Pieces that don't sound like the key they're in

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Do they even exist?! 

The only thing I could kinda think of was Scriabin's 9th sonata.  It's in F major, what the freaking heck?!

But yeah, what about sad pieces in major keys, and happy pieces in minor keys?

It would be pretty cool to see what you guys got!

[davidjosepha]

I don't know about "sound like they're in a different key", but I know a lot of pieces, and especially songs (as in, contemporary music), that are in a major key but sound sad to me (or minor sounding happy). I recognize clearly that they're in a major key, but there's something about them that makes them sad, contrary to the oversimplified "major = happy, minor = sad".

Rach prelude 23/2 in B-flat major comes to mind as a major key piece that makes me feel sad...to me, it feels full of longing, but for something that it can't reach. Rach 23/4 also feels sad to me.

Tchaikovsky piano concerto 1 in B-flat minor feels happy to me

Eyes on Me from Final Fantasy 8 is a pop song that feels really sad to me, but maybe that's because I understand the meaning behind it.

Like half of The Flaming Lips' album The Soft Bulletin feels that way to me too...

I really love what I would call "ironically happy" songs and pieces...ones that have notes that should sound happy, but something about them makes them sad.

Of course, by using words "happy" and "sad" I'm oversimplifying some pretty complex emotions, but if these emotions could adequately be put into words, music wouldn't exist anyway, would it?

[werq34ac]

Pavane for a Dead Princess is in G major. Dead princesses don't usually come in G major.

[pianississimo]

I have recently been interested in Glazunov's Elegie for cello and piano.  It is dedicated to Liszt and is in D flat Major.  There's a stormy middle section but the piece ends, well, shall we say, majorly, if not happily 
I would expect a funereal piece to be dark and gloomy and this piece has that but the ending seems more like a fond reminiscence.

[chopin2015]

How bout pieces that you don't like the key they are in?

[outin]

I don't get this obsession with keys at all  

For me the key only means more or less flats and sharps to learn to play. I always considered keys to be tools for composers, after the music is finished what does it really matter? After all you can transpose it to any key and it will sound exactly the same.  

Of course keys are pretty important for singers, because of the limitations of our range 

Maybe my dislike towars classical and Bach is somehow related to this. Those seem to be so fixed with keys, orthodox tonalities and chord harmonies. Then take Scarlatti for example: I don't know music theory to explain properly, but the way his pieces change their mood and take harmonic freedoms all the time is what makes them so lovely.

Yeh, and of course I am also so bloody ignorant and too lazy to actually study the theory  

[redbaron]

The inexplicable Final Fantasy obsession continues unabated...

[redbaron]

Tchaikovsky piano concerto 1 in B-flat minor feels happy to me

That's because it very quickly moves to the relative major

[outin]

Tchaikovsky piano concerto 1 in B-flat minor feels happy to me

How to compose a famous piano concerto? I know! Let's throw in a few big chords to get everyone's attention and then make them fall asleep from boredom. They will forever remember that opening!

Sorry, but I hate T (almost?) as much as someone else here hates Bach. The ballet suites I can handle but that's it 

[49410enrique]

scriabin op 42 no 4 (my fav of the set, don't understand why no 5 gets all the attention, meh... )
hmm this will most likely be my next etude (as i had already started it some time ago before deciding i was note 'ready for it', that happens with me and etudes, usualby by the time i complete one its my 2nd, 3rd, or more attempt over several years... lol)

but though this is 'f shart major' and certainly has that sound at times, the piece doesn't sound as sweet to me as it at first might appear. sort of like a sweet smelling perfume used to mask something foul, like a rotting corpse  or soemthing, i know a little morbid and dark but that's what i feel and see with this pice (especially w sofrinsky, to me the definative historic interpreter, w gordon fergus-thompson my favorite modern one), so though it's f sharp major and has moments of that , it almost sounds like it 'wants to be in a darker minor key' . i'm stretching thigns a bit and am being abstract but this piece speaks to me (loudly) in that way. i never hear it as its face value implies.

jaw droppingly beautiful, even if it is a little 'corpse's bride' pretty in a way.

PS edit. actually im the midst of picking new rep for the follow terms (some of the spring 2013 stuff has to start now due to the 'big ' nature of some of the works), i just added this to my bag. will begin reading and working through this later in the morning at the practice rooms...

[davidjosepha]

The inexplicable Final Fantasy obsession continues unabated...

hmm?

[49410enrique]

hmm?

 

25 years!
1987-2012
 

well i get it.

[werq34ac]

I don't get this obsession with keys at all  

For me the key only means more or less flats and sharps to learn to play. I always considered keys to be tools for composers, after the music is finished what does it really matter? After all you can transpose it to any key and it will sound exactly the same.  

Of course keys are pretty important for singers, because of the limitations of our range 

Maybe my dislike towars classical and Bach is somehow related to this. Those seem to be so fixed with keys, orthodox tonalities and chord harmonies. Then take Scarlatti for example: I don't know music theory to explain properly, but the way his pieces change their mood and take harmonic freedoms all the time is what makes them so lovely.

Yeh, and of course I am also so bloody ignorant and too lazy to actually study the theory  

If you listen closely, you will find that each key has a different color. They all "feel" different.

[outin]

If you listen closely, you will find that each key has a different color. They all "feel" different.

I just don't see it that way... It is the piece that has the feel and colour, the key is just a technical matter. I get what you mean but I just don't like the think of music as a system of rules and formulas. Even though it would help me play it easier.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

If you listen closely, you will find that each key has a different color.

I think that's only for people with perfect pitch.

[davidjosepha]

I think that's only for people with perfect pitch.

Nah, it's different. People always say, "But it's just relative to each other...you wouldn't notice the difference between a piece being played in C minor and the same piece being played in C-sharp minor unless they're played back to back." The example I always use is this: Would you agree that a piece would sound different, even if not played back-to-back, if you moved it up an entire octave on the keyboard? Well, of course it would. So if you can notice it when it's transposed up 12 notes, why can't you notice it being transposed up 6 notes? And if you can notice it when it's transposed 6 notes, why not 3, and if 3 why not 1? The difference between C minor and C-sharp minor is obviously subtler than between C minor and an octave up C minor since it's 1/12 the amount of change, but it's still definitely different. You might not consciously be able to recognize that it's in C-sharp minor versus C minor, but it does make a difference to the sound.

Now, I do not have perfect pitch, but when I'll often hear a piece and think, "that sounds like B minor", and sure enough, B minor. There are several keys I recognize often. These keys are as follows

B minor
B-flat minor
G minor
F-sharp minor
C-sharp minor
C minor
D minor
B-flat major
C major

I notice especially that with the keys right next to each other, they have many similar characteristics, but also have some differences. B-flat vs B minor, B minor has more edge to it, B-flat is more smooth. Same thing with F-sharp vs G minor, F-sharp is edgier, C-sharp is edgier than C.

They key to a piece definitely matters to the feel and sound. As outin said, yes, it is a tool by composers, but so are chord structure, harmony, tempo...are you going to say those things don't matter to the listener either?

[outin]

^ Of course the piece sounds different (in absolute sense) because it is higher/lover and played on different strings. How much, depends on tuning as well. All instruments also sound different.  But the essence of the music wouldn't change THAT much IMO.

[davidjosepha]

^ Of course the piece sounds different (in absolute sense) because it is higher/lover and played on different strings. How much, depends on tuning as well. All instruments also sound different.  But the essence of the music wouldn't change THAT much IMO.

Have you ever played around with transposing pieces you play? It's good practice for really solidifying your memory of a piece. Anyway, I've played pieces in different keys than they were originally written in (rather slowly, I might add--transposing on the fly is not as easy as it sounds, especially to a key with a vastly different number of sharps/flats (eg A to E isn't that hard since you play basically the same stuff just in a different position and with an extra sharp, but some transpositions can be tricky)) and the mood of the piece sometimes changes drastically...it's really cool, actually, and I would argue it makes a huge difference to the music.

Something I've also noticed is that in sets of music in every key, the same numbers keep popping up in my "favorites" list (assuming the composer arranges the pieces in the same order as everyone else--Bach, for instance, just goes C, C-sharp, D, etc. while Chopin and many (most?) others use the circle of fifths). For instance, numbers 18, 20, and 24 are ones I have found I almost always like, probably meaning I like those keys!

[outin]

I would just think that the composers used certain keys for certain type of music that we then either like or not. There was no reason why Chopin couldn't write a happy fast song in E-minor. He just didn't

[davidjosepha]

While I think you could make a case for "all major keys are the same but composers picked different ones" and "all minor keys are the same...", you're completely wrong to say that E minor could be used in place of E major and have it sound the same.

While all major keys have the same increments so the keys are relatively interchangeable, the same is not true of minor vs major. So using E minor, you would not be able to achieve the same effect you could get in a major key, unless, of course, you based it around the third note in the E minor scale, in which case you wouldn't even be using E minor anymore, but, in fact, G major.

Yes, it is true composers used certain keys for certain styles, but then ask yourself, why did different composers from different periods and countries use the same keys for the same styles? Did they conspire together, or did it appear natural to them that D minor would be used for immense sadness, or that one "cannot well accompany the Devil in any key but F-sharp minor"?

While I'll agree to your point that you can easily transpose a piece and have it still be recognizable, I think there is often an immense change in mood. I think key choice is of equal importance to dynamic and tempo choice in creating an effect with a piece.

[pies]

a

[outin]

While all major keys have the same increments so the keys are relatively interchangeable, the same is not true of minor vs major. So using E minor, you would not be able to achieve the same effect you could get in a major key, unless, of course, you based it around the third note in the E minor scale, in which case you wouldn't even be using E minor anymore, but, in fact, G major.

Not how I see it. It's just the convention how composer were taught to use the keys. If the composer says it's in E-minor but does not use the key the way he is "supposed to", can we tell him that he is wrong?

Yes, it is true composers used certain keys for certain styles, but then ask yourself, why did different composers from different periods and countries use the same keys for the same styles? Did they conspire together, or did it appear natural to them that D minor would be used for immense sadness, or that one "cannot well accompany the Devil in any key but F-sharp minor"?

Yes, they actually did conspire and Bach was the gang leader! 

If you look a bit further you will see that not all music has been composed this way.

[werq34ac]

Not how I see it. It's just the convention how composer were taught to use the keys. If the composer says it's in E-minor but does not use the key the way he is "supposed to", can we tell him that he is wrong?

The composer would have had a reason for doing so. And we as pianists should take it into account when refining that particular piece. I'm telling you, it's subtle, but present nonetheless. And if it's present it should probably be worth noting.

Just an idea, I could be completely wrong. Have you also considered the possibility that black keys sound slightly different from white keys? Black keys are slightly slimmer and so the way we press them is possibly different, just subtly enough that it changes the color.

[outin]

Just an idea, I could be completely wrong. Have you also considered the possibility that black keys sound slightly different from white keys? Black keys are slightly slimmer and so the way we press them is possibly different, just subtly enough that it changes the color.

I think they might. They are a lot easier to play too. So who knows. These are just my very subjective feelings. But it's an interesting discussion 

[invictious]

While some people may find no difference in the key signatures, I personally find that the 'feel' for each key signature is very different. Call it perception problems, but I believe this is an issue of perfect pitch. Also note the issue of temperaments and such.

Some of the pieces mentioned here do not feel like they are in the key they are written in because of modulation. For example, as mentioned, Tchaikovsky's Piano Concerto No.1 - the piece does modulate to relative major pretty very quickly.

The best example I can think of right now is Shostakovich's Concerto for Violoncello No. 1 in E-flat MAJOR (for avoidance of doubt, let's just refer to the first movement), and it obviously sounds very 'C minor'.

If you think the key signature does not make a difference, then try take any piece, maybe  Chopin, and play it through your computer in different key signatures. For me, at least, it has different feels, such as varying degrees of darkness.

[scherzo123]

La Campanella I guess.

[ajspiano]

I think that's only for people with perfect pitch.

Maybe, but since perfect pitch is a learnt skill (as opposed to a born one) there's a strong argument that this kind of statement is a little off base, and it should really be "for people with more refined musical/ear skills".

I personally hear very clear differences in 'emotion' between different keys, and can often identify keys based on that alone. But my "pitch" might be described as something like "60/40 - relative/perfect" - so perfect pitch is likely relevant here...

When I was younger I would've laughed at the idea that there are subtle differences between keys and considered it a subjective topic, but now I see it as a learned listening skill that applies to everyone.

I just don't see it that way... It is the piece that has the feel and colour, the key is just a technical matter. I get what you mean but I just don't like the think of music as a system of rules and formulas. Even though it would help me play it easier.

I hardly think this is wrong, but I wouldnt say its right..  why can't it be a combination of the two? There are no rules, but to suggest that the key is "just a technical matter" in advanced composition is WAY off base.

Google shows that the idea has been around for a long time - if we believe the source

....

Key or mode descriptions from Charpentier's Regles de Composition ca. 1682

C major: gay and warlike
C minor: obscure and sad
D major: joyous and very warlike
D minor: serious and pious
Eb major: cruel and hard
E major: quarrelsome and boisterous
E minor: effeminate, amorous, plaintive
F major: furious and quick-tempered subjects
F minor: obscure and plaintive
G major: serious and magnificent
G minor: serious and magnificent
A major: joyful and pastoral
A minor: tender and plaintive
B major: harsh and plaintive
B minor: solitary and melancholic
Bb major: magnificent and joyful
Bb minor: obscure and terrible

...AND, funnily enough, having never read that before I pretty much agree with the whole thing. - I'll also add here, before anyone says "why didnt he talk about all the keys" - because the others sounded like turd due to tuning/temperament. Notice how there's a similar set of keys here to that which was used for the bach inventions. Only B major and Bb minor being out of place.

..

https://www.harmonics.com/lucy/lsd/colors.html - tones directly evoking or related to colours (like red, blue, green etc.), detailing some thoughts from Scriabin, Berlioz, Debussy and Wagner.

Music and Musicians written by Albert Lavignac in 1905.. - key emotions. https://www.creativekeyboard.com/backissues/jan03/colors.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Lavignac - for some more background on who he is, also it states that berlioz had similar ideas.

.........

Of course the reality is that its personal for everyone. I rather think that everyone should be able to gauge differences but that my opinion of a given key will differ to someone elses.

[scherzo123]

Nice post, ajspiano.

[ajspiano]

Thanks..

I might add that generally the population at large may have had its ability to discern subtle difference between keys significantly damaged as a result of popular guitar music being 98% in the miniscule set of "easy keys"..

Of course I'm just having a guess there..  but I can tell you that G major, on a guitar..  I could pick that out of an orchestra of hooligans even if I were deaf. VERY recognisable and way overused. But, thats what we get for having an acceptance of musical meaning being exclusively related to lyrical content.

[outin]

Thanks..

I might add that generally the population at large may have had its ability to discern subtle difference between keys significantly damaged as a result of popular guitar music being 98% in the miniscule set of "easy keys"..

I grew up with guitar music, so maybe you are right. I have absolutely no idea what keys Jimmy Page, Ritchie Blackmore or Jeff Beck played, I just know they played bloody well...

[davidjosepha]

...AND, funnily enough, having never read that before I pretty much agree with the whole thing. - I'll also add here, before anyone says "why didnt he talk about all the keys" - because the others sounded like turd due to tuning/temperament. Notice how there's a similar set of keys here to that which was used for the bach inventions. Only B major and Bb minor being out of place.

While I agree to your point that different keys have a different feel, I believe quoting a text from a time when tuning was so unequal that certain keys could not even be used does nothing to prove the point. The reason those keys were unusable is because increments were different for different keys, and when increments are different, it is hardly questionable that each key will be different. The only arguable claim one could make is that with equal temperament, given that all keys are equally spaced, different keys are now indiscernible to one who lacks perfect pitch.

Also, unrelated to the topic, you mentioned that perfect pitch is learned. I had always heard that one was born with it, or it developed very early in childhood and thus is not something one could consciously learn. So, if it can be learned, how would you go about learning it? I would love to have perfect pitch...I can always tell if a note is out of tune, even without hearing another note to compare it to, but I can't actually recreate the note in my head or otherwise without a reference point.

Although, I have noted that I can sing an F-sharp out of the blue due to my hours of practice on Brahms Rhapsody No. 1 in B minor. So maybe that helps? haha

I might add that generally the population at large may have had its ability to discern subtle difference between keys significantly damaged as a result of popular guitar music being 98% in the miniscule set of "easy keys"..

While true that guitar music is generally limited to several keys, it's worth noting that part of the reason for that is that you can't get a great full sound on a guitar when playing a chord without open strings, and thus, the guitar is limited not only by the player's technical ability, but also the guitar itself.

[ajspiano]

I grew up with guitar music, so maybe you are right. I have absolutely no idea what keys Jimmy Page, Ritchie Blackmore or Jeff Beck played, I just know they played bloody well...

I wouldn't dispute the skill level of the that particular set of performers (amongst others).

Its nice to be able to go back to open strings whatever you do on guitar though (makes life a lot easier if you're not a god) so E, A as major or minor and D major are the most accessable keys, closely followed by G and C major because everyone learns those first.. they are the easiest open chords..

I feel like there's a bit of a compositional epidemic in pop/rock music now where the keys and riffs chosen are musically designed to produce the same emotional feeling. Fun/Dance/Happy/Powerful.. aswell as being easy to play, ..and that accompanies ALL potential meanings, which are defined by the lyrics.

It provides some awkward contrasts, whether deliberate or not I don't know...

That "pumped up kicks" song that came out a while ago really irked me. It was like a happy fun rock song and the lyrics are plainly about killing people because you're depressed. Nice.

[outin]

Also, unrelated to the topic, you mentioned that perfect pitch is learned. I had always heard that one was born with it, or it developed very early in childhood and thus is not something one could consciously learn. So, if it can be learned, how would you go about learning it? I would love to have perfect pitch...I can always tell if a note is out of tune, even without hearing another note to compare it to, but I can't actually recreate the note in my head or otherwise without a reference point.

I think the ability to hear (and keep) the pitch you are born with, but the part of actually remembering which notes they are must be learned and memorized. I have the first, but never learned the second. I can easily sing a song from the same pitch everytime without reference, but I don't necessarily know what the notes are.

[ajspiano]

@davidjosepha

The main argument behind perfect pitch not being a born skill is that defined pitch, as in that A is 440hz is a human invention. It's absolutely not something that a baby can know at birth and is only the product of experience. Humans defining it as such after birth.

Secondly, excusing the completely tone-deaf (and there are not very many of them) – I don’t believe that anyone is born without the ability to discern between pitches. This is evident largely because of the fact that the Chinese as an entire populace would not be able to speak their language without the ability to discern pitch.

Which is also essentially what inflection is in any spoken language even if it is far less important than it is in languages like mandarin.

…

I won’t argue that it’s easier to learn as a child than as an adult. But I also find the idea that I can’t learn something that a 3 yr old can a little bit offensive since on the whole, I can handle much more complex and difficult concepts than the average child…  Maybe that’s a result of having handled concepts at all as as a child, but the fact remains – I’m still capable of learning, but I do it in a less intuitive way, and rather it has to be more thought out, and progress has to be consciously evaluated, methods adjusted etc.

…

I'm not an expert on teaching/learning perfect pitch (far from it, and mines certainly not there in full – but then I don’t actively work on it and never really have consistently).. however..  The basic principle as far as I am aware, and have worked on it at various times is that there is an underlying quality to each tone. Which is why when we really listen they evoke different colours or feelings.

The underlying quality is sometimes referred to as "chroma" –

To illustrate,  say you had 10 boxes, all the same shape, but all different sizes. Each of these boxes represents a different “C” whether played by piano, a guitar, sung, or anything else. This is about the pitch, not the timbre. Someone without perfect pitch will just see different boxes of the same shape, noting that they are similar but different. Someone with perfect pitch on the other hand will observe that on the underside of each box there is a small red dot that is exactly the same on every single box – drawing a very well defined, “these are all the same” parallel between the boxes.

The red dot is the pitch’s chroma.

So, apparently, the secret to learning perfect pitch is to successfully identify and remember the chroma’s that relate to each tone. Which is HARD. Because you don't know what you're looking for, and its not easily explained by someone else either..  ear's aren't our dominant sense. We like eyes.

But there’s supposedly 2 major things that you can initially do to help – and for me both of them work pretty well.

1.   Have a reference song/piece(or small section of piece). That is, -  a piece where that tone is the tonic. Listen to the piece many times, so that you know it back to front. Learn to play it.. and most importantly..  NEVER PLAY IT TRANSPOSED.
This tool helps you remember the tone when you get stuck, its kind of like you’re bridge between the chroma and the note name that you have to associate with it.

2.   Practice identitfying a single tone within a number of tones..  that is, close your eyes, play a whole series of keys at the piano then answer the question, “does this chord contain target note X”..   

then as you get better, do it with more notes at a time, so does it contain C or G, or both. Etc. etc.

…work at it everyday, just like you would any other aspect of piano/music.

You stick with a particular pitch until you know it, then move on..  You have this weird experience where one day you'll be having a shower or something - and you'll go "!!! WAIT. the water hitting the floor..  Its a freaking Bb. "

.................

Finally, just that much is a really long road I think.. and you havent really got to musically relevant yet. Listening to a musical progression, identifying all the tones and memorising the sequence ...  ..totally different ball game.

That part is something I find really difficult to pursue because I have working relative pitch skills, and they do the job fine. Its challenging to try and fix something when its not broken - as in.. its really hard to identify a subsequent tone using perfect pitch if your relative pitch has already told you what it is ..

[davidjosepha]

Very informative and helpful, ajspiano. Thanks!

[outin]

Funny... I have never even thought about this perfect pitch stuff much but now I realize that it's not that difficult. Because every piece I have played I can hear/sing in my mind at correct pitch. So if I just look at the score in my head (if I have managed to memorize it) I can SEE what the notes are.

[ajspiano]

Funny... I have never even thought about this perfect pitch stuff much but now I realize that it's not that difficult. Because every piece I have played I can hear/sing in my mind at correct pitch. So if I just look at the score in my head (if I have managed to memorize it) I can SEE what the notes are.

Yes, I think a lot of people can do that..  though it sounds as though your's is a bit better than most peoples..

What I mean is that a lot of people know their favourite songs from the radio for example and if they hear them in a different key they will often say something like "I have know idea why, but that sounds wrong"

Likewise, if asked to sing it they will sing it in the correct key - their sense of pitch is absolute, but unrefined. Yours is obviously more developed because you can associate it to a score and therefore attribute names to the sounds.

The challenge comes when you try to use it in the context of a piece of music you are unfamiliar with, and without being able to use your "reference songs" (because they takes way to much time to be musically useful for you in the context of what you're working on)

[outin]

The challenge comes when you try to use it in the context of a piece of music you are unfamiliar with, and without being able to use your "reference songs" (because they takes way to much time to be musically useful for you in the context of what you're working on)

I think it all comes to just conscious memorizing. Which I hate more than anything. So I think I will be quite happy without perfect pitch...

[ajspiano]

I think it all comes to just conscious memorizing. Which I hate more than anything. So I think I will be quite happy without perfect pitch...

Well I wouldn't discourage someone who wants to learn it.. but I would generally suggest that relative pitch is both easier to learn and more musically useful.

But I'll note that comment as being from a person without a solid perfect pitch.. so who knows.

I did have a friend in highschool who had naturally developed perfect pitch - she found it a burden, because pianos that were a few cents out of tune gave her the heebee geebees.

[outin]

I sometimes think I suffer from this tendency to "hear the piece in my head" while playing. No matter how much I try I cannot play through mistakes. I get so confused about hearing the wrong note from the piano when I hear the right note in my head...

[ajspiano]

I sometimes think I suffer from this tendency to "hear the piece in my head" while playing. No matter how much I try I cannot play through mistakes. I get so confused about hearing the wrong note from the piano when I hear the right note in my head...

That's not a "suffering" - Don't stop doing that, ever.

[j_menz]

I sometimes think I suffer from this tendency to "hear the piece in my head" while playing. No matter how much I try I cannot play through mistakes. I get so confused about hearing the wrong note from the piano when I hear the right note in my head...

That tendency is one you should develop, not fret about.  It will serve you well as you progress. You need to concentrate your efforts on using the piano to give life to that "piece in [your] head".  It's that that will make you a musician.

[outin]

But how do I learn to tolerate the fact that I cannot always reproduce that image...?

[outin]

That tendency is one you should develop, not fret about.  It will serve you well as you progress. You need to concentrate your efforts on using the piano to give life to that "piece in [your] head".  It's that that will make you a musician.

The paradox is that I am not a musician nor do I want to be. I just wanted to play the piano. It would be quite enough if I could just hack my way through the pieces I like and feel happy and proud of myself no matter what the result

[ajspiano]

But how do I learn to tolerate the fact that I cannot always reproduce that image...?

You don't. That's how you get better, continually striving to produce the sound you want.

I just wanted to play the piano. It would be quite enough if I could just hack my way through the pieces I like and feel happy and proud of myself no matter what the result

Unfortunately it hardly works that way, with each success we are made more and more aware of our further potential. At least, you are if you have the music inside you, as you obviously do.

It's far better to be that way than the alternative..   What purpose would their be to playing if you didn't have a desired sound? The notes would be meaningless.

[outin]

Unfortunately it hardly works that way, with each success we are made more and more aware of our further potential.

I just don't seem to see any potential, I just see myself failing to get any of the pieces to an acceptable level and moving on because I just get tired of trying. My glass seems to be always half empty when it comes to playing, something I don't experience much in "real life".

[j_menz]

The paradox is that I am not a musician nor do I want to be. I just wanted to play the piano. It would be quite enough if I could just hack my way through the pieces I like and feel happy and proud of myself no matter what the result

From everything else you have said, that is plainly untrue.

[outin]

From everything else you have said, that is plainly untrue.

What I meant is that I wish I could be more like that. I guess I need a shrink because there are two totally different persons inside my head.

[j_menz]

an acceptable level

.... is a moving target. You can measure your progress by how far it has moved.

[j_menz]

What I meant is that I wish I could be more like that.

I think you are more like that than you realise.