bach inventions: sight reading or memorization

[drazh]

hi
I am practicing bach invention no:1 .after 2weeks playing with sight reading ( about 1-2 hours a day) only can play it with half tempo. my teacher said that is not good for playing in front of audience but good for class .I am not satisfied though.anyway when I tried to increase tempo whloe piece ruined.should I memorize it or continue to sight read?
thank you

[brogers70]

That's not a very fast piece, so I suspect that it's nothing physical about moving your fingers fast enough that is the problem. Rather, you have trouble remembering what notes come next, and the delay involved is the delay in processing what you see on the page of music. If you go ahead and memorize it, you'll end up able to play it faster.

[drazh]

If you go ahead and memorize it, you'll end up able to play it faster.

dear  brogers
what is the usual way?  memorization or sight reading bach inventions?
sincerely yours

[cjp_piano]

It depends what works for you. Some people find it hard to read because of the independent lines, so they memorize it. Others find it difficult to memorize so they read it. I would read it like you are, but then work on small sections memorizing.

[keypeg]

I suspect that it doesn't go well if you read them like ordinary music.  Have you been following the individual lines?  They are like melodies that interweave.  That made Inventions easier for me.

[werq34ac]

I find Bach ridiculously difficult to sight read, and ridiculously difficult to memorize.

But memorizing always gives you an edge when you perform.

[arctic_mama]

I'm a memorized, myself.  Especially for Bach, I find the ideas/voices of the music lend themselves to memorization, and I can focus better on dynamics and expressive playing when I am not trying to read the notes and rhythm.  But really, if reading is your strong suit there is nothing wrong with reading it!  But for me, memorizing is easy, convenient, and helps my playing.  Your mileage may vary.

[gore234]

If you ask me, I would say it is impossible to sight read a bach invention and play it at the correct tempo at the same time if it's your first time playing it.  You are playing 2 or more melodies on top of each other using both hands.  I learned to play 5 of the 2-part inventions by memorizing one hand and then the other hand and then memorizing both hands at the same time.  Inventions also have different rhythms on top of each other and trills thrown in.  I believe sight reading is possible for pieces like moonlight sonata 1st mov. or prelude in C major but not for pieces such as inventions or fugues.       

[brianlucas]

Depends on your goals too.  If you want to be a better sight reader than don't memorize anything, try to read it all.  If you're trying to get a piece ready for public performance, then memorize it in sections to get the muscle memory down.

-Brian
www.pianoin8weeks.com
www.brianlucas.com

[kellyc]

Don't increase speed.  Doesn't matter if you read it or memorize it.  Don't increase speed. Keep the tempo comfortable. Speed comes all by itself.  Learn the piece . Really learn the piece.  Actually learn to sightread it and memorize it and speed will come. This is a really easy piece and eventually you will have more speed than you know what to do with.  Just give it time. 


Kelly

[brogers70]

dear  brogers
what is the usual way?  memorization or sight reading bach inventions?
sincerely yours

For Bach inventions I usually work on each hand separately until I have each hand memorized individually, and then I put the hands together. But take this with a grain of salt...I'm a lousy sight reader. If I could sight read them, I would.

[rmbarbosa]

Bach Inventions are wonderful not only for technical purposes but also for learning musical theory. If you only use them to sight read, you are loosing a lot of important things. For example, in the beginning of Invention no 1 and after the theme (cdefdecg) you have first a modulation from C major to G major (only with a F sharp in the left hand) and also 2 bars where you may see the theme reversed (played in a retrograde sequency of those 8 notes) and - at the same time - in a "mirror". And that`s why Bach music is so wonderful and inventive. So, you may wish to study each invention prior to play it. For example, in those same bars, you may put to yourself an interesting question: what do you wish to enhance when you are playing them - the reversed or the mirror? (Note, both are in the same notes...) or do you wish to let the audience choose what each one wants? This is not noticeable if you sight read, isnt true?
About speed: if you see Glenn Gould playing Invention no 1, in youtube, you may see that this Invention isnt to fast. If you play it to fast, you`l lose a certain kind of tenderness it has.
Best wishes. Rui

[xerula]

if you see Glenn Gould playing Invention no 1, in youtube, you may see that this Invention isnt to fast. If you play it to fast, you`l lose a certain kind of tenderness it has.

But if you play it too slowly, you will lose a certain brilliance and wit.

I don't know why so many look to Gould's performances as the ultimate arbiter of tempo in these inventions. His tempo works for him, sort of. I still find it eccentrically and willfully slow. There are, as so often in Bach's music, many valid approaches. (Despite the efforts of didactic youtube "Bach scholars" to enforce single, "historically accurate" tempi.)

You might be able to tell... I like this one quite fast!

When playing them as a set, I personally regard the E major, e minor, and f minor inventions as the slow "movements". The mournful e minor at the heart of the work invites quite a glacial pace. I take the E flat major and closing b minor at a stately moderato. The rest can go allegro to presto. It works well for me as an overall tempo scheme and seems to unify the set.

gore234: you evidently haven't encountered the sort of genius reader who can pull off incredibly demanding orchestral score reductions at first sight. I've seen Piers Lane and Peter Donohoe do this kind of thing. Reading a two-part invention would be comparatively trivial. I think you underestimate what is possible in the field of advanced sight-reading.

drazh: memorize it already!

[brogers70]

I don't know why so many look to Gould's performances as the ultimate arbiter of tempo in these inventions. His tempo works for him, sort of. I still find it eccentrically and willfully slow. There are, as so often in Bach's music, many valid approaches. (Despite the efforts of didactic youtube "Bach scholars" to enforce single, "historically accurate" tempi.)

Amen to that. I think that to a much greater degree than a lot of music, Bach's music can work very well at a great range of tempos (and the first invention is a good example). Even pieces that are clearly meant to zip along quite fast, are still interesting when played quite slowly. Listening to the same Bach at fast and slow tempos is sort of like looking at a very detailed painting quickly, to get the overall effect, or slowly, to linger over the details. I also think that once you've spent a lot of time learning a piece of Bach you are already familiar with all the clever details, and you underestimate the processing time that the hearer will need to appreciate them.

[rmbarbosa]

I dont look for him like a "Bible" of tempo. For example, I dont like de incredible fast speed  he plays Invention no 10. I only say that Invention no 1 gains tenderness when played like Glenn did. And - if played not very fast - one can understand better all the "nuances" Bach put in this Invention.