Technique ratio when practicising

[lufia]

Is this real life? Or is this just fantasy..?

I'm always drilling techniques...when learning a piece i'm spending pretty much all my time practicing the technical difficulties in the measures, drilling it out day and night...Its only when ive mastered the piece technical wise that i start to play the piece and develop musically and imagine stories behind the piece.

So pretty much i'm drilling my technique 95% of the time, rest is used for sight reading to learn the notes, and playing musically at the end. Is this normal ? How do others practice?

[shaggyy]

Once I know all the notes of a part, I immediately try to play it everytime how I want it to sound cause I want to play it so badly, wich leads to much mistakes and much more frustration.  I must really push myself to practise on getting everyting technically right, but once I've done that, the end result is ofcourse very rewarding. But with the pieces I'm working on now I'm trying to focus more on all the technical aspects first, so playing everything slowly and getting the piece in my fingers, and after that focus on the music.

[the89thkey]

Once I know all the notes of a part, I immediately try to play it everytime how I want it to sound cause I want to play it so badly, wich leads to much mistakes and much more frustration.  I must really push myself to practise on getting everyting technically right, but once I've done that, the end result is ofcourse very rewarding. But with the pieces I'm working on now I'm trying to focus more on all the technical aspects first, so playing everything slowly and getting the piece in my fingers, and after that focus on the music.

This sounds like the right idea.

[lelle]

I think you should always practise musically, if at all possible. Even if you are "drilling" (ugh I hate that word) the passage you should always shape the phrases and do what you want to do with it musically, even though it is in slow motion for the time being. I'm guilty of not doing this myself all the time though, especially when I'm learning a new coordination.

[p2u_]

So pretty much i'm drilling my technique 95% of the time, rest is used for sight reading to learn the notes, and playing musically at the end. Is this normal ? How do others practice?

Do you mean purely repeated drilling, hitting the right notes in the right time at the right volume? That's not technique, lufia, that's not even a study of the mechanics of playing, and if I understood everything correctly, then it sounds like a very ineffective way to spend your time at the instrument. True technique is the art of touch, the art of creating an artistic sound image, which should best be done from the very start. While doing so, you may have to solve mechanical problems, find better ways to move a key, etc. but that is not the same as drilling. In that sense, my ratio is 0%.

Paul

[faulty_damper]

It sounds very normal.  The drilling you are doing is piano vocabulary learning.  This means you are practicing the mechanical movements that are needed to play the piano.  This is something very few students do and this limits the available vocabulary that is needed to sightread a piece.  After extensive vocabulary building, you'll find you just won't need to do it as much since you've learned a lot that will be necessary to sightread well.

[p2u_]

It sounds very normal.  The drilling you are doing is piano vocabulary learning.  This means you are practicing the mechanical movements that are needed to play the piano.  This is something very few students do and this limits the available vocabulary that is needed to sightread a piece.  After extensive vocabulary building, you'll find you just won't need to do it as much since you've learned a lot that will be necessary to sightread well.

From that perspective, the topic starter would be much better off using something like Liszt's Technical Exercises (a real Encyclopedia of piano vocubulary) and "drill" those in all keys with eyes closed. [Ab]using Works of Art to learn that skill through mindless repetition doesn't seem like the right way to go. Besides, the mechanical "drilling" part will spoil his/her technique (touch + the ability to really do something with the notes). It's merely moving without an artistic purpose, the enemy of Art.

Paul

[werq34ac]

I've been told that practice should be 99% slow practice... Which means that technique is obviously not the main focus since technique eventually requires speed.

[lufia]

Do you mean purely repeated drilling, hitting the right notes in the right time at the right volume? That's not technique, lufia, that's not even a study of the mechanics of playing, and if I understood everything correctly, then it sounds like a very ineffective way to spend your time at the instrument. True technique is the art of touch, the art of creating an artistic sound image, which should best be done from the very start. While doing so, you may have to solve mechanical problems, find better ways to move a key, etc. but that is not the same as drilling. In that sense, my ratio is 0%.

Paul

What i do is take whatever is most difficult(technically challenging for me) from the piece and practice that. I usually make it much more difficult to play by playing it in triplets/faster at set intervals/doublingNotes/slowStaccato etc<--dependent on passage (focusing on the end goal of perfect execution of the original), making the passage much more difficult to play.

 By magnifying the difficult technical spots within a piece that i struggle with, the original music becomes cake walk after some practice. I play it all in pp to reduce injuries and there is nothing musical about it...just mechanical until i can play it perfect You can't play something musically or the way u want to express it if its sloppy right?

Thanks for the comments and advice guys I will take all in to account.

[p2u_]

What i do is take whatever is most difficult(technically challenging for me) from the piece and practice that. I usually make it much more difficult to play by playing it in triplets/faster at set intervals/doublingNotes/slowStaccato <--dependent on passage etc(focusing on the end goal of perfect execution of the original), making the passage much more difficult to play.

 By magnifying the difficult technical spots within a piece that i struggle with, the original music becomes cake walk after some practice. I play it all in pp to reduce injuries and there is nothing musical about it...just mechanical until i can play it perfect You can't play something musically or the way u want to express it if its sloppy right?

Remember, however impressive the results may look for the layman, what you get is merely a superficial kind of skill, a certain command over the notes, a certain kind of convenience; empty mechanics. The real work on technique starts from there; that is - if you ever want to impress your audience. It's not just "interpretation", soft here, loud there, etc. EVERY note in a piece should have a purpose, expressed through movement, and you cannot just run past any minor detail without professional judges not noticing it. Also, speed is inborn already; you don't need to strive for it and you don't need to "develop" it. werq34ac has it right -> 99% slow practice in search of artistic sound, not noise... Good luck!

Paul

[faulty_damper]

There is a distinction between mechanics and music.  You can't make music without mechanics.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with focusing on mechanics, especially when you start learning something like the piano.  Mechanics doesn't require reading music like the technical exercises Liszt wrote.  The truth about those exercises is that he did them long before he wrote them down.

Music-making practice is just that, practice to make music.  As long as the best/most effective/most efficient technique is used, music-making will be a breeze.

[p2u_]

@ faulty_damper

I think we are talking past each other. It all depends on where lufia wants to be as a result. If he/she wants to be a professional, he/she has to do everything right from the very start without detours. This means that he/she cannot separate mechanics from true technique. This also means that extensive mindless repetition will eventually cause him/her to fall out of the race. Contrary to popular belief, you cannot first learn the "technique" (in the primitive sense people often think about it: acrobatics) and then suddenly start playing "with passion"...

No mechanical playing assists the technique. (c) Vladimir Horowitz

Paul

[faulty_damper]

I absolutely disagree with this even though I agreed with it many years ago.  I've realized that it's not comparable to say you have to get it right from the beginning as opposed to learning mechanics.

It's easy to say that you must get it right from the beginning if you can already do both but this isn't the case here.  You must learn mechanics, the physical movements, before you can fully express music.  It's just like you must learn your letters before you learn how to spell.  Once the mechanics of writing has been sufficient (if not yet mastered, few people master it which is why people's handwriting is generally poor) then can sufficient attention be given to expressing thoughts.  How can you express thoughts without first being able to write?  You wouldn't be able to.  And this is my point.

Also, the OP said exactly what I'm stating: mechanics then music.  If you attempted to the the music right at the beginning and only practiced the music, you'll not be able to generalize the technique required to play other pieces.

[p2u_]

I absolutely disagree with this even though I agreed with it many years ago.  I've realized that it's not comparable to say you have to get it right from the beginning as opposed to learning mechanics.

It's easy to say that you must get it right from the beginning if you can already do both but this isn't the case here.  You must learn mechanics, the physical movements, before you can fully express music.  It's just like you must learn your letters before you learn how to spell.  Once the mechanics of writing has been sufficient (if not yet mastered, few people master it which is why people's handwriting is generally poor) then can sufficient attention be given to expressing thoughts.  How can you express thoughts without first being able to write?  You wouldn't be able to.  And this is my point.

Also, the OP said exactly what I'm stating: mechanics then music.  If you attempted to the the music right at the beginning and only practiced the music, you'll not be able to generalize the technique required to play other pieces.

[Deliberately quoting your post entirely] We are still talking past each other. The thing is that you learn the mechanics while setting yourself artistic goals; that's the beauty of it. A movement that does not create a beautiful sound is empty and can bring nothing but temporary euphoria. You talk about "music" (I guess you mean interpretation as the end result?), but as I said in my third reply (my reply to the topic starter's second post), that's not what I am talking about; I'm talking about TOUCH and CONTROL (= high-quality movement). You CANNOT learn this and you cannot practise this (even as an accomplished pianist) at anything higher than very moderate speed. The ultimate speed (even super-presto) grows by itself and should not be forced; it is a grave mistake to try and "develop" it.

What you condition is what you get. The purpose of all practice at the instrument should be rational management of energy from the body through the fingertips into the keys with artistic beauty as the inevitable source and as the inevitable result. No detours, no shortcuts.
Any other practice methods:
1) are a waste of time (you will need more and more time afterwards to get rid of bad habits until ultimately you will have to be seriously retrained by a professional to get you back on track)
2) make you less confident (you use these methods as a replacement of what is really required for success and the funny thing is that you *know* this in the back of your head)
3) are mind-numbing (no purpose in the movements)

P.S.: The technique of writing is an entirely different story which I'm ready to discuss with you in the "anything but piano section", but it could generally be taught a lot better by focusing on the development of the intrinsic muscles and fingertip sensitivity BEFORE they even start writing. I taught my son (he's now 7) how to write. Notwithstanding the fact that he's left-handed ("a child with a potential for trouble"), he learned it in no time and writes with better quality than his right-handed peers. Essential is not the mechanics of the movements of writing, but the ability to imagine what the letter really looks like (points in space), which is a completely different problem.

Paul

[faulty_damper]

The assumption that bad habits will occur is not absolute.  What is important is that the movements be explored to find the effective ones and the ineffective ones.  The effective ones will be retained.  Ineffective ones discarded.  It's vital to explore movements so that the useful ones can be applied to any other piece.  But if focusing on that one piece, and not exploring the best movements and settling for whatever happens to work, this will most likely develop bad habits.

The ultimate speed (even super-presto) grows by itself and should not be forced; it is a grave mistake to try and "develop" it.

This requires muscular conditioning, which requires that muscles and nerves be pushed beyond what it is capable.  If not, then it will remain at its current state.

[p2u_]

The ultimate speed (even super-presto) grows by itself and should not be forced; it is a grave mistake to try and "develop" it.

This requires muscular conditioning, which requires that muscles and nerves be pushed beyond what it is capable.  If not, then it will remain at its current state.

Dear faulty_damper,

I have read ALL your posts. I am actually surprised we are in disagreement, since (if I read and understood them all correctly) you tend to highlight the role of the mind a lot. In piano playing, the secret to speed is GROUPING, which is the role of the mind; it has not so much to do with muscles and nerves. Without slow, controlled, purposeful movements during practice, absolutely nothing lasting can be accomplished. If at speed something doesn't work properly, it means the basics have to be revised SLOWLY. I really hope the topic starter has the wisdom to make the right choices...
EDIT: What works at speed is known to a good teacher/trainer. When assigning certain pieces, the coach gives/shows that movement so the student doesn't lose time having to find it all out by himself.

Paul

[faulty_damper]

I think we are working under different assumptions which is why we come to different conclusions.

These are my assumptions, at least the ones I'm consciously aware of:
1. OP is still a relative beginner.
2. Technical vocabulary is relatively limited
3. ...
4.

Well, I could only come up with those two even though I know there are more.  But this is why I say that it's fine to work on building vocabulary.

[p2u_]

I think we are working under different assumptions which is why we come to different conclusions.

These are my assumptions, at least the ones I'm consciously aware of:
1. OP is still a relative beginner.
2. Technical vocabulary is relatively limited
3. ...
4.

Well, I could only come up with those two even though I know there are more.  But this is why I say that it's fine to work on building vocabulary.

I see. I'll keep that in mind when I write a reply. I don't like arguing for the sake of it.
Actually, I thought that since the topic starter has been posting here since 2005 already, he/she was a little further on the road to Parnassus.

Paul

[faulty_damper]

You know, from my experience, I didn't do exercises and instead, just practiced pieces.  As a result, I could play pieces that sounded very good but I had poor technique.  That's what one of the professors said to me when he accepted my audition.  But I didn't need him to tell me that.  I knew that my playing sounded good but it was a struggle to make it sound good.

I hated exercises because I thought they were a waste of my limited time.  Why would I want to waste time doing something that may have benefit but isn't directly related to the pieces I was working on?  But now I realize just how important they are because my technical vocabulary is limited compared to the difficulty of pieces that I can play.  I can play difficult pieces, but don't ever ask me to sight read relatively easy pieces because I don't have the technical vocabulary to play them.  I will fumble and it's embarrassing.

This is why I'm much more open to working on expanding my technical vocabulary because the techniques that I used to learn to play a piece weren't usually the best.  By creating my own technical exercises based on the repertoire I want to play or am currently playing, I am actually exploring the possibilities to find which is better than others.  This is what Czerny did for Beethoven's sonatas (Op.740 et al) and Liszt did (his technical exercises).

[p2u_]

You know, from my experience, I didn't do exercises and instead, just practiced pieces.  As a result, I could play pieces that sounded very good but I had poor technique.  That's what one of the professors said to me when he accepted my audition.  But I didn't need him to tell me that.  I knew that my playing sounded good but it was a struggle to make it sound good.

I see a discrepancy, actually, but that may be my mistake. I'm not against exercises; on the contrary! But at the instrument, they should have an artistic purpose, otherwise they are a waste of time.

I hated exercises because I thought they were a waste of my limited time.  Why would I want to waste time doing something that may have benefit but isn't directly related to the pieces I was working on?  But now I realize just how important they are because my technical vocabulary is limited compared to the difficulty of pieces that I can play.  I can play difficult pieces, but don't ever ask me to sight read relatively easy pieces because I don't have the technical vocabulary to play them.  I will fumble and it's embarrassing.

You would think differently if someone had shown you how to make those exercises more interesting, how to get a beautiful sound image out of them. Sight reading has other components you may not be good at, I don't know. I have a very extensive vocabulary at the piano that I can do with eyes closed at virtually ANY tempo, but my sight reading still sucks, partly because of a psychological problem.

This is why I'm much more open to working on expanding my technical vocabulary because the techniques that I used to learn to play a piece weren't usually the best.  By creating my own technical exercises based on the repertoire I want to play or am currently playing, I am actually exploring the possibilities to find which is better than others.  This is what Czerny did for Beethoven's sonatas (Op.740 et al) and Liszt did (his technical exercises).

Have you actually ever tried Liszt's Technical Exercises? They are far from mere mechanical in their requirements if you follow ALL instructions (not the finger lifting that was indicated by the editor, not by Liszt himself, but the dynamics, for example). And so are Czerny and Hanon. People often don't know what to do with them, that's why those exercises have such a negative reputation.
P.S.: Look at the tempo markings (limits) in Hanon, for example. Is 60-88 or 88-120 four in the beat really "virtuoso"? No, of course. A good virtuoso can do them twice as fast. It's just the limit of speed at which you can still control them consciously, bring out the details deliberately, move purposefully. Hanon is actually saying that you should NOT practise them in a mechanical way!

Paul

[lufia]

Thanks for advice fellow pianist.

I'm not really sure at what approach i should take at my current point though because of the arguements. I'm nowhere near a beginner just a humble servant of the piano slaving myself to achieve virtuosity and musicality at my best. Most of my technique was developed learning pieces.

I've always felt that technique was my control over the piano. The more masterful I became at the mechanics the more I am able to express my music musically rather than it being the other way around.

I remember many years ago i was just mindlessly practicing my 4-5th trills for La Campanella, it took a lot of mechanical soft repetition and rhythm with absolutely no soul attached but I was able to learn it and trill it just like my 1-2, speedily and beautifully as an end result so i always held to the notion of mechanics as the foundation to expression. Another is with my pathetique tremolos which i learned 5 years ago, i spun my wrist up and down in the air when i wasn't at the piano, like turning a door knob, i was able to play it well within a few days.

So far i've fooled everyone, professors and the like.
I may not know it but what are the potential damages that ive faced? it seems ive been thinking within the box, i want to be the best i can be.

I do practice slow but usually at technical extravagance it calls for me to make the notes extremely harder than it is to  break down the barriers which lets me communicate it more freely.

Before i do anymore harm to myself, ill work my way on listz tech Studien  

[p2u_]

I may not know it but what are the potential damages that ive faced? it seems ive been thinking within the box, i want to be the best i can be.

Before i do anymore harm to myself, ill work my way on listz tech Studien  

Please, don't think in terms of "damage". Limit your "mechanical" practice and go for quality movement, getting maximum beauty with minimum effort out of the instrument. Work and experiment mostly in the mf zone. Since you can already do a trill with 4-5 at the speed of 1-2, you have no further reason to strive for speed as a goal in itself; you will never lose that speed.
P.S.: As far as Liszt's Technical Studies go: that was merely a suggestion in a reply to faulty_damper about acquiring piano vocabulary. I'm not so sure you should do them without guidance. If you still want to have a look, then there is one super-exercise that basically could replace ALL others: the two-note slur with different adjacent finger combinations. Do that one (very slowly at first!) in all tonalities over several octaves, trying to get the sound quality of Beethoven's "Tempest" sonata, first movement. You will learn a lot from that. Good luck!

Paul

[p2u_]

This one is to get rid of that terrible numerical value...

Paul

[lufia]

Will do, thank you good sir