Will Classical piano practice hinder my progress as an improviser?

[cuberdrift]

I've been playing for almost 4 years and I guess my progress has been quite well. Mainly a classical player, I still love to explore the keys by improvising - practically anything, from just "playing around" to learning jazz standards and even Chopinizing a Mozart Sonata.

But the thing is I'm afraid my busy practicing schedule with classical repertoire will somehow constrict my improvisatory freedom/creativity. With all the compulsiveness on getting the notes played correctly, at the proper tempo etc. I fear I may adapt the same attitude with improvisation. Help anyone? Thanks!

[justharmony]

I've been playing for almost 4 years and I guess my progress has been quite well. Mainly a classical player, I still love to explore the keys by improvising - practically anything, from just "playing around" to learning jazz standards and even Chopinizing a Mozart Sonata.

But the thing is I'm afraid my busy practicing schedule with classical repertoire will somehow constrict my improvisatory freedom/creativity. With all the compulsiveness on getting the notes played correctly, at the proper tempo etc. I fear I may adapt the same attitude with improvisation. Help anyone? Thanks!

My short answer would be that I suspect your creativity and love of improvising will not be affected because it is clearly what you enjoy, and it is an entirely different type of playing than "strict" classical repertoire.  If you already have this ability, I don't think you can lose it, and only you can tell if you are somehow losing your ENJOYMENT of it.  That's what I would watch.   

On a slightly different note, I am sensitive to what the culture of classical music (or at least some teachers' portrayal of that culture) can do to some people.  I'm not saying it's negative for everybody, and I'm also not saying that learning to play is always be fun.  Sometimes it's just not, but usually we start seeing how what we don't like as much leads to exactly what we DO like - an easier and greater ability to play the music we love. Sometimes it's less obvious and takes time to appreciate. 

Sometimes, though, something we encounter -a style or culture or method - simply does not sit well with us on some basic level and that feeling does NOT go away.  Do you think you may be encountering something like that?  If so, I think that's worth paying attention to.  Maybe ask yourself:  Are you enjoying your classical lessons?  Are you enjoying the effects of them?  Do you like and trust your teacher?  Do you look forward to playing what you are learning?  Do you look forward to playing in general?  Is it really important to you to be a "compulsive" classical player?  Do you want to make a career out of playing classical music?

If the answer to any of those questions is no, then perhaps you might think about if you need to explore some other options - another teacher, another style of teaching, or whatever. 

Ultimately, only you know you best, and only you can decide what it is that you most want to do.  How's that for a long-winded non-answer?  -grin-  I hope something I said in there is helpful on some level.

Good Luck.

JH

[chopin2015]

no. there are threads out there that talk further about this. I reckon that is why you haven't got any responses yet. I haven't posted about this, so I will tell you what I think.

I love romantic classical music, then Beethoven, then impressionist stuff that I am slowly getting good enough to pull off...lol I also LOVE jazz and I have people that inspire me and that I play with! I think classical practice helps warm up your hands, but for that jazz sound, you really should try to jam jazz with good musicians. Also listen to jazz and read about it and the theory...it should put some fresh seeds into your jazz subconscious....

Classical to Jazz:
The point is, in romantic music, I love the big, fast, loud, agitated sound and really fast runs...or fast, improv-like ornaments! it's why I practice challenging parts of a song or practice ornaments. Getting those moments in written music right is the first step to good performance, be it classical or jazz. You gotta know how to reach musical success in stating your ideas, first. Starting simple, but with a little challenge is the way to go. I recommend classical because it gives you a set musical idea in learning which you discover theory, writing style, harmony, technique, etc. You have to know and understand these concepts about any style or genre of music, so start with classical because it is written out and you do not have to worry about writing out your own ideas before you are ready, or learning by ear, which sometimes takes much longer. Also, learning a classical piece by reading does not mean you will get it right. So, it can also train your ear, which is essential to a jazz musician that improvs in solo and group music. Practice reading a piece, then listening to it professionally performed, then change what you learnt to what you hear.
 
I also do scales. Recently, I have been exploring the freedom of scale practice.Instead of the boring warm-up, I improv on scales either before or after practice, or both. But start with a regular scale, varying in tempo/accents.  

I feel like once you play enough classical music, you will have a good basis for exploring tempos, time signatures, key signatures, technique, etc.

Jazz only is different than classical because it explores harmony more extensively, or should I say-in a different way. If anything and most importantly, classical can help you form good habits(hopefully) and exercise for reading notes instead of charts(it is advantageous to know how to read both) and help shape your hands as a reflection to many great musician/composers best attributes that any pianist should desire...

I mean, honestly! Beethoven was a genius when it came to polyrhythms...I am so fascinated with his music and how advanced it is! If anything!

Please let me know if you have questions or would like me to talk about something in more detail, or if you want to just discuss this in this thread!

[ted]

I'll firmly join the chorus of "nos" here. Nothing really hinders anything in piano playing. We've come a long way since concert pianists eschewed ragtime and jazz pianists avoided classical. All boundaries are nonsense and should have been abolished decades ago. I know they still exist but players who embrace them are getting fewer and not before time.

On the contrary, they feed one another. Don't forget that, without a single  exception I can think of, all composers of really good piano music, old and modern, were titanic improvisers. Your habit of improvisation will help you see what the masters were getting at, and things you like in formal music will enrich your improvisation with ideas.

The only fly in the ointment is time, as always. You might have to balance, carefully allocate the time you spend on each; none of us has copious spare time these days, less so if you are a professional musician.

Aside from that pragmatic consideration, play anything that is going.

[eric0773]

It seems possible to combine both classical repertoire practice and improvisation. I bought a book a couple months ago on this topic: Improvisation At The Piano (A Systematic Approach For The Classically Trained Pianist) by Brian Chung and Dennis Thurmond. Although I did not dedicate enough time to the book (other aspects of practice take my time at the moment), the first few chapters are extremely interesting and implementable. They teach you how to improvise using your existing repertoire, with the example of Für Elise.

This approach can somehow make you feel closer to the composer of the original piece, since you have to make harmonic choices as he did. If practiced regularly, I imagine it can also contribute to making you "free" at the piano, i.e. not being stuck with playing the same things over and over. If I do manage to go through the entire book this year, I will post a feedback here.

[g_s_223]

I wish more classical musicians were able to improvise (and compose), as was usually the case up to the time of Schubert at least. However, what is important (IMO) is to grasp the essence of style of whatever you are playing and express that authentically. By that I mean that when you play Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Brahms, Scott Joplin, Scriabin, Tatum etc, then you have a sense of how their sound world is properly expressed: which can be grasped by study and listening to excellent performers.

What doesn't work, for me at least, are attempts at "crossover": please don't go there!

[cuberdrift]

Thank you for replying!

What doesn't work, for me at least, are attempts at "crossover": please don't go there!

What exactly is "Crossover"? Heard of it but don't know it. Mind explaining what this is about?

[soitainly]

 The only negative aspect of playing classical vs. improvising is do you have time to do both. Everyone knows playing classical well involves lots of practice, but improvising takes lots of work also. A good improviser isn't just noodling away, there is lots of knowledge and skill behind being able to play interesting music in the moment.

 The positive aspect is that any music you play, in fact any music you even listen too, can provide future inspiration for improvisation. Great improvisers have listened to vast amounts of music. It's not like they are copying phrases and pasting them together, it's more like all that music just gets in their blood and starts flowing out.

[quantum]

Improvisation will only compliment your classical playing, and vice versa, not hinder it.

I started out with classical training and studied with several teachers.  Not one of them placed a focus on improvisation as an essential skill.  The general culture was improvisation was something the "great composers" and jazzers did, not something you learn from your "classical piano teacher." 

Nonetheless, I began to explore improvisation on my own time.  Often I would explore sounds or styles of playing that stemmed from music I was interested in, not necessarily music that I was currently studying from the classical rep.  I was fascinated by complex harmonies and strange chords, so began to construct phrases of chord progressions.  Phrases eventually led to full length pieces.   Pieces into sets of pieces, etc.  All the while, I was only doing this during private practice time, thinking nobody would want to listen to my silly sounds.  On a few occasions, I improvised for a small group of friends.  They in turn encouraged me to do more improvising and to share my work. 

I have found that improvisation has help solve some of the questions I had in studying the repertoire, and in turn my rather inquisitive and eclectic tastes in repertoire have undoubtedly shaped my improvisatory work.  Today 50% of my practice time is dedicated to repertoire, the other 50% to improvisation.  Improvisation is also an important part of my own teaching in classical piano.  IMO, it is as essential as learning all your scales and arpeggios. 

Improvising can be a healthy break from practicing your repertoire.  Up to a certain point, practicing a certain passage over and over begins to loose its effectiveness.  Improvisation can rejuvenate the mind, and can assist in the learning of such repertoire. 

[ted]

I have also found that listening to orchestral music, world music, music of exotic genres, feeds my improvisation in ways that direct study of piano music cannot. I don't quote what I have heard precisely, or study scores, but I allow form, rhythm and harmony to enter my mind, where they ferment over time and emerge subconsciously in diverse ways during improvisation. I do not understand the exact mechanism of this process but I feel that through it my playing and invention has become much richer over the years than if I had listened mostly to piano music. 

[birba]

Ultimately your classical playing  SHOULD sound like you're improvising.  Spontaneous.