the opportunity to bang on the keys and make the ugliest, worst sounds they could ever make so they can realize wrong notes are allowed in the classroom, free them from judgement, and get back to the more child-like state of learning about their bodies, sound, without inhibition. Many times are desire to not make a mistake and to play perfectly creates us to form tensions in our bodies and as a results creates a whole set of problems."

I'm not quite convinced by this personally. I think that allowing casual wrong notes is actually one of the biggest sources of clenching and tension. The more accurate I make my execution of a Chopin Etude, the less effort it is to play. When they are not going accurately, to eliminate tensions can scarcely even come onto the radar. I need a bare minimum of accuracy to have a hope in hell of avoiding accumulating tensions. That's not about psychology. It's because of the sheer unpredictability. Accuracy means you always come from the same place. If you don't know where you're going to be coming from half the time, how can you possibly move with ease or fluency?

There a certain type of person who moves stiffly in the name of accuracy. However, this simply down to not having acquired the quality of movement. I think that sense of care should always be actively encouraged- not treated as the problem. It's just that they need to understand how to incorporate ease of motion at the same time. In fact, the more care you take the more confidently it should be possible to move. Students should understand the difference between wrong notes in practise and wrong notes in performance from the very start. Those who casually allow the most wrong notes in practise are the most tense, in my experience. It's a whole different thing to the carefree playing of a virtuoso.

"Many times are desire to not make a mistake and to play perfectly creates us to form tensions in our bodies and as a results creates a whole set of problems."

Not that I disagree with this, but I think we should seek to destroy this association in the student. Care CAN breed tension- but it's not inherently the case that it must. I think we should applaud the sense of care while changing the quality of movement alone. If we try to change the underlying mindset there's a real risk of replacing a very good attitude with a haphazard one- when the real problem lies in their not having learned to move both precisely and confidently at the same time.

[fleetfingers]

Here is what I think now, at least what has "come to me" in the last couple of hours:  Confidence is a demonstrable blend of skill, courage, and hope.  For some reason, that's something that I am just starting to be able to grab onto a bit more.  Skill is something tangible to me, at least it can be and it is becoming more so in general.  Not long ago I had to define to myself what "skill" means, too, or how it develops.  I realized something that made sense to me, in that skill is the result of lessons learned through experience.  Lessons learned involves conscientiousness and awareness; and a scientific mind in approach and demonstration.  And, it really needs to be that lessons have been learned!  Skill is the fruit of the labor.

On Saturday, I had someone call and ask me to accompany them while they sang a song in church the next day. We met together that evening for a rehearsal, and I was able to play the song almost perfectly the first time through. I took the music home with me but didn't practice - didn't even give it a thought - until we performed Sunday morning in front of the congregation. Why didn't I practice? Because I had confidence in my skill to play that particular song with ease.

That's just an example of how skill begets confidence in a pianist. No matter our age or skill level, we know what we can do. If we know we can do something, we are confident; free of worry and anxiety.

I think that courage and hope are present in a student when they are moving forward and attempting more difficult things, or are in the process of developing a particular skill. Even if they don't have a certain level of skill now, they can work and learn with confidence, having the hope that they will eventually meet with success. That success will breed more confidence. They will continue to have the courage to try new things . . . it becomes a cycle of courage, hope, success, confidence. Skill is in there somewhere (maybe synonymous with success?)

[mcdiddy1]

"I like to give adults the opportunity to bang on the keys and make the ugliest, worst sounds they could ever make so they can realize wrong notes are allowed in the classroom, free them from judgement, and get back to the more child-like state of learning about their bodies, sound, without inhibition. Many times are desire to not make a mistake and to play perfectly creates us to form tensions in our bodies and as a results creates a whole set of problems."

I'm not quite convinced by this personally. I think that allowing casual wrong notes is actually one of the biggest sources of clenching and tension. The more accurate I make my execution of a Chopin Etude, the less effort it is to play. When they are not going accurately, to eliminate tensions can scarcely even come onto the radar. I need a bare minimum of accuracy to have a hope in hell of avoiding accumulating tensions. That's not about psychology. It's because of the sheer unpredictability. Accuracy means you always come from the same place. If you don't know where you're going to be coming from half the time, how can you possibly move with ease or fluency?

Well my point is of course accuracy is the end goal but we can play accurate with our bodies seized up preventing ourselves from playing the wrong note, or we can play accuratly free of tension just because we have done it correctly so many times. Players who deal with tension tend to have performances that stand up better in performances. Tension can come from anywhere also. Some students will tense up when they play the right note because they think it is wrong just as they would by playing the wrong note. These players also tend to be stutters in their playing because they stop and check every note they feel is questionable. I think you can't  ignore the psycological aspect because it makes a difference in your playing in the piece.

Students are all taught the right notes but they play the wrong notes anyways because there are conflicting thoughts in their head. There potential in the brain to play right note and the wrong note. If the brain does not reinforce the correct movements to play the right note then the wrong note will more likely to appear in stressful performances such as in a lesson or in a performance.

Allowing them to play through the mistakes allows them a couple of benefits, less tension in their playing, a chance to practice musical flow, freedom to expose what is not in their muscle memory, prepares them for performance, and makes them feel more comfortable that you wont beat them up for every mistake. After the run-through then all errors are of course eliminated by discovering the cause not the symptom, lack of pulse , note-reading, technique, etc and each time some improvement should be made. Eventually with practice their should be perfect accuracy with a lack of tension from a discovery mentality rather than a stop and go. Even the best of us make mistakes but it is how we learn to deal with them makes the difference in if we get better or not.

"Many times are desire to not make a mistake and to play perfectly creates us to form tensions in our bodies and as a results creates a whole set of problems."

Not that I disagree with this, but I think we should seek to destroy this association in the student. Care CAN breed tension- but it's not inherently the case that it must. I think we should applaud the sense of care while changing the quality of movement alone. If we try to change the underlying mindset there's a real risk of replacing a very good attitude with a haphazard one- when the real problem lies in their not having learned to move both precisely and confidently at the same time.

That is a good point. I agree with you that attitude of caring enough to play accurately should be applauded. However we still have to accept that in reality it is possible for tension to build up and should be addressed. The problem is in some people the tension is so great they cannot perform the quality of movement.

One example is a student who have a piece that required a movement to fast arm movements which he was unable to execute despite being shown. I asked him to drop his arm on his lap and each drop carefully dropped and slowed down. When moving his arm, it felt as stiff as board. So we approached it by developing a feeling of letting go muscles that did not need to clenched for this movement and practiced then allowing him to do this motion on the keyboard. After a couple of missed attempts his body began to learn the distance of the jump and lock it into his muscle memory and he never had a problem with it since then.

So it is not to say you go from caring about note accuracy to just playing any note but taking what is good generally about child like movements ( tension-less) and applying it to a specific precise motion and then the playing can be more confident, precise, and tension free at the same time which is goal I think we can live with.

[nyiregyhazi]

"These players also tend to be stutters in their playing because they stop and check every note they feel is questionable. I think you can't  ignore the psycological aspect because it makes a difference in your playing in the piece."

But that's being careful in hindsight- not before the act. They need to learn to take care to feel the finger first and then move it confidently after- to focus their care into something productive. The uncertainty that arises after the act was almost certainly matched by uncertainty before. It's a lack of care before the act, not too much! Simply to feel uncertaintly warrants correction the same as any wrong note- even the right note happens to be struck. What could be worse than pressing on through an uncertain feeling? How could that ever breed stability and reliability? 

"Allowing them to play through the mistakes allows them a couple of benefits, less tension in their playing, a chance to practice musical flow, freedom to expose what is not in their muscle memory, prepares them for performance, and makes them feel more comfortable that you wont beat them up for every mistake."

Perhaps- but they really must understand the difference between running through in performance mode and good preparation for that. Half the time, people do not take enough care and simply do not know what notes they wish to hit. Playing through in such circumstances just loads the brain with uncertainty- which breeds panic in performance. There are too many wrong turns available- that need never have arisen in practise. Unless you know what note you had intended to play, I don't believe it's wise to play through mistakes. However, it's even worse to simply change the note and then go on. The best thing of all is to stop immediately and think, then start a short way before the error- so you make a full connection of the missing link. Until you already have a acquired continuous chunk of at least 4 bars that is regularly played accurately, I don't personally see any value in playing through errors. Students who regularly do so are always those who struggle the most, in my experience. They never manage to truly patch things up. How does playing on expose the flaw in the muscle memory any better? On the contrary, it gives you a very good chance to fail to observe what error occurred. Stopping is far more conducive to awareness of what is needed to make a fix.

"After the run-through then all errors are of course eliminated by discovering the cause not the symptom, lack of pulse , note-reading, technique, etc and each time some improvement should be made."

will they be remembered after a run-through? Why not just start by getting it right- rather than hope to polish a turd little by little? It's so rare to see something sloppy turn into something truly secure.

"However we still have to accept that in reality it is possible for tension to build up and should be addressed. The problem is in some people the tension is so great they cannot perform the quality of movement."

Why not simply deal with the movement? Having a more care free attitude will not necessarily improve the movement anyway. The most inaccurate amateurs I hear are almost always stiff (whereas only SOME accurate pianists are stiff). Good technical training ought to deal with the issue. Every pianist needs to learn how to be both careful and relaxed, or there is a serious problem in the fundamentals.

"One example is a student who have a piece that required a movement to fast arm movements which he was unable to execute despite being shown. I asked him to drop his arm on his lap and each drop carefully dropped and slowed down. When moving his arm, it felt as stiff as board. So we approached it by developing a feeling of letting go muscles that did not need to clenched for this movement and practiced then allowing him to do this motion on the keyboard. After a couple of missed attempts his body began to learn the distance of the jump and lock it into his muscle memory and he never had a problem with it since then.

So it is not to say you go from caring about note accuracy to just playing any note but taking what is good generally about child like movements ( tension-less) and applying it to a specific precise motion and then the playing can be more confident, precise, and tension free at the same time which is goal I think we can live with."

Even here, is it necessary to go wrong? Of course, it will always happen sometimes. But if a person moves stiffly I personally like to show them ways of covering a leap with a quick movement but only covering the key- not playing it. It's a great way of loosening up motions and practising the key elements of a movement without ever needing to go wrong in what you play. If you don't whip the arm over lightly and accurately and land in the right place, you just don't play anything. You're not yet ready to. Separating the preparation from the playing of the note is very useful. You can "go wrong" without even going wrong. I don't let them add the action of playing until there is prior confidence in the action of covering the distance. It's uncertainty in the distance that makes them stiffen in anticipation. Remove the act of playing altogether and merely practise getting there and nobody stiffens.

 

[mcdiddy1]

"These players also tend to be stutters in their playing because they stop and check every note they feel is questionable. I think you can't  ignore the psychological aspect because it makes a difference in your playing in the piece."

But that's being careful in hindsight- not before the act. They need to learn to take care to feel the finger first and then move it confidently after- to focus their care into something productive. The uncertainty that arises after the act was almost certainly matched by uncertainty before. It's a lack of care before the act, not too much! Simply to feel uncertaintly warrants correction the same as any wrong note- even the right note happens to be struck. What could be worse than pressing on through an uncertain feeling? How could that ever breed stability and reliability? 

I understand your point. All of this run-though, is after the student has been taught the right notes and correct notes. But being successful at playing the right note does not mean the student will play the correct note until the end of time. All piano teachers know the right notes and teach it to the students but note errors still exist in students playing because this action must be inforced. If the student is too busy with a stop and start over type of playing, the student will never be able to practice other sections of music and as a result more sections of the piece remains unlearned. Also the student begins to learn when you make an error you stop and that does not hold up well in a performance setting. I agree there should be a great deal of care of learning before the note is actually played but eventually at some point you need to physically encounter the instrument and learn what works and does not work.

"Allowing them to play through the mistakes allows them a couple of benefits, less tension in their playing, a chance to practice musical flow, freedom to expose what is not in their muscle memory, prepares them for performance, and makes them feel more comfortable that you wont beat them up for every mistake."

Perhaps- but they really must understand the difference between running through in performance mode and good preparation for that. Half the time, people do not take enough care and simply do not know what notes they wish to hit. Playing through in such circumstances just loads the brain with uncertainty- which breeds panic in performance. There are too many wrong turns available- that need never have arisen in practice. Unless you know what note you had intended to play, I don't believe it's wise to play through mistakes. However, it's even worse to simply change the note and then go on. The best thing of all is to stop immediately and think, then start a short way before the error- so you make a full connection of the missing link. Until you already have a acquired continuous chunk of at least 4 bars that is regularly played accurately, I don't personally see any value in playing through errors. Students who regularly do so are always those who struggle the most, in my experience. They never manage to truly patch things up. How does playing on expose the flaw in the muscle memory any better? On the contrary, it gives you a very good chance to fail to observe what error occurred. Stopping is far more conducive to awareness of what is needed to make a fix.

i agree , some students do not prepare enough to play. I personally try and prepare them by having them say note names, shadow the note (play the note without making a sound) before they actually play the music so their is chance to prepare mentally knowing the note and the physical act.  However the ones who have the experience should learn to run-through a piece especially if it has patterns they have encountered before. You would want a student to know how to sight-read and take all their knowledge of music and learn to read music without relying on the help of the teacher.

On the topic of mistakes, there are times when I do want student to stop and think about the note like you said. Particually if it is a repeated rhythm that happens through out the piece or a note that is sharp that they are unaware of. But an error due to a finger slip or an uncharacteristic error they never make I do think they need to get used to playing through the mistake because they need to have the skill to retain musical flow. The ones who struggle the most are the ones who simply do not know how to practice on multiple levels. These students need to learn how to practice because there is an art to it and these who don't struggle. There needs to be a healthy amount of simple repetitions , both short and long that needs to happen for mistakes to fixed but it depends on the type of mistake not just simply any mistake.

"After the run-through then all errors are of course eliminated by discovering the cause not the symptom, lack of pulse , note-reading, technique, etc and each time some improvement should be made."

will they be remembered after a run-through? Why not just start by getting it right- rather than hope to polish a turd little by little? It's so rare to see something sloppy turn into something truly secure.

Students that are taught how to play it in the beginning is fine but as you know students are not machines. They may get it right once but this does not mean they will be perfect forever and ever or none of my students wouldn't make any mistakes.As performers we know there are times we play and it is not nearly the standard we know we can play. We would not have to relearn the entire piece but run through and get refamiliar with the piece, making mental notes of what to improve on and getting sharper each time we do it. I am not saying run-throughs should be used as a learning tool but as a way of maintain what has already been taught or learned

Even here, is it necessary to go wrong? Of course, it will always happen sometimes. But if a person moves stiffly I personally like to show them ways of covering a leap with a quick movement but only covering the key- not playing it. It's a great way of loosening up motions and practicing the key elements of a movement without ever needing to go wrong in what you play. If you don't whip the arm over lightly and accurately and land in the right place, you just don't play anything. You're not yet ready to. Separating the preparation from the playing of the note is very useful. You can "go wrong" without even going wrong. I don't let them add the action of playing until there is prior confidence in the action of covering the distance. Its uncertainty in the distance that makes them stiffen in anticipation. Remove the act of playing altogether and merely practice getting there and nobody stiffens.

While this is a useful for learning the distance, the reason I do not personally use that technique because some students like to slow down the motion of their hand to land on the right key. This restriction on their arm to play the right note is another form of tension that should be avoided. When the student makes the mistake, as long as it is tension free, the distance can easily be adjusted by after a couple of tries and eventually achieve the right accuracy distance. It is difficult to learn the distance of jumping the keys without actually having piano keys to measure the distance. The speed of the jump should also taken into consideration particularly for a piece like Liszt's La Campanelle where the jumps have to be done rapidly and jumps throughly learned

[nyiregyhazi]

"But being successful at playing the right note does not mean the student will play the correct note until the end of time. All piano teachers know the right notes and teach it to the students but note errors still exist in students playing because this action must be inforced. If the student is too busy with a stop and start over type of playing, the student will never be able to practice other sections of music and as a result more sections of the piece remains unlearned."

If that is so, I'd say the student is not ready for it. It should never be unfeasible to learn passages of 8 bars or so with real accuracy (but a slow tempo). If that is not happening, it's exactly why the student will likely have a high frequency of wrong notes to attempt to survive. If there are too many times where they need to stop, it's because there's either not enough care or the student is unready. Continuing through can in no way help with either issue. 

"Also the student begins to learn when you make an error you stop and that does not hold up well in a performance setting."

That's exactly why there are two modes of approach. Performance and practise. If you spend too much time in performance mode you just learn to be a bad performer who has plenty of errors to press on through. A student must learn to understand the difference. Arguably the average student tends to treat each mode far too interchangably. Their performances include stops (due to the insufficient fluency having been acquired), whereas their practise doesn't fix errors properly. They often get the worst of both worlds, sadly.
 

"I agree there should be a great deal of care of learning before the note is actually played but eventually at some point you need to physically encounter the instrument and learn what works and does not work."

And then press on if it didn't work? Why devote so much to getting out of emergencies rather than pay due attention to avoiding emergencies?

"You would want a student to know how to sight-read and take all their knowledge of music and learn to read music without relying on the help of the teacher."

Of course. But this is a whole different skill to that of learning pieces properly. They need to be distinguished. To overlap the two things in a single approach would be very dangerous. 

"But an error due to a finger slip or an uncharacteristic error they never make I do think they need to get used to playing through the mistake because they need to have the skill to retain musical flow."

Of course. It's all down to what level they are already at with the piece. In an ideal world I'd try never to press on through an error throughout the entirety of the first day or even week of learning a new piece. I really wish I had that patience.

"There needs to be a healthy amount of simple repetitions , both short and long that needs to happen for mistakes to fixed but it depends on the type of mistake not just simply any mistake."

I disagree. It depends on the frequency. If you can rarely manage four bars (in some cases even one or two) without an error, you should not be pressing onward. You should be polishing smaller segments. If you can typically play a page of music with only one or two minor slips, clearly you're ready to be rehearsing. Obviously there's no absolute rule here, but I see so many more students who are nowhere ready for a performance approach. They press on solely because they are lazy in their practise approach.
 

 

"While this is a useful for learning the distance, the reason I do not personally use that technique because some students like to slow down the motion of their hand to land on the right key. This restriction on their arm to play the right note is another form of tension that should be avoided."

If I see this, I move their hand for them and demonstrate curved paths etc. Alternatively I get them to whip the hand fast to cover the key. There are various approaches- but the point is that they do not have to "have a go" in a way that almost inevitably means errors in order to fix the movement issue. I actually find it's easier to improve ease when they do not play the note at all.


"When the student makes the mistake, as long as it is tension free"

What if they aren't tension free? Why would missing the note involve any more or less tension? The fear of missing is the biggest source of tension. You cannot miss that which you do not have to play anyway. There's no easier way to be carefree and relaxed- all without the experience of doing anything wrong.
 
"It is difficult to learn the distance of jumping the keys without actually having piano keys to measure the distance."

Exactly. That's why it pays to practise the leap on the surface of the keys first, to get the feel. Why have a random stab- when you can first learn to get your hand in the perfect position? Most of the time when I see tension in leaps, they simply don't know how to get where they need to. That uncertainty breeds tension- as the movement stops and starts. The key is to learn an easy path before you involve the worry of actual notes sounding.

[danhuyle]

Confidence in piano starts with you.

To apply it in practice, you have to own the piece and know that you deserve to play it.

I'm currently practicing Chopin Fantasie in F minor Op.49 and can play it slowly from memory. Like any other virtuoso piece, you have to put in the work to get it up to speed.

The lesson is - what other people think about your performance is none of your business.

I've got a blog post on my site about this. I share what I've learned as a piano student, among other things.

I can say that even just posting videos of myself on the audition forum can be nerve racking and can be one of the hardest tasks I'll ever do. If I continue to care about what other members think of my performance, I'll never get better. You can go to the audition room and watch my playing of Liszt Transcendental Etude no.10. I don't care what people think about it because I'm after constructive criticism. You know what? I finally come to realization that the Liszt transcendental etude no.10 was too difficult for me to handle way before I even posted the video in the audition room. Because of how horribly I played Liszt Transcendental Etude No.10 (and I still do  ), I began to lose confidence in myself with other pieces. Then I felt traumatized to play other virtuoso pieces since if I play Liszt TE 10 badly, then I'll play play everything else badly. Another feeling that I get is that people will think that I will always play piano horribly because of the way I played Liszt TE 10. You don't want to carry this burden around your whole life.

You play the piano from your heart and you want to share it, that's why play it.

@nyiregyhazi - If a student wants to play a piece you believe they're not ready for, only they can come to realization that they're not ready for it. What you do as a teacher is tell them this is how you learn it, and then they learn it on their own. Like me, I wanted to learn Liszt TE 10, but my teacher taught me no9 instead. Anyway, what this has taught me is that a student will come to realization that they're not ready for a piece after they have it memorized and they've tried everything they can think of. I've exhausted all the possibilities of what I can do with Liszt TE 10, and I came to realization that I'm still not ready for it, so I leave it and move on to something else. Let's face it, you don't want to work on ONE piece for 5 years while you can learn other pieces.

Same thing with La Campanella, I played it in a piano workshop, the teacher said I wasn't ready for it, then I realized why, but watching Yundi Li play, I had to find a way to learn it. He simply blows me away and I had to watch that performance 20 times per day before I could turn the PC off. I came back to it a lot of times, then I came across Czerny Study Op299/22 (study in repeated notes) and that solved one major problem I had with La Campanella.
I continued learning La Campanella, students said it was too hard for me, then months later, I blew them out of the water. I play in front of that same teacher who said I wasn't ready for it, and he was surprised by how seriously I took my piano playing. Still can't believe I tripped on that Contrary chromatic octave part in my end of year recital, it's the only time I ever slipped that part.

If you're a teacher helping a student gain confidence or if you're a pianist who wants more confidence, it's all about you having power and you own your own power, not someone else.
Another way to get pianistic confidence is to post recordings of yourself in the audition room here in the forum for feedback. The constructive criticism here is all part of your growth.

If you play a hard piece, you have to know that you deserve to play that piece and that you have what it takes to play it. You'll have a much easier time accepting feedback from other members and you know that it's all part of your development as a pianist and as a person.

Just remember - What other people think about your performance is none of your business.

Hope this helps. 

[keypeg]

Back to the opposing sides of McDiddy and Nyiereghazi - I'll say both, and I'm saying that after having experienced both sides.  I began on a different instrument where the challenges are mostly technical and right from the beginning.  I had a poor instrument which messed things up eventually and that's when I looked to see what others were doing.  Many of them seemed to teach in technical detail very early, and there were also lots of students tied in knots about standing just so, moving just so - teachers worried about their students being self-conscious about form.  Ok, we didn't have that kind of anxiety.  In recitals I watched as the intonation of students became more refined as they advanced, because as they gained control their teacher's demands increased.  That was instead of trying to be perfect as beginners before that control was there.  This made sense to me, and it goes toward what McDiddy is saying.  Otoh, there were some basic things like foundations, and if I had had them, my playing would have been more secure.  I had to seek them out later and when I had them there was a difference.

If you try to choreograph every motion you do in life, then you would become self-conscious and insecure.  Your actions would be full of hesitation and the things that happen automatically would be hampered.  Otoh, great athletes who were picked because of their natural physical abilities still get trained in the most efficient way of using their bodies.

Another side of tension and clumsiness is if you step forward and don't know whether you want to go or stand still, turn left or turn right.  You'll be stiff and jerky.  This can happen at a musical instrument.  If you know where to direct your body and how to move, then your motions will be more fluid than if you're in a quandary.  If you are unsure and everything sort of half works but doesn't, this gives unsure results and it does not help confidence.

From my own personal experience I'd say that I want to know how to sit and how to move from the very beginning, but in such a way that natural things that are already good don't get blocked.  I also don't think it should be done with a heavy hand, not choreographed as though we were some teacher's personal marionnette, it still has to arise from within us.  It has to be timing and observation and I suspect it's different for every student.

[nyiregyhazi]

In recitals I watched as the intonation of students became more refined as they advanced, because as they gained control their teacher's demands increased.  That was instead of trying to be perfect as beginners before that control was there. 

I can't see that as being comparable. A piano key is a big target that a student has the opportunity to both look at and feel physically prior to sounding it. A flawlessly intonated note is a very small target to home in on that is neither visible to the eye nor distinguishable by the sense of touch. I think it would be more comparable to a violin student taking a wild stab at position changes and hitting the wrong notes altogether. A beginner who plays a lot of wrong notes on the piano is in a very different position to a violin beginner who needs to work on tuning. One requires refinement, the other requires a major overhaul.

[keypeg]

I can't see that as being comparable. A piano key is a big target that a student has the opportunity to both look at and feel physically prior to sounding it. A flawlessly intonated note is a very small target to home in on that is neither visible to the eye nor distinguishable by the sense of touch. I think it would be more comparable to a violin student taking a wild stab at position changes and hitting the wrong notes altogether. A beginner who plays a lot of wrong notes on the piano is in a very different position to a violin beginner who needs to work on tuning. One requires refinement, the other requires a major overhaul.

It is comparable to things like even tone, types of articulation, ideal form in using the hand and body - what is natural but needs to develop whereas what represents a problem that will cause other problems and should be addressed.  I could have mentioned anything else, but the intonation was the most obvious.  I've had a similar process described to me on piano, where a student might already have a good natural way of using the hands (etc.) which develops, and how obsessing too much about the "holding the apple" or whatever might lead to stiffness.

[mcdiddy1]

If that is so, I'd say the student is not ready for it. It should never be unfeasible to learn passages of 8 bars or so with real accuracy (but a slow tempo). If that is not happening, it's exactly why the student will likely have a high frequency of wrong notes to attempt to survive. If there are too many times where they need to stop, it's because there's either not enough care or the student is unready. Continuing through can in no way help with either issue.

Depends on to what level of mistakes are making. If a student makes numerous errors in 8 bars then they should certainly not go on and leave them unchecked. Making an error because you learned a note as an F natural instead of F sharp is something that should be noted and practice but should not stop you from learning the rest of the piece. Typically students play their first couple pages excellent and the last page of their pieces very weakly. Also students need to see how different sections are repeated, different, and fit in the whole piece so they can streamline their practice into sections and achieve the more out of their practice time.

That's exactly why there are two modes of approach. Performance and practise. If you spend too much time in performance mode you just learn to be a bad performer who has plenty of errors to press on through. A student must learn to understand the difference. Arguably the average student tends to treat each mode far too interchangably. Their performances include stops (due to the insufficient fluency having been acquired), whereas their practise doesn't fix errors properly. They often get the worst of both worlds, sadly.

Exactly . Could not have said it better myself.

I agree there should be a great deal of care of learning before the note is actually played but eventually at some point you need to physically encounter the instrument and learn what works and does not work."

And then press on if it didn't work? Why devote so much to getting out of emergencies rather than pay due attention to avoiding emergencies?

You do not need to press on if it didn't work. But you need to know it didn't work before you fix it. I don't argue about the importance of avoiding emergencies, the conversation just lead to how to deal with emergencies. I do feel the other areas of learning music well are taught often and aspects of musical flow and dealing with emergency is less discussed.

"You would want a student to know how to sight-read and take all their knowledge of music and learn to read music without relying on the help of the teacher."

Of course. But this is a whole different skill to that of learning pieces properly. They need to be distinguished. To overlap the two things in a single approach would be very dangerous.  

I agree. One the student has mastered of number of pieces and some of the tonal and rhythm patterns are repeated than they should begin learning on their own. They just need to be introduced to that in a control setting. Otherwise they develop a type of learned helplessness  where they feel they cannot learn a piece unless you show it them how to do it.

"There needs to be a healthy amount of simple repetitions , both short and long that needs to happen for mistakes to fixed but it depends on the type of mistake not just simply any mistake."

I disagree. It depends on the frequency. If you can rarely manage four bars (in some cases even one or two) without an error, you should not be pressing onward. You should be polishing smaller segments. If you can typically play a page of music with only one or two minor slips, clearly you're ready to be rehearsing. Obviously there's no absolute rule here, but I see so many more students who are nowhere ready for a performance approach. They press on solely because they are lazy in their practise approach.

Actually we agree on this. Like my other example, it depends on the number of mistakes on determining the length of the practice section. Of course once you are successful in small repetition then you should view things in the bigger picture. However there  is benefit in showing the student how many times the section they are learning is repeated and they are actually learning more than one section at the same time.

If I see this, I move their hand for them and demonstrate curved paths etc. Alternatively I get them to whip the hand fast to cover the key. There are various approaches- but the point is that they do not have to "have a go" in a way that almost inevitably means errors in order to fix the movement issue. I actually find it's easier to improve ease when they do not play the note at all.

There some aspects of this that may pose a problem. One is it is impossible to go inside the students body to make sure the muscles feel relaxed. You can move their hand for them but they can still tense their muscles on the landing. The second potential problem is that the student would need to learn the jumps of on their own without the teacher.  Because they will need to learn jumps on their own and most of them will not be accurate then they need to learn hone this accuracy. Carefully learning the distance of the jumps on the piano does not transfer to playing rapidly fast and accurate jumps. I

"When the student makes the mistake, as long as it is tension free"

What if they aren't tension free? Why would missing the note involve any more or less tension? The fear of missing is the biggest source of tension. You cannot miss that which you do not have to play anyway. There's no easier way to be carefree and relaxed- all without the experience of doing anything wrong.

I depends on the context. If you are place a great deal of pressure on playing the correct note and you miss it, you would natural flinch with tension. But if you approach learning the number from the idea where you experiment and concentrate on releasing the feeling of tension rather than the result that you will be able to get better results.

Any note can be right or wrong depending on the context however if you play a jump and then notice the result of it the missed note can give you information on how to approach the next attempt. If all the notes become equal and there is no emotional attatchment to getting the right note the student is more free to explore and learn from the mistakes and make adjustments accourdinly.Ultimtely the student need to learn how to learn from their own mistakes and even with careful practice in the beginning, it does not translate to pieces where the jumps need to be fast and automatic because it is a different mental approach.

 The only way to deal with the physicality of the jump, the feel of the key and the depth of the keybed is by doing it on the piano. Dealing in abstract is useful in the beginning but will only go so far because some people have a fear of jumps and going into the key bed. For quick jumps the process needs to automatic and learned through muscle memory.

[nyiregyhazi]

"You do not need to press on if it didn't work. But you need to know it didn't work before you fix it."

Of course- that's exactly my point. The sooner you stop, the fresher the feedback will be and the easier the fix will be. Playing even a note further contributes nothing- when you are nowhere near having mastered the element that failed. This is why I feel the "keep going through mistakes" is generally pushed way too much and inadequately distinguished from the prior necessity of learning a piece in the first place.

"I don't argue about the importance of avoiding emergencies, the conversation just lead to how to deal with emergencies."

I don't think these should be separated though. Those who have the most emergencies to deal with usually practise badly. For some, trying to press on forwards is just too difficult- because emergencies happen every time they play the piece. It's just too stressful to have so many problems to try to get out of. They have no opportunity to be confident. Often the wrong people are given the wrong advice.


"There some aspects of this that may pose a problem. One is it is impossible to go inside the students body to make sure the muscles feel relaxed. You can move their hand for them but they can still tense their muscles on the landing."
 
I generally show them how to build up to a flat path with no landing. I prefer the curves to be as viewed from above.

"Carefully learning the distance of the jumps on the piano does not transfer to playing rapidly fast and accurate jumps"

It certainly builds up to it, in my experience. The fast movement follows immediately, but without striking the note. Attempting that before the process of getting there is assured always breeds the tensions of panic.

"I depends on the context. If you are place a great deal of pressure on playing the correct note and you miss it, you would natural flinch with tension."

That's why I omit the sounding of note until they know how to get there with assurance. The pressure is on avoiding guesswork and wild stabs in the dark. That's not the same as making people feel terrible about the odd wrong note.

"If all the notes become equal and there is no emotional attatchment to getting the right note the student is more free to explore and learn from the mistakes and make adjustments accourdinly.Ultimtely the student need to learn how to learn from their own mistakes and even with careful practice in the beginning, it does not translate to pieces where the jumps need to be fast and automatic because it is a different mental approach."

You learn as much by only covering the notes though. In fact, I'd say the feedback is richer when whipping the arm over a note than when splashing at it. This is my point. You don't need to bring the carefree attitude about the notes to receive all the same benefits.

 "The only way to deal with the physicality of the jump, the feel of the key and the depth of the keybed is by doing it on the piano."

? I'm talking about doing it one the piano.

"Dealing in abstract is useful in the beginning but will only go so far because some people have a fear of jumps and going into the key bed. For quick jumps the process needs to automatic and learned through muscle memory."

Exactly- so why start allowing random notes to be hit? Why not start by learning a consistently accurate leap and THEN start playing notes- with accuracy. The famous leaps in the mephisto waltz are a classic case here. The easiest approach is to learn how span the leap in an instant and then play with a flick of the hand. There's simply no time to land down on the notes. It's just a flick of the hand. This flick is very easy. What is difficult is setting it up by covering the distance accurately. I wasted plenty of my time haphazardly "having a go" with maverick disregard for accuracy. The results were awful. I've achieved not only far more accuracy but far more looseness and ease- quite simply by practising in a way that ensures if I don't judge the leap accurately I do not go on to play any notes. This gives me way more freedom than if strive for loose movement while playing notes independently of worries about accuracy. Seeing as I'm not going to play anything unless I judge the leap right I can be all the more carefree without any of the negative effects of splashing onto the notes. In such cases, you simply cannot afford not to be concerned by accuracy. What you need is an effective means of acquiring it that does not conflict with ease.

[mcdiddy1]

Of course- that's exactly my point. The sooner you stop, the fresher the feedback will be and the easier the fix will be. Playing even a note further contributes nothing- when you are nowhere near having mastered the element that failed. This is why I feel the "keep going through mistakes" is generally pushed way too much and inadequately distinguished from the prior necessity of learning a piece in the first place.

I think we are talking about two sides of the same coin. I think you need the ability to both stop and correct and error and be able to play through mistakes (that aren't learned) to ensure musical flow. Leaning too heavily on either side is an error that could have negative consequences.

I don't think these should be separated though. Those who have the most emergencies to deal with usually practice badly. For some, trying to press on forwards is just too difficult- because emergencies happen every time they play the piece. It's just too stressful to have so many problems to try to get out of. They have no opportunity to be confident. Often the wrong people are given the wrong advice.

Strong players can also have a stuttering problem also. I have seen it. You can practice consistently but when the pressure of performance is on the student they have uncharacteristic errors. Even if weaker players who have more errors need to learn to deal with mistakes better, it doesn't diminish the importance of dealing with mistakes for older students.

I generally show them how to build up to a flat path with no landing. I prefer the curves to be as viewed from above.

I have to admit I don't know what this means.

It certainly builds up to it, in my experience. The fast movement follows immediately, but without striking the note. Attempting that before the process of getting there is assured always breeds the tensions of panic.

Ok makes sense. I do that too sometimes.

Exactly- so why start allowing random notes to be hit? Why not start by learning a consistently accurate leap and THEN start playing notes- with accuracy. The famous leaps in the mephisto waltz are a classic case here. The easiest approach is to learn how span the leap in an instant and then play with a flick of the hand. There's simply no time to land down on the notes. It's just a flick of the hand. This flick is very easy. What is difficult is setting it up by covering the distance accurately. I wasted plenty of my time haphazardly "having a go" with maverick disregard for accuracy. The results were awful. I've achieved not only far more accuracy but far more looseness and ease- quite simply by practising in a way that ensures if I don't judge the leap accurately I do not go on to play any notes. This gives me way more freedom than if strive for loose movement while playing notes independently of worries about accuracy. Seeing as I'm not going to play anything unless I judge the leap right I can be all the more carefree without any of the negative effects of splashing onto the notes. In such cases, you simply cannot afford not to be concerned by accuracy. What you need is an effective means of acquiring it that does not conflict with ease.

Your method of teaching is pretty much the same as mine except mine has some tweaks. I use both careful practicing of jumps as you do and start of a place of broadness to more refinement of the jumps. I do not think there is only one right method to teaching. Having the flexibility to approach a piece from a variety of different avenues allows you to be more versatile and effective. I have seen both methods worked so I would keep them in my teacher toolbox to use.

[nyiregyhazi]

"Strong players can also have a stuttering problem also. I have seen it. You can practice consistently but when the pressure of performance is on the student they have uncharacteristic errors. Even if weaker players who have more errors need to learn to deal with mistakes better, it doesn't diminish the importance of dealing with mistakes for older students."

I didn't suggest otherwise. That's why you have the performance mode as well as the practise one. It's just very important to know which is which and be able to distinguish. A simple trick for performance mode is to record yourself, to create some pressure.

The following:

"I generally show them how to build up to a flat path with no landing. I prefer the curves to be as viewed from above."

means that the arm travel flat- with no sense of coming down to finish. It's the quickest way to span leaps and avoids and need to worry about landing.


"Your method of teaching is pretty much the same as mine except mine has some tweaks. I use both careful practicing of jumps as you do and start of a place of broadness to more refinement of the jumps. I do not think there is only one right method to teaching. Having the flexibility to approach a piece from a variety of different avenues allows you to be more versatile and effective. I have seen both methods worked so I would keep them in my teacher toolbox to use."

There is no great care when whipping the hand across. There doesn't need to be- because you are only preparing for the act of playing a note. You are not intending to play the note but merely to observe whether you got to it. This allows the student to be vastly more carefree and loose when doing the movement than they could ever be while knowing the movement ends with striking something. I'm not talking exclusively about careful movements at all. The difference is that I refine it not by allowing wrong notes but rather from observing the accuracy of the leap before even contemplating the act of sounding the next note. I believe this is much more conducive to avoiding anticipatory seizures. If you don't get the feeling of hand safely being ready where it needs to be, you don't play. You only go on to play anything after having already received a "thumbs up" from the senses. This gives extremely rich feedback and ensures that the hand is never playing without certainty of where it actually is. If you try to play too soon, the hand effectively falls off your mental radar. I feel that this is better avoided when possible. I believe there is more to be learned from ending with the chance to observe where your hand ended up and how it felt to get it there- compared to feeling your hand crashing into some note that you have yet to even identify with any certainty. In an ideal approach, the hand would never fall off the radar until you at least know what it feels like to accurately cover the distance.

I'm not saying it's wrong to have occasions where accuracy is allowed to take a momentary back seat. However, I don't believe in encouraging casual and needless errors. Most students are far too inclined this way in the first place. Doesn't it make sense that it would be better if you could improve the quality of movement without having to sacrifice care and accuracy even for a moment? At the most advanced levels, there are pieces that simply cannot be played unless the practise approach breeds both ease of motion and accuracy as one single entity. Professionals don't tend to "have a go" at hard movements in practise. They are meticulous about gradually building up something to the point of being virtually fail-safe. Careless splashing around would not come into the practise approach of many serious pianists. First they get things assured in a fashion that breeds comfort.

[casaet]

I have only been skimming through this thread, but I have not seen Neuhaus mentioned. In his book The Art of Piano Playing, there is a chapter on Confidence as a Basis for Freedom, and I must say it is the best I have come across on the topic of confidence in connection with piano playing. The rest of the book is, of course, a goldmine of useful information.
     casaet

[dcstudio]

I often teach professionals and experienced pianists...lack of confidence is their main issue.  If you experience anxiety during performances--and you are an exp. musician--more than likely the problem is not in your hands, but in your head.  As a pianist I always tried to fix my hands with hours of painful practicing--and still left my performances in a neurotic state.  I found that once I concentrated on some other factor besides "playing perfectly"-- I felt much better about performing.  Can't say I've ever turned out an absolutely "perfect" performance--but I sleep a LOT better afterwards. 
     

[carlsen10]

Well, as for myself i get my "pianistic confidence" whenever i finish a piece, or play it for the first time for people who applaud me for it. That gives anyone confidence, but my teacher may sometimes get very enthusiastic and say things like: "That's it! That's the work of a virtuoso" or whatever. So confidence may come from within, and from the teacher.

[m1469]

On Saturday, I had someone call and ask me to accompany them while they sang a song in church the next day. We met together that evening for a rehearsal, and I was able to play the song almost perfectly the first time through. I took the music home with me but didn't practice - didn't even give it a thought - until we performed Sunday morning in front of the congregation. Why didn't I practice? Because I had confidence in my skill to play that particular song with ease.

That's just an example of how skill begets confidence in a pianist. No matter our age or skill level, we know what we can do. If we know we can do something, we are confident; free of worry and anxiety.

I think that courage and hope are present in a student when they are moving forward and attempting more difficult things, or are in the process of developing a particular skill. Even if they don't have a certain level of skill now, they can work and learn with confidence, having the hope that they will eventually meet with success. That success will breed more confidence. They will continue to have the courage to try new things . . . it becomes a cycle of courage, hope, success, confidence. Skill is in there somewhere (maybe synonymous with success?)

Thanks for your thoughts.  I 'get' what you are saying.  But, I've pondered a couple of things since you've posted this.  One is that I think that just because somebody doesn't feel fear about something, doesn't necessarily mean they are not demonstrating or expressing courage.  But, here it does depend a bit on the sense of pressure one might feel about the endeavor.  I think that for even seasoned, virtuostic performers, even people who know they have the skill, there has to be courage, too.  I mean, Horowitz supposedly got nervous about playing - Rachmaninov supposedly felt like he never quite achieved a certain level of mastery in his playing ... though I think there are many who even idolize the skill expressed by them - as in, they were not the average "student" just pushing themselves to grow.

Maybe some of us exercise that courage and hope differently in the sense that it doesn't have to necessarily be "mustered" with each event, but is perhaps something which one is so used to they rely on it without hardly thinking about it.  For many, though, I think it probably needs to be summoned many times and in many ways throughout one's life and artistic experiences, but I would think the skill in summoning it can be honed.

I am finding layers and levels to this.  Me starting this thread was not the first time I've ever worked with some ideas, but definitely since I've started it something is changing and my working with these ideas is taking on a new quality in my life.  What I can see is this straight kind of line backwards through my childhood, where it's like I'm going back and correcting mentalities and behaviors and even circumstances (well, memories, obviously) where now I know what I needed, then.  Life is not straight, though!  Sometimes there is courage needed to just express something which has always been there (and, there is some sense of realizing that some friends and others have been correct in that I mostly need to be believing in myself!  Not, though, that other factors like skill and environment don't still play a vital role!).

Well, I don't know that I'm being clear!  But, this is a work in progress and there's much more to its effect than I can currently remark about.  

*runs to piano*

[m1469]

So confidence may come from within, and from the teacher.

Yes, and yes.  Working with my teachers has not excused me from being myself and from needing to work things out in my own thought-foundations, but definitely, each of my teachers have helped me in their respective ways to be seeing and experiencing vital aspects of my growth and development!  


  |
  |
  |
  |
  V

[dcstudio]

Well, as for myself i get my "pianistic confidence" whenever i finish a piece, or play it for the first time for people who applaud me for it. That gives anyone confidence, but my teacher may sometimes get very enthusiastic and say things like: "That's it! That's the work of a virtuoso" or whatever. So confidence may come from within, and from the teacher.

Please don't look for others to validate your abilities--not your teacher, your audience, or anyone.  This leads to a very dark and neurotic place...

You are awesome!

[m1469]

Please don't look for others to validate your abilities--not your teacher, your audience, or anyone.  This leads to a very dark and neurotic place...

You are awesome!

There is a difference between the need for mere validation, vs. the genuine need for growth and development.

[dcstudio]

encouragement comes in many forms--this boy said when he hears people say he played well he acquires confidence--if he only allows these statements to tell him he is a good musician, and he is unable to validate his own abilities without these outside factors--the future will not be bright for him as a pianist.

[m1469]

encouragement comes in many forms--this boy said when he hears people say he played well he acquires confidence--if he only allows these statements to tell him he is a good musician, and he is unable to validate his own abilities without these outside factors--the future will not be bright for him as a pianist.

I don't believe he said that, exactly, but aside form that - since you are speaking general philosophy and psychology, now - I don't think anybody can be a soothsayer on this, exactly.  Sure, anybody who is in the business of performing, especially for years, is going to run up against varying opinions on how these performances go and on what a person's ability is.  Nobody, I don't think, is excused from working these things out and coming to terms with it.

And, aside from there being a big difference between a student/teacher relationship and how they work together in the endeavor towards music-making, vs. what people do or don't respond with towards a performance -- I can nearly guaranty that anybody who performs on a regular basis doesn't do so because they expect people to hate it.  In fact, if they are performing regularly, they likely have a sense that *most* of the feedback they are going to get is going to be positive.  No, not every event is going to go in a stellar way, but in an ongoing basis (so, as in having some kind of career as a performer), there IS an expectation that there is going to be positive feedback of some sort, and not mostly rotten tomatoes!  That doesn't mean they themselves aren't hearing the reason there would be positive feedback!  Or, that if something doesn't go that great, that they don't have the skills to pick themselves up.

In general, what I don't quite get about people, sometimes, is how we expect to live on separate islands from one another when we're all just squished into each other constantly?  We are going to learn from each other, we are going to need each other in various ways, we are going to need space from each other ... what's the big deal?

But, going back to my original topic-heading, and as I've mentioned quite a ways up, I don't necessarily equate validation or positive feedback as the exact same thing as "success" ... which is what I've ultimately aimed at with this thread (though, I realize there's facets).

[dcstudio]

yes I am speaking psychology and I apologize for sounding like a soothsayer--it was not my intention. I am in the business of performing, for many years--I can only state what has worked for me and what I've learned.  I strive to trust myself as a performer, and to not require others to tell me I did great. For me, I must know when I step out to perform that I am able to make people happy--that is the most important thing to me.  Everything else, is secondary--and because of that I can walk away from each performance without regret.  This was all I meant to say  
also--I really like your ideas on teaching children to experience success--this is the mark of a GREAT TEACHER!!! Excellent work! 

[m1469]

also--I really like your ideas on teaching children to experience success--this is the mark of a GREAT TEACHER!!! Excellent work!  

Thanks!  I will print this out and put it in my secret stash of wonderful things that people have written about me  .  I read it periodically throughout each day, sometimes reciting from it to my students in their lessons and at recitals (just in case), and of course every night in bed, while I am drifting off to sleep ... to let my greatness be the very last thing on my mind as I go into dreamland.  Most times, that means I'll dream about how great I am, too, and then I wake up feeling super great about myself.  

[dcstudio]

Thanks!  I will print this out and put it in my secret stash of wonderful things that people have written about me  .  I read it periodically throughout each day, sometimes reciting from it to my students in their lessons and at recitals (just in case), and of course every night in bed, while I am drifting off to sleep ... to let my greatness be the very last thing on my mind as I go into dreamland.  Most times, that means I'll dream about how great I am, too, and then I wake up feeling super great about myself.  

That is the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me online -- thanks so much! a few nice words sure can go a long way, you have a great day--I know your students will 

[m1469]

That is the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me online -- thanks so much! a few nice words sure can go a long way, you have a great day--I know your students will  

 

Well, today I decided that sometimes a person really must remember the positive aspects of one's playing, and even magnify that in one's thinking to the point of blotting out the bad - and then build on that.  Not that we live in the fantasy world of pseudo perfection, but that the foundation of confidence really is some brick by brick of success.  Do most people have a lifetime of that even in their whole life, not just music?  Where all their lives they were able to recognize the positive and keep building on that?  It seems like that's a good place to address the problems in one's playing, even, to identify first with the positive, to affirm that as one's foundation to work from, and then attack the areas in need of greater attention.

I've started reading a book called "The Perfect Wrong Note" (subtitle: Learning to Trust Your Musical Self) by William Westney.  So far I've only read the first chapter but I love it already.  It is talking about kids' (and people's) musical instincts.  I've been thinking about this in relation to myself as a learner, but also in my teaching, for the classes I'll be teaching at school as well as in my private studio.  And, I started thinking about this idea of building lessons upon musical instincts, and to have the foundation of the class be that my students experience music in a natural-to-them way, but that my concept for the lessons and the classes help towards the endeavor of building skill and courage - basically, a kind of funneling of those musical instincts into something that could really bless their lives.

[mcdiddy1]

I've started reading a book called "The Perfect Wrong Note" (subtitle: Learning to Trust Your Musical Self) by William Westney.

I love this book. Very insightful read.

[m1469]

I love this book. Very insightful read.

Yes, indeed!  

I've continued into part of the second chapter and it's just like it's talking right into my inners - reading it is something like drinking water, and it seems to have a kind of healing effect on me as though I'm remembering and even embodying my childhood musician!    It caught my attention from the very first sentence (which, of course, it was meant to have done.  But, it was actually successful and effective!).

[m1469]

Yes, indeed!  

I've continued into part of the second chapter and it's just like it's talking right into my inners - reading it is something like drinking water, and it seems to have a kind of healing effect on me as though I'm remembering and even embodying my childhood musician!    It caught my attention from the very first sentence (which, of course, it was meant to have done.  But, it was actually successful and effective!).

oh, oh ... I've got some disagreements with the book going on now  .

[mcdiddy1]

oh, oh ... I've got some disagreements with the book going on now  .

With what part?

[nyiregyhazi]

oh, oh ... I've got some disagreements with the book going on now  .

Yeah, tell us more. I've always wondered whether the book takes care to distinguish between the nature of good practice and the psychology of actual performance. It's so important to get balance with these kinds of issues.

[m1469]

_@/

[m1469]

_@/

[cdowlen]

For me as a piano student, I learned about confidence in the piano through Recitals. But also through just playing in front of people for fun. I've learned that piano is something more than just an instrument it's merely an art. But, on the other hand, I learned that when you procrastinate and don't practice music everything goes down the drain. To be honest, I went to a piano contest last year and received a Second Division. Partly because I was not prepared to the fullest. My piano teacher told me six weeks before contest,"If you wanna go to State, you've gotta put in the effort." I practiced my heart out and kept at it til contest. Not really sure what happened. But I do agree confidence on the piano comes from playing in front of people and getting used to it. In fact, I've made many friends over the 11 years I've played from doing so. Piano is fun.