Considered "learned"

[ignaceii]

I would like to know how you all think when a piece is considered as being "learned", or "done".
Does this mean.
1. I can play all the notes with no interrupts of course.
2. I play 1 + dynamics, phrasing, all repeats.
3. I play 2 + pedalling, if necessary.
4. I play 3 + I play it by heart.

Does one continue until he finds he knows the piece (so 1,2,3 or 4) before starting another ?
Or not.

If any intermediate steps you would consider.
Being hampered with my health, I have trouble playing through whole movements of sonatas, and
need to stop, not to say play the repeats.
I need to accept my limiitations or borders, and that is tough.

Thanks for your appreciations.

Greetings from Belgium

[jugular]

Greetings from Canada ignaceii

I agree with all your points that are factored into a piece being "learned". However, I would add one more factor to your list:  you are able to perform it in front of an audience.

Performing a piece in front of an audience is a test of what you've been working on. You only have one shot when performing; there's no going back once your fingers press the keys. If you are able to execute the piece in front of the audience at the same level (more or less) as when you're practising it, then I would consider the piece to be learned.

[danielekstrom]

Greetings from Canada ignaceii

I agree with all your points that are factored into a piece being "learned". However, I would add one more factor to your list:  you are able to perform it in front of an audience.

Performing a piece in front of an audience is a test of what you've been working on. You only have one shot when performing; there's no going back once your fingers press the keys. If you are able to execute the piece in front of the audience at the same level (more or less) as when you're practising it, then I would consider the piece to be learned.

I would agree with Ignaceii and what you said, but I do think it also depends on what you want out of a piece. There are some people are very shy and get extreme performance anxiety but can play beautifully when alone. Or they just may not want to perform.

One other thing I might add is that you may never consider a piece completely learned. I like to think that pieces I learn will be played off and on for the rest of my life and be improved each time.

[ignaceii]

Honestly, I balance between 1 and 2. I'm largely autodidact, never had music theory, but private lessons. So learning by heart, no, I suppose you need quite some hamonics background to do all that. Even pedalling is quite difficult.
And, yes, I see my performances for myself.
So, not ambitious, but very passionate. And that is what counts.

Thank you very much.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

I'm a loser for this.

If I get the gist of most of it, then I'll say that I learned it.  I remember this in a piano lesson


Teacher: okay play everything from the beginning

Me: okay sure

*starts playing*

Me: okay this repeats from the beginning so I'm not gonna play it.

*continues*

Me:  okay this is the same thing as the second page except the third note on the left hand is played an octave higher so I'm not gonna play it. 

*continues*

Me:  okay so this repeats from somewhere else in the piece so I'm not gonna play it

*continues but then messes up and stops*

Me:  look dude, I already know the rest, It's the same thing as the main theme, it's just an octave lower and there's a couple more rests in between.

Teacher:  dude just play the rest...  I don't know what you're trying to pull...

Me:  dude just trust me, I know the rest okay?  

Teacher:  Yeah okay...

*a long silence*

Me:  okay fine!

*blasts through the end hitting like 50% wrong notes*

[krajcher]

One other thing I might add is that you may never consider a piece completely learned. I like to think that pieces I learn will be played off and on for the rest of my life and be improved each time.

100% right.

[mark737]

I don't play well in front of others so for me making a good recording for U tube does it for me.

[grandstaff]

I think that a piece can never be fully "learned", as I have seen that even if all of the notes are learned there are always different interpretation-wise things you can do with it. That being said, there is nothing wrong with learning multiple pieces at once, especially at a more advanced level.

[j_menz]

On your scale, 4 for memorisers and 3 for readers is the place where you start to learn a piece, not where you are finished.

[thinkgreenlovepiano]

I never feel like I'm "done" 

And I've always learned multiple pieces at once. Just how my teachers taught me... *shrugs*

[ignaceii]

I think a piece can also be "learned" just reading it.
THis means, that if I would play it over and over the actual art of piano playing would become in danger, just because there is no change, just repetition. I recall my private teacher.
At least, we did a Bach, an etude, and a performance piece, meaning Beethoven sonata, Schubert,...  So, we let things rest for a while and come back.

But, it would be worth going into the actual learning by reading. Richter learned a piece on the train, and performed it once he arrived.
So, the analytical way is something to consider. But as I lack harmony training, I think it's harder, but worth a try.
I'm working on early Schubert klavierstucke, and Schubert often modulates from major to minor. This means, double sharps (how do you call that I don't know the term), flats where the key of the piece is major. So, hard to read, with all the modulations. This could be learned upfront analyzing the piece.

I have to try it. I think it sharpens the ears in the mind to.

[faulty_damper]

Learning is the process of memorization.  When you've learned something, you've memorized it.  If it isn't memorized, you haven't learned it.  This is a very important concept in understanding what learning is.

Learned = Memorized

[davidjosepha]

On your scale, 4 for memorisers and 3 for readers is the place where you start to learn a piece, not where you are finished.

Definitely true. I find that on more difficult pieces, I can't even begin to play it until I've memorized it, not because my sightreading is poor (it's actually quite good, I think), but because when there are fast jumps, learning it without looking at your hands just sets you up for hitting the wrong notes repetitiously, making it very hard to correct later on.

[ignaceii]

Just watched Alexandre Tharauds on medici.tv playing his recital at the verbier festival from the score.
Of course he not only reads the score, but it is there for a reason. Just a violinists play their concertos often with score.
So, there is a way in between I guess. I'm not a memorizer, due to lack of analyzing theoretically scores I suppose, but I'm glad to see concertpianists from time to time using their score.
Angelich does it to.
But don't get me wrong, it's na a counterargument, it just makes me feel at ease.

[danhuyle]

play the piece multiple times testing out interpretation
record yourself playing


Playing a piece well and play a piece from memory have nothing to do with each other. To learn a piece, it requires, what I call, memory work. Whether you play with a book in front or not, you can play the piece.


The end goal of piano is to play the music artistically.

[ignaceii]

What do you mean by memory work ?
Analyzing structure harmonically ?
Note by note ?
It would be interesting to understand the process of memory work. With or without the piano.

[davidjosepha]

What do you mean by memory work ?
Analyzing structure harmonically ?
Note by note ?
It would be interesting to understand the process of memory work. With or without the piano.

I think he means that learning a piece, even if you're using the sheet music, is all about memory. If it weren't (eg if you had no memory), you'd just be sightreading it as if it were the first time you played it, every single time.

[danhuyle]

I think he means that learning a piece, even if you're using the sheet music, is all about memory. If it weren't (eg if you had no memory), you'd just be sightreading it as if it were the first time you played it, every single time.

Spot on.

If your goal was to learn all 48 Bach Prelude and Fugues, to play them fluently to the point where you can perform them, with or without sheet music, it still requires memory work.

To play a piece fluently with interpretation requires you to not be affected by the technical aspects so that you can concentrate on the musical aspects.

[ignaceii]

Ok, that is what heapens naturally when you come back to a piece several times. Things get easier because the memory integrated a lot of basic information on playing the piece.
But It would help if I could memorize so I could be concentrating on the actual interpretation.
I still need too much of the score every time to get me through.
I suppose on memorizing there exists already a lot of debating on the forum, or not ?

What intrests me, is to understand the architecture of the piece, and what has been built on top of that afterwards. How does the actual process of memorizing works ?
Even if I don't have all the skills (apart from private tuition I had no formal training in earing, theory,...) I would like to know more of the process.

It would help me progress in using the score more effectively, I guess.

[hmpiano]

What do you mean by memory work ?
Analyzing structure harmonically ?
Note by note ?
It would be interesting to understand the process of memory work. With or without the piano.

Start by memorizing the chord structure as you go along.  Try and spot as many V-I's and II-V-I's as you can.

[ignaceii]

It would be clearer with an example.
Left hand passages are often broken chords. So?
We take left and right together ?
Too fuzzy for me right now.