It is impossible to become a concert pianist?

[musickid2011]

Hey, i just noticed that my teacher alwasy mention about adult student can't become a concert pianist or performer. It was make me feel sad and depressed all the time. I am currently learning the piano at age 26 and in grade 4 pratical and grade 8 theory.

It is true about that? i am really confused and my target is become a pianist , but after heard about what my teacher said , i am really don't know where i should go after complete the grade 8 or diploma. Teaching i am not thinking about it at the moment.

Should anyone can give some advice or ideas?

Very much appreciate


Thanks

[caioramos]

There is countless threads people make here about that, but its a legit concern I guess, we all love piano here, we all dream of it.

In my opinion, it is possible, and the coincidence is that I am 26 too, and I started in the beginning of this year in February. I always had doubts about it before I started, I thought of the old saying "you have to start young to be successful" then I just decided to try it, and my teacher was the first to say, its possible, it may not be very likely but, it's not impossible. In a year time I reached grade 8 or a little higher in practice and I never thought I would progress that far in such short period, so I didn't even know of my own capabilities, and now I'm moving to Canada next year to study at a conservatory. Look at how things developed.. The thing is, if no one done it before, instead of giving up, its better to think you can always be the first! You have nothing to lose, everything is experience and at the end, if you don't make it, you will not regret trying it, and you can always teach, accompany, and also, when we think of "concert pianist" I guess most think of being as famous as lang lang and other tops. There are countless concert pianists in the world, like my teacher, that played in europe, us, canada and japan, and maybe no one heard of, and she also graduated from Curtis.. Moreover, if you start at the age of 3 and go to Juilliard it doesn't mean you will be a concert pianist too.. so this is really two-sided.

Now, evaluating this from another point of view, there are 2 factors that comes to mind. One is how good you are as a pianist, and the second, the piano market. I believe, and I know many teachers who say and can prove by some students they have that everyone dispite age can reach top technical excellence. Some teacher will say no. But I believe, if you have talent, you can play as good as a top. In my opinion if there is one real problem for starting late is the market. I hear many people saying that orchestras look forward to young talents most of the times, so as better as you are as a pianist, the world would choose a younger pianist than you. Also, there is the competitions problem. Many pianists make their names winning competitions. Like, you win the Chopin international competition in Warsaw, well you're probably sure to be a concert pianist the next day. But the competition has an age limit of 30 if I'm not wrong.. and most of the serious competitions, has an age limit around 35.
 
Just think if this is what YOU wanna do for the rest of your life and if you love piano that much, then and only then you will be able to study and give your best to have the chance.

Hope it helps, it's just my opinion anyway =)
Caio

[ajspiano]

put simply, no its not.

the idea that you can't stems from the idea that it takes 'talent' which I just don't agree with. Talent just means you are able to accomplish certain aspects of the task intuitively.

If there's something you can't do intuitively you just need a teacher that can recognise what's wrong and show you how to fix it.. or the determination to experiment and research until you drop dead. Either will get you there in the end.

[caioramos]

Talent is a reality in my opinion. Mozart did something even a brilliant composer today would take 3 lives to get near. You don't have how to explain how someone composes symphonies at 4, 5 years old without any knowledge on composing. If that is not called talent, than I don't know what it is. And that goes for playing. Some people can express things by their playing some take years, and some just don't. Some people are just mechanical players, its a fact some people are more sensitive than others.

And quoting the grandmaster Arthur Rubinstein himself "One is born with talent, you cannot learn talent, and one can go as far as his talents allows it".

But I believe everyone is talented, maybe one is not talented as a musician, but as an engineer, or medicine, you just have to flow with your own nature

[ajspiano]

Talent is a reality in my opinion.

I didnt say it doesnt exist..   but there is talent as natural ability and talent as determination/hardwork and guidance.

both look roughly the same as an end product..

Not saying anyone is capable of being THE BEST...  but I do believe anyone is capable of being very good.

[caioramos]

Yeah, I agree 

[ajspiano]

Also when you look at mechanical players vs players with excellent feel or any other attribute its so heavily to do with the guidance aspect that measuring talent is pretty much impossible..

take 3 identical, equally determined and naturally talented pupils, put one with a fingerschool teacher that pounds them to death with hanon, put the other with a music/interpretation only teacher, and another with a mixture..  or say a really seriously thought out technique teacher such as someone on the golandsky faculty

10 years down the track the performers will be so contrasting as a result of this that talent will more or less me completely irrelevant. Observers will still stand around saying one is more 'talented' than the other though.

[caioramos]

And that's why teaching guidance is of utmost importance. I think the 1st step for someone wanting to be, as the topic says, a concert pianist, is getting a very good teacher. Someone that can take that most of the talent of the student out to full advantage.

By the way, ajspiano, are you a piano teacher?

[m1469]

It is impossible to become a concert pianist?

I don't know.  I don't know if anybody knows that about themselves, no matter what age they started.  I think the question is nearly unavoidable, but generally I think it and very similar questions are a distraction from progress and tend to become more prevalent as one matures (for many reasons).  I am beginning to think there are better and more pertinent questions.  

[caioramos]

m1469 is surely fed up with this ever going trend xD

[m1469]

At the time, I am literally fed up with pizza and cookies, unfortunately.  Not my most stellar day of eating  :-.

[goldentone]

I think it is helpful to break the question into two slices (or two cookies).  The fundamental question is, Can I reach a certain level?  This is dependent upon you, your talent, and your desire.  How many pianists have reached concert level and yet are not concert pianists performing regularly in the classical world at large?  A lot I think.  And some performers out there are not necessarily the best pianists. They are just the ones who have made it.

I started piano late at 14.  But it wasn't until some seven years or so later that I discovered the real talent I had.  And it wasn't until I was 30 that I started practicing seriously.  Don't listen to what people say you can't do.  If you believe you can do it, then go after it.

[jesc]

Is your goal specifically the title "concert pianist"?

The title "concert pianist" is incidental. It is a result of the performer perfecting the pieces they perform. It is the culmination of all the effort to strive to attain perfection.

If you're studying pieces with this statement in mind "I need to be a concert pianist.". I just don't know... I don't know what you will achieve with that. The first thing you should worry about is "Performing the piece to perfection." or "Breaking new grounds in interpreting the piece".

Here's a question. Will you be satisfied at becoming a mediocre pianist, mediocre interpreter, all in all, a subpar performer BUT labeled as a "concert pianist" by most people?

Will you stop practicing? Stop perfecting your pieces once someone calls you a "concert pianist"?

Is your end in all itself only the title "concert pianist"?

Is performing a very difficult, challenging piece perfectly, with a fresh interpretation not enough? Will it be enough only when you are called a concert pianist?

My point is... play to your very best. Focus on the pieces you play and the title "concert pianist" will come without you seeking it. Once you've reached that you might not even care if you're labeled a concert pianist. You will just find out that you're living the life of one.

[nyiregyhazi]

Many pianists make their names winning competitions. Like, you win the Chopin international competition in Warsaw, well you're probably sure to be a concert pianist the next day.

But this is totally beside the point. The big issue is whether anyone could reach that standard as a late starter. To reach such a standard is little more than a pipe-dream for virtually anyone- whether you start as a kid or adult. It's just silly to be thinking that way, until a number of lesser goals have been reached. The goal should be to play well. If it's about being a concert artist, it always makes me think that it's about fantasies of glory before desire to be a good pianist. Stop fantasising and learn to play as its own reward.

[keypeg]

Here's a first thing I'm wondering about.  MusicKid88, did you tell your teacher "I want to become a concert pianist.", "I want to become a performer."?  Like, then, at least the part where your teacher is addressing the likelihood makes sense, if it's in response.  But I'll bet he's just saying it at random out of the blue, "An adult can never become a concert pianist."  Why do I think that?  Because how often does it happen that somebody posts in a forum saying he wants to learn to play the piano and how should he start, and the answer includes "You'll never become a concert pianist." or "You'll never get to Carnegie."  Like - what the hey?  Why?  Not why can't one - but why is it being said?

Imagine a kid starting to learn to read and write.  The teacher says "Of course you will never be another Shakespeare."  Or you take Physics and the teacher says "You will never be a rocket scientist."  What teacher in his right mind, when a student begins learning a new subject, will decide to tell the student what he will NOT be able to do?  What for?  Anyone with an ounce of pedagogy knows that students who don't believe in what they are doing will not be able to achieve much.  It's like saying "I don't believe in you.  You are in the wrong group and that group always fails.  You will fail.  Give up now."  No, that is not what a good teacher does.  He encourages his student.  He helps the student learn, tells him what he must do in order to achieve things.  He sets a series of goals that the student can reach.  He does not spend his teaching time telling that student what he cannot become.

Let's say I got out of the wrong side of bed this morning and am tired of the stereotypes and assumptions.  Again - why?

[keypeg]

The big issue is whether anyone could reach that standard as a late starter.

No, that is not the big issue.  The big issue is that this is being said out of the blue, with no ambitions stated, way too often.  Remember, the OP was also told for reasons unknown that he would never be a performer.  Performance is a pretty broad field.  The issue is that the student is not being told this because of the abilities that he has personally shown, or the work or lack of work he has personally put in, but because he belongs to a group.  The issue is the fact of that kind of statement being made at random out of the blue while a student is making the effort to master a skill - and that it is made way too often in that way.

Everyone has missed how it makes the OP feel to be told this repeatedly.  A teacher should be focusing on practical goals, such as playing a passage expressively, improving staccato, getting a better handle on key signatures, making Baroque sound Baroque, Romantic sound Romantic, or whatever.  He might talk about practice habits, mannerisms while performing.  There is a host of things dealing with musicianship, pianism, and performance skills (which you want even if you are playing in front of your grandmother).  Like, who the heck cares what I may or may not become at the end of the road?  Stop telling us what we will become, and stay focused on what it is that we should be learning?  If somebody does become really good, who knows, maybe that person will end up performing - but that is not the matter at the moment.  The point is to do your best and reach your personal potential.  That cannot happen in the face of negative talk.

 

[nyiregyhazi]

Everyone has missed how it makes the OP feel to be told this repeatedly.  A teacher should be focusing on practical goals, such as playing a passage expressively, improving staccato, getting a better handle on key signatures, making Baroque sound Baroque, Romantic sound Romantic, or whatever.  He might talk about practice habits, mannerisms while performing.  There is a host of things dealing with musicianship, pianism, and performance skills (which you want even if you are playing in front of your grandmother).

That is what the teacher would doubtless prefer to get on with- rather than be distracted by premature talk of concert pianism.

Like, who the heck cares what I may or may not become at the end of the road?  Stop telling us what we will become, and stay focused on what it is that we should be learning?

If the student doesn't want answers, they shouldn't be asking the questions. You can't blame the teacher for giving a reasonable answer. If a student asks their driving teacher whether they can become a formula 1 racing driver (before even mastering gear changes), is the driving instructor supposed to encourage such a ridiculously premature question by humoring it- if the student is actually 100% serious? As long as someone is more interested in questions about their fantasies than the task in hand, they are limiting their scope to make real progress.

If a student (who hadn't even finished their grades, nevermind got to a serious high standard) sincerely asked me such a fantastical question, I'm afraid I'd have no choice but to be pragmatic in my answer. If that's negativity, I'm afraid it's prompted by such an over the top question. I'd tell them to stop wasting their time fantasising and spend it productively- on learning to play the piano.

Reasonable questions (about progress and development) warrant reasonable answers. Questions that are grounded in fantasy can only be answered pragmatically.

[keypeg]

That is what the teacher would doubtless prefer to get on with- rather than be distracted by premature talk of concert pianism.

You are totally missing it.  Teachers will bring up this topic out of the blue, without the student mentioning it.  The OP has not said that s/he brought up the topic.  It happens often enough that this is said over and over again, without a student mentioning ambitions.  I wrote this clearly in my post.  The reason you are not seeing it is because you probably don't do it as a teacher and so you don't expect this to happen.  There is no way of knowing what is happening in the OP's case, but what I described does happen and that is what I am addressing.

[nyiregyhazi]

You are totally missing it.  Teachers will bring up this topic out of the blue, without the student mentioning it.  The OP has not said that s/he brought up the topic.  It happens often enough that this is said over and over again, without a student mentioning ambitions.  I wrote this clearly in my post.  The reason you are not seeing it is because you probably don't do it as a teacher and so you don't expect this to happen.  There is no way of knowing what is happening in the OP's case, but what I described does happen and that is what I am addressing.

While I wouldn't write off the possibility, I must say that I find this hard to believe as something that is common. I can picture a teacher using it as part of a positive piece of encouragement- perhaps saying something on the lines of "obviously you're not going to go on to be a concert pianist, but you can still aim get to a very good standard", for example. I'd find that a perfectly reasonable statement to make. Anyone who would find that negative rather than encouraging (before having even done grade 8 ) would be advised to step back and think about whether are setting goals or fantasies for themself. Outside of that, I'm finding it hard to imagine in what context a teacher might suddenly come out with something like this, except in response to a question or statements of intent.

What teacher just says "you'll never be a concert pianist" out of the blue? The poster does not explicitly state the circumstances, but I'm guessing this is in response to a question- not a statement that is regularly foisted upon him out of nowhere. If not, I'd be somewhat surprised.

[keypeg]

A statement that begins with "obviously you're not going to..." is unnecessary and beside the point.  Additionally, the OP's teacher keeps telling him that he will not be a performer. 
There are many types and levels of performances.  Such a statement is not encouraging, because it begins with a negative expectation.  Again, it is not necessary.  When we begin learning a skill we are not at the point of expectations of what to be in the first place.  I would think that it is the other way around.  As a student progresses, any age, that is when you start thinking of what might become of it.  You don't start with such things.

[nyiregyhazi]

A statement that begins with "obviously you're not going to..." is unnecessary and beside the point.  Additionally, the OP's teacher keeps telling him that he will not be a performer.  
There are many types and levels of performances.  Such a statement is not encouraging, because it begins with a negative expectation.  Again, it is not necessary.  When we begin learning a skill we are not at the point of expectations of what to be in the first place.  I would think that it is the other way around.  As a student progresses, any age, that is when you start thinking of what might become of it.  You don't start with such things.

I think we need to know more about the poster and the circumstances, to get an idea. Back-slapping and blind encouragement for someone we know nothing about is worthless and does not help that person. The first thing that stands out is the title of the thread. It's not about being mildly upset by slight negativity. I'm sorry if this doesn't sound sympathetic and comes across as negative, but it's simply ridiculous to even be contemplating the issue at 26 years old and grade 4 level. Simply to phrase it that way already reveals that the poster is caught up in issues that should not even be part of current considerations. I find it very hard to believe that that this is about anything other than poster asking premature questions, and leaving the teacher with no choice but to be honest.

It's important not to ask premature questions, or a teacher simply has no choice but to respond with what will come across as being negative- but which is actually a perfectly honest answer from a teacher who probably doesn't have it in them to fuel delusions by lying. I know that I wouldn't be able to lie to any student who asked me that question. If such issues come up a good teacher will inevitably be honest- not slap their student on the back and say, "yeah, you could probably be a concert pianist one day". I'd turn it around to smaller positive goals. Even if the teacher really did say "obviously you'll never be a concert pianist, but you could become very good" who would be offended by that- unless they are already fantasising about things that are way too far down the line to warrant consideration? How can a 26 year old who is at grade 4 be offended by the notion that they are not going to be playing like a concert artist- unless their priorities are in all the wrong places? If you don't compare yourself to realistic goals, you're asking for a negative answer. If you take it a stage at time, you can expect positive encouragement.

If a person had never played golf before their 30s and the teacher said "obviously you'll never be world number one, but you might get to a very low handicap if you work hard", is that negative? You have to have a sense of perspective on these things. Unfortunately, people get lost in the idea of being a concert pianist rather than devote themselves to becoming good as its own reward. That's that point at which any realistic answer starts looking negative- when a more sensible question would have given something positive.

When a person starts asking such questions there's a 99.9999999999999999999999% chance of disappointment- whether that comes from being told it's not going to happen or whether it comes from told it could but it never coming anywhere near happening. For all we know, the teacher may even mention age as a way to avoid singling the poster out as not being talented enough. It could be intended as a way of sparing their feelings compared to saying that they specifically are not progressing in a way that could feasibly lead to the extremely high standard that professionals play at.

Anyone who has both the talent and drive to be a concert performer will not be stopped by one or two negative comments. In fact, anyone who is really serious about it would simply feel more inspired to prove people wrong. You have differentiate between destructive negativity and worldly pragmatism.

The thing that is destructive is quite simply for students to start wondering about these things. If to play well is not a good enough goal, they don't have what it takes to be a concert pianist. If they did, they'd be working hard enough anyway, without having to think about that.

[starstruck5]

I find it interesting that you should have reached Grade 8 theory so quickly! This suggests that you may want to explore composition??

I have not studied anything about the life of Einaudi - but I don't believe he was a concert pianist, before his music became popular??. Currently he performs his own work to large audiences, so he is a famous concert artist.

This might be another avenue for you to explore.   

Another name which springs to mind is James Rhodes. He didn't begin in his mid twenties - but he only seriously dedicated himself to the piano as an adult - - his drive and determination to play the piano like the people he heard on records as a child has taken him far. He also recovered from a quite serious nervous breakdown - after believing he would never reach the standard he craved so much. He persisted though.

Given that you can develop your technique and musicianship to the level required and can find enough time to dedicate to the piano - then never say never.

[keypeg]

Nier, you do have a point about the choice of title, which may reveal a mindset and background.  I'm also wondering about the teacher rushing his student through the grades so quickly - is it thorough (therefore how seriously is he taking this student?).  That last thought comes from my own experience.

[nyiregyhazi]

Nier, you do have a point about the choice of title, which may reveal a mindset and background.  I'm also wondering about the teacher rushing his student through the grades so quickly - is it thorough (therefore how seriously is he taking this student?).  That last thought comes from my own experience.

I don't think the poster said anything about the speed regarding the grades. All we know is that they are on grade 4, yet evidently wondering whether they can be a concert pianist. To me, that can only be viewed as fantasy. These kinds of posts inevitable inspire a tirade of posts saying "you can do it if you want" and "you go girl" etc. but we know nothing about the circumstances. With an adult beginner, they would have to be making AMAZING progress for me to even say "maybe". If they are merely making average or even rather good progress "maybe" would be a totally dishonest response. They would have to be doing something remarkable indeed, before the question should reasonably be on the table whatsoever. Without knowing this to be the case, the only appropriate way to respond to these kinds of questions is to talk about starting with a series of realistic goals, which they can be positive about.

Sadly, for some people the whole fantasy is about being a concert pianist and not about realistic step by step self-development. I hope that doesn't necessarily describe the poster, but these things are very typical. In such cases, the healthiest thing is to break the delusion and see if the student's really interested in real-life progress of the kind they can achieve. This may involve a very good standard in the long-run, but it's silly not to acknowledge what a gulf there is between even doing unusually well and concert pianism.

[49410enrique]

i'm a living room concert pianist. i'm also a practice room concert pianist. mostly i'm a closet concert pianist. i never let anyone tell me it was impossible. if they did, i just kicked them out of my living room or practice room.

[ajspiano]

By the way, ajspiano, are you a piano teacher?

Yes.

[lostinidlewonder]

I take a much more business like approach to this question and since I have done more solo concerts than I can count I feel it is the right way to look at it from experience.

If you have cash, the connections and can play the piano well then you can be a concert pianist easily (whether you make money is another matter). If you have no cash, no connections and can play the piano well, then it will be very difficult to become a concert pianist.

Hosting a concert event does not require any prerequisites except having the cash to hire out the venue. However you may only have your friends and family turn up if you do not understand how to market a piano concert. Marketing is where 99.99% of aspiring pianists fail.

[jesc]

I take a much more business like approach to this question and since I have done more solo concerts than I can count I feel it is the right way to look at it from experience.

If you have cash, the connections and can play the piano well then you can be a concert pianist easily (whether you make money is another matter). If you have no cash, no connections and can play the piano well, then it will be very difficult to become a concert pianist.

Hosting a concert event does not require any prerequisites except having the cash to hire out the venue. However you may only have your friends and family turn up if you do not understand how to market a piano concert. Marketing is where 99.99% of aspiring pianists fail.

This is a very realistic, down to earth answer. It's a reality I've come to notice but kept a tight lip about. I never had the guts to actually ask anyone even my teacher about it. However, it's been bugging me for some time and it's a bit of a relief that someone actually blurted the entire thing as it actually is. I mean, on the surface, everyone wants to say "It's pure talent that got them there."

To the OP: If you have the money, keep the quoted "reality" in mind. However, remember the part of the condition repeated twice... "play the piano well".

 

[nyiregyhazi]

I take a much more business like approach to this question and since I have done more solo concerts than I can count I feel it is the right way to look at it from experience.

The poster is 26 years old and grade 4 standard. I don't think the right way for you to look at it is going to have much bearing on the right way for them to look at it. It's not lack of marketing that dictates the fact that most people who learn the piano never get to be in a position to breeze through difficult concertos from memory.

Once somebody has crossed a certain line, marketing is probably the biggest thing of all. The problem is that you have to cross that line first. To say that mentioning it to a grade 4 pianist constitutes putting the cart before the horse is putting it mildly indeed.

[lostinidlewonder]

...on the surface, everyone wants to say "It's pure talent that got them there."

And this is the wrong way to consider things in my opinion. If people want to dream big and achieve things in their life they have to stop putting obstacles in their path and simply get on  with the real task at hand as m1469 pointed out. It is important to have long term goals but what are you going to do to move towards that? If someone dreams of playing in a large concert hall then how are they going to sharpen their "performance sword", where are they going to gain practical experience? I have posted in many threads on how one might go about getting concerting experience here are some;

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=41921.msg464109#msg464109
https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=6544.msg64969#msg64969
https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=23949.msg275137#msg275137
https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=42183.msg464919#msg464919

...I don't think the right way for you to look at it is going to have much bearing on the right way for them to look at it.

None of us know how well the OP can play or how well they will progress in the future. People in this world usually listen to the experience of others who have already taken a certain path that interests them. However there are some who do not want to listen to others experiences, that is fine, but it would be more constructive to hear that from the OP rather than from a random persons unsubstantiated opinion.

It's not lack of marketing that dictates the fact that most people who learn the piano never get to be in a position to breeze through difficult concertos from memory.

I considered how marketing dictates how well your concerts will sell, I don't have much interest discussing your spin on it.

Once somebody has crossed a certain line, marketing is probably the biggest thing of all. The problem is that you have to cross that line first. To say that mentioning it to a grade 4 pianist constitutes putting the cart before the horse is putting it mildly indeed.

Neither you or I know how well the OP will progress, so it would be rather arrogant and unfriendly to state that they will never do so to a masters level no matter how long they live for.

[nyiregyhazi]

Neither you or I know how well the OP will progress, so it would be rather arrogant and unfriendly to state that they will never do so to a masters level no matter how long they live for.

Yet it would make sense to encourage someone of grade 4 standard to think about booking out a concert hall, before they have acquired anything resembling the standard required? Do you know what Grade 4 standard is? Your post is tantamount to talking about a path for a learner driver to become a formula one racer, before that person has even reached the standard to acquire their driving license. Marketing skills could scarcely be less relevant to this topic. You can market all you like, but you still have to learn to play the piano first. Also, to pay for a professional venue before practising with concerts in churches etc would be an extremely bad move for someone without plenty of concert experience- even if they were already playing to a very high-level.

What this person clearly needs is to go and sort out the process of playing the instrument. To even entertain thoughts of booking venues or marketing is just to encourage fantasies. The first step is to learn to play- not to start planning which venue to book, while you're still in the beginner stages.

[lostinidlewonder]

Those who think big achieve great things. Aim for the stars and you hit the moon, aim for the moon and you hit the sky, aim for the sky and you hit the trees, aim for the trees and you hit yourself in the foot. There is no dangers in thinking big and in fact many of the greatest achievers throughout our history where big thinkers.

[jesc]

generally I think it and very similar questions are a distraction from progress and tend to become more prevalent as one matures (for many reasons).  I am beginning to think there are better and more pertinent questions.  

simply get on  with the real task at hand as m1469 pointed out. It is important to have long term goals but what are you going to do to move towards that?

but you still have to learn to play the piano first.

What this person clearly needs is to go and sort out the process of playing the instrument.

I'm going out on a limb here and might be extremely vulnerable but aren't these messages almost "similar"... messages addressed to the OP at least?

I'm not going to quote myself when I also said that the OP should focus on his current pieces which is the task at hand.

"What are you going to do to move towards that?"
"learn to play the piano" and "sort out the process of playing the instrument" <-----Isn't this part of moving towards that?

I don't know. There's this arguing but it seems that everyone has the same "underlying" message to the OP. What I'm concerned about, which I think is already happening is that the commmon "underlying" message is getting lost by the debate.

[lostinidlewonder]

"What are you going to do to move towards that?"
"learn to play the piano" and "sort out the process of playing the instrument" <-----Isn't this part of moving towards that?

Playing the piano well just isn't enough. That is the problem that stumps many aspiring concert pianists. Just being able to play, the laymen do not really care in all honesty. It is a harsh reality. You need to have a performance package which the audience didn't know that they needed. How do you go about developing your performance standard must be stepwize, you do not just jump into the most expensive venue that seats thousands of people, you start modestly and build from there. A lot of these issues I discusses in links I now just included in my previous post.

[keypeg]

Those who think big achieve great things. Aim for the stars and you hit the moon, aim for the moon and you hit the sky, aim for the sky and you hit the trees, aim for the trees and you hit yourself in the foot. There is no dangers in thinking big and in fact many of the greatest achievers throughout our history where big thinkers.

This bears repeating.  It is not that we think that we will hit the sky, but that by aiming for the sky maybe we manage to stand upright.  If used this way as a mental trick, it can be a powerful thing.  By the same token, if a student (or child) is constantly reminded of his insignificance and the poor prospects of someone in his class (as a child, as a woman, as a minority, as an adult student), he will miss his potential by far for the mere thinking of it.

[nyiregyhazi]

Those who think big achieve great things. Aim for the stars and you hit the moon, aim for the moon and you hit the sky, aim for the sky and you hit the trees, aim for the trees and you hit yourself in the foot. There is no dangers in thinking big and in fact many of the greatest achievers throughout our history where big thinkers.

In other cases, think big and you end up getting knocked out cold by an opponent you don't have the skill to be taking on. To encourage someone at grade 4 standard (a standard that is very typically reached by 12 or 13 year olds who are not even terribly remarkable) to start thinking about booking out venues is absurd. The only way to think big in a productive way, is to understand every STEP towards the destination. Without that, thinking big can be very dangerous indeed.

The first step is to be able to play the piano to concert standard- and that's not a small step for a 26 year old at grade 4. It would be a truly remarkable step were they to succeed in making it. To wish to attempt this step is already aiming spectacularly high. To start thinking about booking a concert/promotion hall would be like a boxer preparing for a fight with an experienced heavyweight by worrying about flyers, when he has neither yet developed a punch nor the ability to block. The starting foundations are the most important of all.

[nyiregyhazi]

This bears repeating.  It is not that we think that we will hit the sky, but that by aiming for the sky maybe we manage to stand upright.  If used this way as a mental trick, it can be a powerful thing.  By the same token, if a student (or child) is constantly reminded of his insignificance and the poor prospects of someone in his class (as a child, as a woman, as a minority, as an adult student), he will miss his potential by far for the mere thinking of it.

By that logic, should we also start the child on Rachmaninoff's 3rd concerto? It equally bears remembering that aiming high can mean achieving very low. Everything needs to be done in stages.

[keypeg]

The metaphor of being knocked out by an opponent creates an image of achievement being a competition.  Against whom, for heavens sake?  You are learning how to do something.  I'd rather take the metaphor of a baby learning to walk and talk.  Does he use a toddler as his model?  No, he looks at adults who do these things so freely that one cannot imagine that it was ever an effort for them.  He learns because he has an inner drive to learn - it is in his makeup.  There is nothing more it than an effort from moment to moment to get on his feet and then move forward, stage by stage.  He is not competing against anyone, and he doesn't get "knocked out" because he lands on his bum many times over, while by comparison the adults don't.  This is a fault of adult thinking - comparing yourself to others, mentally competing, and finding yourself sorely lacking.  The LAST thing that an adult learning to play an instrument for the first time is to be reminded over and over and over that he is flawed by the very fact of being an adult, doomed to never really get anywhere, faulty and second rate because of what he has no control over - his age.  This question should not come about AT ALL.  What should be posed by a teacher is not "Who can you not be like." but "What skill do you need to get next.  What skill have you acquired.  What are your strengths that we can use.  What weaknesses will we turn into strengths."

[nyiregyhazi]

The metaphor of being knocked out by an opponent creates an image of achievement being a competition.  Against whom, for heavens sake?  You are learning how to do something.  I'd rather take the metaphor of a baby learning to walk and talk.

Okay, let's say a tightrope walker then. Let's suppose that someone is being encouraged to publicise a walk across the grand canyon, before having learned to walk a tight-rope. This is a closer analogy, but the point about both is that aiming high is NOT always a good thing!

The LAST thing that an adult learning to play an instrument for the first time is to be reminded over and over and over that he is flawed by the very fact of being an adult, doomed to never really get anywhere, faulty and second rate because of what he has no control over - his age.  This question should not come about AT ALL.  What should be posed by a teacher is not "Who can you not be like." but "What skill do you need to get next.  What skill have you acquired.  What are your strengths that we can use.  What weaknesses will we turn into strengths."

That's where obsessing about "can I be a concert pianist?" is so harmful. Anyone encouraging the belief risks setting the person up for a major fall- considering how truly miniscule the odds are. Anyone being pragmatic looks negative. That's why people who ask such questions need to be brought to earth and made to understand the steps that must be achieved, before they have any business asking such a question. Fuelling such beliefs by talking about booking venues (before basic skills are even on the table) is the last thing that will help such a person.

[keypeg]

By that logic, should we also start the child on Rachmaninoff's 3rd concerto? It equally bears remembering that aiming high can mean achieving very low. Everything needs to be done in stages.

That is not at all by that logic.  Rachmaninoff's 3rd concerto is a piece.  We do not aim for pieces - we aim for the ability to play the piano and understand music.  A child does not try to dance the specific steps of a solo dancer in Swan Lake.  He tries to stand up, not fall over, take a step, another step, and walk.

I started lessons as an adult on a new instrument.  I am very glad that nobody fed me those kinds of lines just as I was starting out.  I was told how to hold the instrument, how to draw a sound out of it, what to listen for.  I heard my teacher's professional playing and drew out of it what I needed for the level that I was at, and as I grew, that changed.  And nobody ever told me what I could not do, and how my age limited me.  I was free to go as far as I could go without thinking of such things.  Later on people did feed me that garbage, and it was poison and crippling.  And UNNECESSARY.  You do not ever need to hear who you will not be like.  You take lessons in order to learn to play the instrument - not to get a prognosis of your future.  What you will be able to do reveals itself over time.

[nyiregyhazi]

That is not at all by that logic.  Rachmaninoff's 3rd concerto is a piece.  We do not aim for pieces - we aim for the ability to play the piano and understand music.  A child does not try to dance the specific steps of a solo dancer in Swan Lake.  He tries to stand up, not fall over, take a step, another step, and walk.

What does it matter if it's a piece. What is changed by that? It's an example of how aiming high in the wrong way leads to DISASTER! To suggest that aiming high is always good is simply not accurate, as shown by this example. There are instances where aiming at what might seem beyond your grasp is beneficial. And there are instances where it's a very bad idea. It's all very well to want to be optimistic, but there are good ways to aim high and there are also very bad self-limiting ways to aim high.

Those who want to play the piano well have to start with things that are within their grasp- not with things that are out of their reach.

[keypeg]

Okay, let's say a tightrope walker then. Let's suppose that someone is being encouraged to publicise a walk across the grand canyon, before having learned to walk a tight-rope. This is a closer analogy, but the point about both is that aiming high is NOT always a good thing!

Again - when the baby learns to walk, he has the image of walking freely in his mind, but he starts by getting on his feet, holding on the furniture and the rest.  I have described a PROCESS.  You are missing it.

That's where obsessing about ...

Nobody has obsessed or asked about anything.  We've got a teacher keeps saying over and over to his student that he cannot be a PERFORMER (not concert pianist - look at the original post).  It is just as likely that the teacher is planting the worry in his mind.

And supposing that a student does want to go for becoming a performer.  Then the correct response is to look at what is needed to become that performer.  Then you are right back to basic skills.

Look, becoming a performer is not the same thing as being a performer right at this moment (which is what all of your comparisons are doing).  Becoming means that you learn the basic skills of piano playing and you move on.  With your tightrope metaphor - if someone wants to cross the grand canyon and hires a teacher to help him get there, the teacher is not going to spread a rope across the grand canyon.  He'll be doing balancing things on the floor and eventually move to something two feet above the ground.

You are not getting what we are seeing in aiming toward goals.  The idea that moving toward something is the same thing as doing it immediately is what is wrong here.

[keypeg]

What does it matter if it's a piece. What is changed by that? It's an example of how aiming high in the wrong way leads to DISASTER! To suggest that aiming high is always good is simply not accurate, as shown by this example. There are instances where aiming at what might seem beyond your grasp is beneficial. And there are instances where it's a very bad idea. It's all very well to want to be optimistic, but there are good ways to aim high and there are also very bad self-limiting ways to aim high.

You are not understanding what "aiming high" means in the way I and others are thinking.  And that it is a piece matters a great deal.  A piece is not a goal.  Aiming high means this:

I want to cross the grand canyon on a rope.  How do I get there?  What do I need to get there?

Then follow the steps.

I want to become a performer.  What do I need to do to become a performer.

Then follow the steps.

The steps are small steps.  Playing the Rachmaninoff is wrong already for that reason, because it is not a small step.  It's the final result.  Nobody is talking about the final result.

I'm done unless you get this because it's going in circles.  You are addressing things that I and the other poster are not saying.

[nyiregyhazi]

Again - when the baby learns to walk, he has the image of walking freely in his mind, but he starts by getting on his feet, holding on the furniture and the rest.  I have described a PROCESS.

Yes, but walking is EASY. All able-bodied people succeed. Work alone does not guarantee the skills to be a concert level pianist any more than it guarantees the ability to walk a tightrope over niagra falls.

And supposing that a student does want to go for becoming a performer.  Then the correct response is to look at what is needed to become that performer.  Then you are right back to basic skills.

No. The correct response is to look at the level of progress and give them an honest assessment of whether they have a hope in hell. If not, it's time to direct their attention to attainable goals. It would exceedingly cruel to fuel the fantasies of somebody who makes anything less than remarkable progress.

With your tightrope metaphor - if someone wants to cross the grand canyon and hires a teacher to help him get there, the teacher is not going to spread a rope across the grand canyon.  He'll be doing balancing things on the floor and eventually move to something two feet above the ground.

Exactly. You tell them to stop fantasising and get on with actually learning to walk a tightrope. Only IF they develop some remarkably sound basic skills would you come back to the idea of crossing the canyon.

[nyiregyhazi]

I want to cross the grand canyon on a rope.  How do I get there?  What do I need to get there?

What if you keep falling off the rope over and over, showing no unusual skills for balance- but keep asking your teacher about crossing the grand canyon? It's not as simple as sketching out a path and magically following it. It would be lovely to live in such a simplistic world, but there's no magic path by which a 26 year old goes from beginner to concert pianist. That's why they need to start with short term goals.

What you seem to be missing is that we are largely saying the same thing. It's just that I do not believe it's fair to fuel delusion. Fantasies must be replaced with short-term goals. If more immediate goals aren't enough for the student's satisfaction, delusions of concert pianism aren't going to serve them any better.

[keypeg]

Nobody is asking anything of any teacher over and over.  The only thing we know for certain is that the teacher is saying something over and over.  As teacher, meanwhile, if a student of mine keeps failing at a task then my first job is find out why, and change what and how I am teaching, and what I ask the student to do.  The question of what the person can become doesn't come into it and I don't think it would be part of the discussion.  I would not state whether or not the student can become this or that, but reorient him toward the immediate goals.

[nyiregyhazi]

Nobody is asking anything of any teacher over and over.  The only thing we know for certain is that the teacher is saying something over and over.  As teacher, meanwhile, if a student of mine keeps failing at a task then my first job is find out why, and change what and how I am teaching, and what I ask the student to do.  The question of what the person can become doesn't come into it and I don't think it would be part of the discussion.  I would not state whether or not the student can become this or that, but reorient him toward the immediate goals.

Well, as I said, the title of the thread is clearly significant. I cannot imagine a teacher in the world who would just keep saying adult beginners can't become concert pianists, without some kind of contextual reason. And the fact that the poster is concerned or offended by hearing this makes it clear that they are thinking this way. Otherwise they wouldn't bat an eyelid at hearing such a statement.

These considerations are not healthy. Students need to start by making progress and learning to play well for no other reason because they want to- not by fantasising about the glories of concert pianism. Getting lost in these pointless contemplations can only distract them from short-term goals of improvement- i.e. the only issues that could provide even the slimmest chance of reaching concert standard. It's a situation where reaching for the stars (rather than tackling issues one at a time) can only be a negative.

[starstruck5]

I am inclined to agree with Nyir on this one. Even though I said in an earlier post that 'never say never' -on further reflection I think the idea of an adult beginner becoming a concert pianist is far fetched. Maybe the only route is through composing and performing your own music - in Einaudis case, his work is usually fairly simple.

Even if you discount competing in the same market as the prodigious greats, such as; Daniel Barenboim, Yuja Wang, Martha Agerich, Krystian Zimmerman, etc, -and by definition be as good as them- then you have to ask if you can get by teaching and giving performances in small towns to small audiences? Does the poster even know if he has the temperament to perform? Anxiety can be very destructive for some.

I would also say that technically the poster should already be able to memorise pieces quickly -and be able to astound his teacher. Given the negative comments from said person, this seems unlikely.

I wish he would update us with his reaction to the response his thread as generated - at least I think it is a him!

[keypeg]

I've been thinking about this thread.  The very first thing is that a teacher's response or advice has to be geared toward where the student is at.  What is happening here is that an assumption is being made about what the student's attitude is, and opinions go accordingly.  I have tried to be neutral and thus we have talked past each other.  We don't know what is going on here.

Personally, I have encountered teachers who have not known me, heard me, or worked with me, and who immediately did this "performer" line if I identified myself as an adult student.  I have encountered assumptions oodles of times, where a teacher goes by what he knows about my age group in general, and then assumes he knows what I am thinking, and addresses me according to those assumptions.

It is just as possible that the OP's teacher is volunteering that line frequently without being prompted, and after hearing umpteen times "You can't become a performer." starts thinking and wondering about it.  We don't know what is going on, and he has not come back to tell us.

There is an additional insidious thing that can and does happen.  Here the teacher thinks that this person is older, therefore a hobbyist, therefore does not need to get the essential skills on which musicianship is built and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy.  I suspect that the most when a student progresses fast, because you can skim through the grades.

We don't know what prompted the title of the post - what the mindset is behind it.  We can assume, and then answer according to that assumption.  But I have seen unfortunate titles before, and as discussion progressed, it revealed much different thoughts and intentions.

[nyiregyhazi]

I've been thinking about this thread.  The very first thing is that a teacher's response or advice has to be geared toward where the student is at.  What is happening here is that an assumption is being made about what the student's attitude is, and opinions go accordingly.  I have tried to be neutral and thus we have talked past each other.  We don't know what is going on here.

The post says quite plainly what the intentions are- to be a pianist. The fact it's geared towards circumstance is exactly why backslapping and "you can do it" posts could easily be so harmful. The circumstances would have to be OUTSTANDING- for a 26 year old grade 4 to reasonably be told they have a chance. If not, saying there's a chance is nothing but fueling unhealthy fantasy. Another poster in this thread speaks of making remarkable progress from a late start. Unless that is happening, the teacher is absolutely right. Only amazingly rare progress can justify so much as a mere "maybe" (that would still rightfully be qualified with explanation of how even that "maybe" is a slim chance). I appreciate that you dislike needless negativity, but you cannot just assume that everyone is on track for something spectacular and that anything that says otherwise is wrong. Those who fantasise about such things when having scarcely even begun as a pianist need honest advice about how to direct their goals to what they CAN achieve in stages. Not empty encouragement about something that only a tiny percentage of people have a hope in hell of even approaching.

I have encountered assumptions oodles of times, where a teacher goes by what he knows about my age group in general, and then assumes he knows what I am thinking, and addresses me according to those assumptions.

Are you on track for the standard required to have a concert career? Are you offended by the thought that someone might suggest you are not? I certainly don't have that impression. You cannot put everything in the same box- just because you have personal experience with truly unjustified negativity. Just because something is not what a person wants to hear, does not mean that the teacher is wrong and that blind optimism is always the way to go. When a person has unrealistic expectations, it's the teachers job to bring them to REALISTIC goals and whether they are being met or not. The odds that these expectations are realistic are miniscule. It makes no sense to leap to the assumption that we are looking at a one in a billion case where a late starter is making amazing progress but the teacher is scoffing.

We don't know what prompted the title of the post - what the mindset is behind it.  

Yes we do. Read the poster's comments about their evident disbelief about being told they are not on track for a concert career. For a grade 4 pianist to be thinking that way is NOT healthy.  I appreciate that you wish to be positive. But fuelling what is 99.99999999999999% certain to be a delusion does not serve anything positive. It sets up major disappointment. Now is the time to start making realistic goals. If someone wants to play the piano, they have to start with small goals and work up. The other poster in this thread clearly succeeded in that and who know how far they may go. Unless there is evidence of remarkable progress, it is just cruel to fuel fantasies that stem from inexperience and lack of knowledge about what it takes. Nobody at grade 4 has even begun to understand what concert pianism takes. More likely than not, the teacher is just commenting on the fact that the student is not progressing anywhere near what would be required- and the teacher favours referencing late starters to saying that this individual is not good enough. It's a more polite way to put it- than to tell someone that they (as an individual) are not showing any sign of making special progress.