Solid scales and arpeggios

[katefarquharson]

I got my grade 8 end of 2010 but stopped for 18 months as I was unwell, which isn't that long but in my short life (i'm 18) it is!  I've been with a new teacher (in a new country might I add) for 9 months now. When I started with him I hadn't done any scales/technical work since grade 8, and I was terrible. He's super into scales so I have a lot to do.

I do all keys - major minor (harmonic + melodic) 8ve apart, 3rds+10ths, double octaves(beasts!), double 3rds and chromatic dbl 3rds. Both legato and non-legato.
Arpeggios - all keys all inversions.
Sometimes he'll throw in bitonal scales if he's feeling mean! 

EVERY lesson I mess up. I haven't had a single lesson (in 9 months!!!) where I haven't restarted, clunked weird notes or get my fingers tangled up. It's not like I don't practise them, I do. Even if I can run almost all the scales perfectly in practise, it doesn't happen in the lesson. I understand the slow practise thing, and I'm really pushing that on myself at the moment.

Every lesson I'm a bit nervous (and this is something I need to sort out) so with both technical and repertoire I never show what I can really do, and how I've been practising.

So my question is (finally!) surely there is a way of getting the technical work so solid that no matter what situation and how nervous you are (unless your hands are shaking really bad) they will still be good. I know it's not an overnight thing of course, but what is the best way to get there?

I'm tired of just having to try to get them to come out right, I'd like to be at the stage where I can  really polish them! (and for him to be impressed  )

[chopin2015]

Do you practice with a metronome?

[outin]

Maybe it's a matter of concentration? Nerves won't help either.

Why would you really need to do all those scales? Wouldn't it be better to spend your time learning pieces, since you obviously are advanced enough to play really interesting ones. And paying for a teacher to listen to you mess up your scales seems a bit silly. I am sure you can evaluate them yourself?

I am totally unable to do any scales without messing up, because I simply cannot concentrate on something that I don't feel any musical connection with. I have similar problem with certain type of music. It took me a while to figure out why...If there are no surprise elements (tonally) I just phase out...So basically most of the classical era music is not for me...

[ajspiano]

The change of environment is what is causing the problem, not how competent you are at the scales. You need to practice them, and your repertoire, as if "under pressure" like you are when your teacher is watching.

Start by video recording yourself. If you can find someone willing, practice in front of someone who will actually watch/listen, rather than be in the room doing something else. Or in other words, you need to "practice performance" rather than "practice for performance".

[chopin2015]

Definitely a good thing to do would be to discuss techniques in dealing with environment change. I was taught to perform a few clicks slower than what you practice, but more importantly-have a solid understanding of tempo. If you're nervous, you may play faster. Try to play slower in a more relaxed way, take enough time to enjoy the music. When you play slower, you can catch moments where you can be more expressive or improve transitions!

[lighthand045]

I hate to play scales as an exercise, one way to practice them for me is doing an improv with a lot of modulations to cover all the scales  
Many pieces have scales and arpeggios.

Practice these HS fast as you can while mantaining clarity and then when you have them mastered HS, practice them HT slow(not too) and then when you get the hang of it, at normal speed(maybe 100-120 bpm)

If you are nervous you have to deal with it and eventually that stress will go away, not just for lessons but for performances and recitals too where you have to play real music.

Just be confident, try practicing the good ol' "talk to yourself in the mirror", it works really well tbh.

[chopin2015]

You could do groups, groups of 6, 5, 7...3 over 2?! 

[hfmadopter]

This harkens back to the days I took mechanical drawing. Everything went great till the third year, when I ended up with this instructor who just ever wanted to discuss and draw threads of a bolt. The same stupid bolt for two semesters. I though for sure after the first we might at least work on the nut that would go with the bolt but NOOO ! Well I zoned out, went from A- average to barely passing out of pure boredom. Fortunately that was the year we also moved to a new school where I ended up with a new and more interesting instructor in the third semester.

In your situation, I'd be asking questions of this teacher you have. If I didn't like the answers I got I'd be looking to move on. You're advanced enough to know how to work on scales yourself, you don't need a teacher for that. Certainly not for nine months of your time.

[katefarquharson]

Do you practice with a metronome?

I do indeed, and it has been helping a lot.

Why would you really need to do all those scales? Wouldn't it be better to spend your time learning pieces, since you obviously are advanced enough to play really interesting ones. And paying for a teacher to listen to you mess up your scales seems a bit silly. I am sure you can evaluate them yourself?

I'm working on a fair amount of stuff and ALL of it is super interesting and he's always throwing new things in. I've really taken to Janacek and now Bach! The practising of scales is because I need to refine my technique, I learn a lot through the technical work - getting an even sound, balancing and voicing, agility etc. I'm going to start learning Chopin's c minor Nocturne (op. 48?) and the double octaves are ESSENTIAL to learn the middle/end section of that piece.
I'm auditioning for music major at the university here, and he's a lecturer in piano and teaching and does all the technical work exams and often auditions where you're required to do scales, so a big thing he's trying to do is prepare me really really well. I'm seeing real results in my Bach pieces and mozart.

You could do groups, groups of 6, 5, 7...3 over 2?! 

I often play with them which makes them much more fun and works my brain! my favourite is in 5. Also like to do it where the LH ascending is staccato and piano RH ascending the opposite and then they swap on the way down surprisingly difficult to pull off!

The change of environment is what is causing the problem, not how competent you are at the scales. You need to practice them, and your repertoire, as if "under pressure" like you are when your teacher is watching.

You're totally right and I'm going to try to do the getting someone to watch me play them thing. Feels odd to get someone to watch me play scales but I really think it will work. Will get on it asap!!!!

[outin]

I'm auditioning for music major at the university here, and he's a lecturer in piano and teaching and does all the technical work exams and often auditions where you're required to do scales, so a big thing he's trying to do is prepare me really really well.

Then obviously you do not have a choice...Hopefully you get over the nervousness or whatever it is that does not allow you to do your best.

[nyiregyhazi]

Maybe it's a matter of concentration? Nerves won't help either.

Why would you really need to do all those scales? Wouldn't it be better to spend your time learning pieces, since you obviously are advanced enough to play really interesting ones. And paying for a teacher to listen to you mess up your scales seems a bit silly. I am sure you can evaluate them yourself?

It depends what the teacher is doing in that time. A good teacher knows how to develop proper basics. The question is whether he simply hears one scale and moves on to another or deals with the true technical issues. Even many advanced pianists don't use their thumbs well and get squashed down as a result.

I put together these exercises, including a section on freeing up movement in scales.

https://pianoscience.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/action-and-reaction-in-practise-part-i.html


I have one very advanced student who's been working on la campanella. she manages pretty well, but even with her I'm constantly having to work on the basic thumb action for individual notes, independently of the leaps. just the slightest sense of squashing the arm through the thumb rather than moving the thumb to create freedom is ruinous in the final product. Nobody is too advanced to work at basics. The question is how productively they are attended to.

[nyiregyhazi]

also, proper understanding of fingering is invaluable. Since I wrote this breakdown of the important aspects of fingering (in a way that does not waste time with excessive attention to that which does not need attention) my fingerings simply never go wrong in standard scales. My fingers can slip, the same as anyone, but I never accidentally take the wrong finger on a note , since I went through this:

https://pianoscience.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/scale-fingering-made-easy.html

[outin]

It depends what the teacher is doing in that time. A good teacher knows how to develop proper basics. The question is whether he simply hears one scale and moves on to another or deals with the true technical issues. Even many advanced pianists don't use their thumbs well and get squashed down as a result.
 

Ok, I just don't seem to get it that people can do all those high grades and exams without having excellent basic skills...Considering we work on them constantly on my lessons and I am not even studying for exams...

[nyiregyhazi]

Ok, I just don't seem to get it that people can do all those high grades and exams without having excellent basic skills...Considering we work on them constantly on my lessons and I am not even studying for exams...

That depends on whether the skills should be regarded well and truly basic compared to those on the level of a Horowitz or Volodos, or whether they have similar basics behind them as such great artists did. Very few do have the same basics. If you truly have the basics down, you play things reliably. You don't struggle. The question is whether the teacher can point out that you went wrong or show you why you went wrong and how to make a fix.

[outin]

 If you truly have the basics down, you play things reliably. You don't struggle. 

That's what I meant, I don't get how people go through all the exams if they can't play reliably and struggle...

[nyiregyhazi]

That's what I meant, I don't get how people go through all the exams if they can't play reliably and struggle...

That's all a matter of how you define reliability. there are students who are ALWAYS struggling a bit but in a consistent way. They never fall apart but continually struggle through well enough to pass. Equally there are students whoare usually safe but who are inconsistent and who sometimes struggle and fall apart for a brief spell. quite honestly, either can scrape through an exam with a pass but neither has come near to getting their basics down. And even those who play safely and reliably usually have a wealth of technical issues that restrict their range of sounds or potential to play faster etc.


pianists who play Chopin etudes to virtuoso level have basics down. the idea that passing a few exams means you're sorted and need merely carry on playing is a very dangerous and restrictive myth.

[outin]

pianists who play Chopin etudes to virtuoso level have basics down.

So that's what you mean by basics...I use the concept of basics differently, it is what you build on to be really good. Whatever one plays, one plays it with maybe a bit rough but consistent good technique, including posture and sound and when one advances the things one plays require more refinement, advancement and more complex applications of the basics. Unfortunately many adults tend to do the whole things backwards, but that's another story.

For you basics seem to include everything technically required in piano playing no matter what the level. After you have the basics you just can do whatever you want to do, pick up a virtuoso etude and run with it.

the idea that passing a few exams means you're sorted and need merely carry on playing is a very dangerous and restrictive myth.

Don't know whether it's a myth or not, I think it should be obvious to everyone that doing something like piano playing is a lifelong learning experience just like dancing or singing. You are never ready. But if passing quite a few exams doesn't require to have solid basic skills, then there simply is no proper consensus what is a technically right way of playing or the exam system fails to evaluate it. Or is not even meant to evaluate that. Which it probably isn't...which just makes it even less interesting for me...and quite a cheat to those who work so hard with often boring stuff to pass those...

[nyiregyhazi]

So that's what you mean by basics...I use the concept of basics differently, it is what you build on to be really good. Whatever one plays, one plays it with maybe a bit rough but consistent good technique, including posture and sound and when one advances the things one plays require more refinement, advancement and more complex applications of the basics.

True, but the question is how you know. 99% of pianists who tell themself they have the basics down are just being naive and generating self limitation. I was foolish enough to think that at 18. Since then I'd played the Rachmaninoff second concerto with orchestra and the Liszt sonata. My basics were still poor. Since then, I relearned basic movements (that ought to have been acquired from scratch)and recently became capable of playing liszt's 6th rhapsody. It takes a work like that to expose how poor your basics are, even after having been able to play the sonata in public. I'd never even been close to the ability to fake it (until I changed basic finger movements altogether), despite having got far enough to perform the sonata. my basics are still poor. it's the vastly superior basics of Cziffra's motions that determines why I cannot equal either his ease or speed in the rhapsody . My basics are vastly less wrong now than before, not correct.


Never tell yourself that scales are "easy" and that you should be able to do it yourself. A teacher like Alan Fraser could take an international competition winner and show them something about simple movement that would improve their sound and ease. Speaking from experience of being naive enough to think that basics are "basic" and that the rest magically appears with time, I can tell you that it rarely does. However, it can come from realising what significant flaws ALL but the greatest pianists retain in their quality of "basic" movements.

"But if passing quite a few exams doesn't require to have solid basic skills, then there simply is no proper consensus what is a technically right way of playing or the exam system fails to evaluate it."



It fails to evaluate it . It doesn't show that anything goes in technique. it shows that you do can do enough to pass exams via a mediocre representation of your true inner musical capacity , without learning what enables that which is truly outstanding. having good basics does not guarantee that a well taught child will be executing chopin etudes with ease. That is true. However, on the flipside the ability to do so really is the only way to be relatively SURE (rather than naively hopeful) that basics are indeed down properly and that the rest is a mere time issue. Virtually everyone else who thinks they have basics covered is kidding themself, to their own limitation- especially if they think that a few exams attest to anything. The only definitive test is repertoire so advanced as to expose poor foundations. It doesn't necessarily teach you good basics, but it does show much is totally out of whack with what actually works in practise. Typically, that is because essential ingredients of virtuoso technique are literally absent from that student's radar, not because a few years are required for such elements to magically appear from nothing.

[outin]

True, but the question is how you know. 99% of pianists who tell themself they have the basics down are just being naive and generating self limitation.

That figure obviously is just something you made up. It would be better to say it's common. I doubt people are so naive as you think. It's propably more of a choice: How much of your resources you are willing to use, if you can somehow manage with what you already have. Denial also is a very popular thing among people, it has nothing to do with being naive.

Not that I wouldn't think that ignorance and narrow vision are common features as well...

Never tell yourself that scales are "easy" and that you should be able to do it yourself.

Who said they were? They are damn difficult. But in this case I didn't get the impression that the teacher is working on the way they are played at all, it's simply about playing any of the scales without "messing up" which seems to occur specifically on lessons.

And if you are correct that 99% of pianists don't have the basics in technique then who would help them do it? Probably almost all of those who I would call pianists have already had a teacher or several. If they all failed to teach the basics I'd say it's a pretty hopeless case. There's a limit how many students you or Mr. Fraser can work with   

[nyiregyhazi]

That figure obviously is just something you made up. It would be better to say it's common. I doubt people are so naive as you think. It's propably more of a choice: How much of your resources you are willing to use, if you can somehow manage with what you already have. Denial also is a very popular thing among people, it has nothing to do with being naive.

Popular or not, it's naive to think you have basics sorted if you don't and it creates a cycle of self-limitation. 99% was a conservative figure. What percentage of pianists reach the level to play feux follet fluently and lightly? What percentage of pianists think they have their basics sorted? A radically higher one than that which are at the level for feux follet. Yet it's the lack of proper basics that means that virtually all fail the test of time, after having started out on the delusion that time would take their technique significantly further. Only such tests as difficult double notes truly test whether basics are genuinely dealt with or merely kind of sort of there, in a way (ie. completely improperly dealt with and not really there at all).

Who said they were? They are damn difficult. But in this case I didn't get the impression that the teacher is working on the way they are played at all, it's simply about playing any of the scales without "messing up" which seems to occur specifically on lessons.

Both yourself and another poster said she should be good enough to work on scales on her own. I agree that it's pointless if the teacher merely nods or shakes his head after each scale, rather than works on fundaments, but we were not informed which is so. I don't think we should encourage the popular progress-limiting delusion that fairly advanced students have nothing to learn about fundaments of technique.

And if you are correct that 99% of pianists don't have the basics in technique then who would help them do it? Probably almost all of those who I would call pianists have already had a teacher or several. If they all failed to teach the basics I'd say it's a pretty hopeless case. There's a limit how many students you or Mr. Fraser can work with  

None of my teachers taught me the efficient actions that I consider the true fundaments of good technique and which took me from complete incapability to play repeated octaves, to the capability to do the 6th rhapsody without instant seizure. It's not a hopeless case though. I learned a lot through Fraser's writings and I too am writing exercises that detail some of the simple but indispensable actions that so many pianists never learn. The question is whether a pianist chooses to pretend that time and effort alone produce things that had not even started out on their radar, or whether they want to make an effort to discover what fundamental actions they will require to break through their limits.



[/quote]

[timothy42b]

Who said they were? They are damn difficult. But in this case I didn't get the impression that the teacher is working on the way they are played at all, it's simply about playing any of the scales without "messing up" which seems to occur specifically on lessons.

I have not met even close to 99% of teachers.   I'm also not sure how fundamental the basics are, but that's a separate and longer conversation.   

I get the impression from conversations on the forums that there is a large contingent of teachers and students who think specific exercises will teach correct mechanics regardless of how they are performed.

The exercises most commonly mentioned are scales and Hanon. 

It seems more likely to me that scales, e.g., could be a good platform for learning some mechanics if done under the careful guidance of a teacher who understood mechanics.  But done merely for the sake of learning scales, they probably only improve the endurance of the posterior muscles. 

[nyiregyhazi]

I have not met even close to 99% of teachers.   I'm also not sure how fundamental the basics are, but that's a separate and longer conversation.   

I get the impression from conversations on the forums that there is a large contingent of teachers and students who think specific exercises will teach correct mechanics regardless of how they are performed.

The exercises most commonly mentioned are scales and Hanon. 

It seems more likely to me that scales, e.g., could be a good platform for learning some mechanics if done under the careful guidance of a teacher who understood mechanics.  But done merely for the sake of learning scales, they probably only improve the endurance of the posterior muscles. 

Agreed. Scales are entirely about quality of movement. Drilling them at high speeds is pretty useless except as the odd test of how well the basics are down. The key is in how you perceive hand positions and the specific quality of how you use the thumb to bridge between them. Even with my most advanced students, I need to keep them working on this. We shouldn't make any assumptions as to whether the teacher is working on the quality or just repetitive drilling.

[chopin2015]

Try playing hands together without looking at the keyboard, look up or close your eyes.

[outin]

Both yourself and another poster said she should be good enough to work on scales on her own.

No I didn't.
This is what I wrote:
"And paying for a teacher to listen to you mess up your scales seems a bit silly. I am sure you can evaluate them yourself?"

If that wasn't specific enough for you, what I meant above is that she will know if she messes the scales up or not on her own. I did not mean that she can evaluate her technique on her own. If this has been going on for a while and she still is worried about messing them up, I doubt her teacher is concentrating on the actual way she plays them either. Or at least hasn't made it clear to her why she is asked to play them at lessons.

[nyiregyhazi]

No I didn't.
This is what I wrote:
"And paying for a teacher to listen to you mess up your scales seems a bit silly. I am sure you can evaluate them yourself?"

If that wasn't specific enough for you, what I meant above is that she will know if she messes the scales up or not on her own. I did not mean that she can evaluate her technique on her own. If this has been going on for a while and she still is worried about messing them up, I doubt her teacher is concentrating on the actual way she plays them either. Or at least hasn't made it clear to her why she is asked to play them at lessons.

If her teacher is indeed merely saying good or bad after each scale and moving to another, I'd be concerned as to whether that's good use of time. But that was neither stated nor implied. we shouldn't be making any assumptions about such matters.

[outin]

If her teacher is indeed merely saying good or bad after each scale and moving to another, I'd be concerned as to whether that's good use of time. But that was neither stated nor implied. we shouldn't be making any assumptions about such matters.

If you read the op post properly, it was very much implied that the teacher is either not working on the technique or practice habits  (other than slow practice maybe) to prevent her messing up, why else would she need to ask us?

"EVERY lesson I mess up. I haven't had a single lesson (in 9 months!!!) where I haven't restarted, clunked weird notes or get my fingers tangled up. It's not like I don't practise them, I do. Even if I can run almost all the scales perfectly in practise, it doesn't happen in the lesson. I understand the slow practise thing, and I'm really pushing that on myself at the moment. "

...

"So my question is (finally!) surely there is a way of getting the technical work so solid that no matter what situation and how nervous you are (unless your hands are shaking really bad) they will still be good. I know it's not an overnight thing of course, but what is the best way to get there? "

[outin]

we shouldn't be making any assumptions about such matters.

BTW. You have presented a lot of assumptions on what 99% of pianists think and what their teachers do on this thread...So is this a rule that only applies to the rest of us? 

[nyiregyhazi]

BTW. You have presented a lot of assumptions on what 99% of pianists think and what their teachers do on this thread...So is this a rule that only applies to the rest of us?  

I'm relating an observation about what I've seen over and over- not making unsupported guesswork about a lone case that I have not observed. it's the same basic thing that enables virtuoso repertoire as what is involved in good movement in basic scenarios. For example, the leaps on la campanella involve a very simple 5th finger action. However, it's the fact I hadn't actually mastered that most basic action that meant I had to totally relearn how I'm to use my 5th, to get anywhere with it.

I've seen countless pianists with lesser technique than my own (which still requires considerable work on basic movements) who thought they had basics down and only needed time. it's a widespread way in which people lie to themselves on a way that retains hope. Sadly, such pianists rarely turn into truly fluent players. even at professional level you hear some artists where there's a real technical struggle in their sound, some of the time, even when notes are all there. Considering how few pianists have mastered technique to the volodos level, you can safely say for a fact that anyone who plays with less ease does not have the basics movements mastered to same level. that's logic, not assumption.


The poster said nothing about what manner of work her teacher is doing for improvement. I think I'll wait to see if she tells us, rather try to use guesswork to determine anything.

[outin]

that's logic, not assumption.

Ok, so I understood the rule wrong...it only says the rest of us are assuming, not using logic

[nyiregyhazi]

Ok, so I understood the rule wrong...it only says the rest of us are assuming, not using logic

If you'd like to explain the logic of someone not having described what manner of work their teacher is doing leading to the deduction that their teacher must therefore doing nothing to aid the physical technique, be my guest. as I said, I'll wait for the poster to inform us, rather than guess. However I'm perfectly happy to stake my life savings that the poster has not acquired the same quality of basics as a volodos or Horowitz- based not on guesswork but based on the information that she is struggling with accuracy on scales.

[katefarquharson]

wow so may replies. In regards to wether my teacher works on the technique or simply nods or shakes his head then moves on....
 

I doubt her teacher is concentrating on the actual way she plays them either. Or at least hasn't made it clear to her why she is asked to play them at lessons.

Didn't make it clear, or mention it all really. Just had a lesson today which I'll use as an example. First thing he asked me: C major, 8ve apart, non-legato. Nice and easy? Usually a trick, C is actually one of the hardest for me! would rather play G# minor! I often struggle to get a consistant sound with non-legato and my LH is often flimsy (we're fixing this). So of course I stumble at the top but get back down. He pointed out my left shoulder was tense and that I wasn't activating my finger tips so they were kind of flapping. So I do the LH alone, slowly and it's better (still a little shaky because my LH gets stage fright!). We put it back together, he beats time so I keep steady and rhythmic. Tada! Then F# melodic minor non-legato, stumbled a bit (i had a wrong finger) but then I did it again and it was okay. Arpeggios were a bit better. Didn't do any double thirds today but I don't stuff them up most of the time because he's really helped me with the specific technique for them. With standard scales and arpeggios, which I've done a long time, I've built up bad habits which for me are hard to break, but anything new I've learnt with him really does stick.
I feel bad because he has to repeat himself. I don't think I'm fully applying what he tells me in the lesson to what I'm doing at home, so I'm going to have a good think and try and work on that. I do have a notebook that he writes in but there's only so much he can write down... When it comes to repertoire I take what he tells me and I really explore it and put it into practise on my own and then it sticks. So I've got bad habits with scales basically.

BUT my main thing which I've known all along, and that is difficult for me to fix is focus. I'm focused in the sense that I know why I'm there, what I want to do. Not thinking about going home etc. But my head is not in the keys or in my hands when I'm playing the scales. I kind of run with them and hope they work, which is a bad attitude. He knows this and tells me that before I start I should breathe and visualize. Sounds simple but I struggle to actually do it. I have a total butterfly brain and it takes REAL effort and discipline for me to completely zone in on what I'm doing. Times when I have, things were perfect. But I can only maintain that level of focus for about 15 seconds (seriously). And it's quite draining. I need to learn to be able to flick that switch at an instant.

And confidence. I am a very confident person in general but with certain things I begin to lose it...

Oh and on the topic of the technical work and 'basics' for exams I always did pretty well. I got a good distinction at grade 8 that does not in the slightest mean my basic technique is flawless. I Just made sure I could whizz through them by drilling them so I could get my 9/10! I didn't use them as a means to learn technique that can be applied to repertoire. My teacher then wasn't fond of scales and when I finished my exams he told me to stop scales (he had his reasons). In my opinion Grade 8 is simply a starting point. It's kind of a gateway. A lot of people get their grade 8, but that's the end of it. Once you get there you then choose your direction. (obviously most who are going to continue will know beforehand)

SUCH a long post, sorry!

[timothy42b]

BUT my main thing which I've known all along, and that is difficult for me to fix is focus. I'm focused in the sense that I know why I'm there, what I want to do. Not thinking about going home etc. But my head is not in the keys or in my hands when I'm playing the scales.

Try this, it might work.  You never know.

Get a plastic bottle with a screw top, like a small soft drink container, and a wide cup like a short milk glass or wide coffee cup.  The bottle has to have a very narrow mouth, and the cup a very wide mouth, but exact dimensions are unimportant.  Fill the bottle halfway or so with water.

Before you get out of the car, pour water from the narrow bottle into the cup.  That represents the lack of focus you're demonstrating with scales.  Now, pour the water back into the narrow mouth of the bottle without spilling.  THAT's the concentration you need for your scales.  Put the cap back on the bottle.

Now just before you play your scales for the teacher, briefly mentally recreate the state of concentration you used to pour the water. 

This is a basic martial arts exercise, possibly from wing chun or something similar.  If it works for piano, let us all know.   

[nyiregyhazi]

Try this, it might work.  You never know.

Get a plastic bottle with a screw top, like a small soft drink container, and a wide cup like a short milk glass or wide coffee cup.  The bottle has to have a very narrow mouth, and the cup a very wide mouth, but exact dimensions are unimportant.  Fill the bottle halfway or so with water.

Before you get out of the car, pour water from the narrow bottle into the cup.  That represents the lack of focus you're demonstrating with scales.  Now, pour the water back into the narrow mouth of the bottle without spilling.  THAT's the concentration you need for your scales.  Put the cap back on the bottle.

Now just before you play your scales for the teacher, briefly mentally recreate the state of concentration you used to pour the water.  

This is a basic martial arts exercise, possibly from wing chun or something similar.  If it works for piano, let us all know.  

Why not channel it into the task at hand? The problem with false starts is almost always lack of clear visualisation of what is to be executed. there are so many similarities between different scales that a clear head doesn't strike me as useful to the task. I'd put all the focus into what is to be executed, not into a single thing that carries the mind elsewhere. You don't think about scales when focusing on pouring water. you put all your focus on pouring the water, not into other things. why distract yourself from the overwhelmingly more intricate task of executing a scale by filling the mind with anything else? Concentration that isn't put into what you are going to do strikes me as something that would be be bettered labelled as "distraction" ie the polar opposite of the useful state of mind.


for any key practise the scale very slow with one finger and learn to visualise the whole octave of the scale as one entity - where every individual note is pictured in the context of every other. you should never start a scale without a full map of what is to come. the fingers cannot be trusted not to confuse different keys so the brain must lead with understanding. Equally, make sure you can picture the two thumb notes in each hand before starting. the more rational awareness you have of the key features, the more reliable it will become. for me, scales are not the place to go into an abstract zen trance but a place where all of your attention is directed to understanding what you are about to do. The fingers cannot learn a proper reliable autopilot for the turnaround in melodic scales in particular, so the brain has to be clear on which features it is going to prepping them to execute.

[timothy42b]

 You don't think about scales when focusing on pouring water. you put all your focus on pouring the water, not into other things. why distract yourself from the overwhelmingly more intricate task of executing a scale by filling the mind with anything else?

This illustrates a rather basic problem with logic.

You have started with the assumption you know the precise root cause of the student's symptoms.

You have followed with the assumption you know the precise mechanism of operation of my proposed exercise. 

(you are probably unaware of these implicit assumptions)

Then you have applied logic to prove the assumed mechanism cannot affect the assumed root cause, so you reject the real exercise. 

However, if you are wrong about either assumption your logic is irrelevant, however correct it might otherwise be. 

Sometimes when it's so simple you might as well just give it a try instead of overthinking it. 

[nyiregyhazi]

please read the poster's last post. my advice was given with what she wrote in it most explicitly in mind. as a professional teacher, I see these issues constantly and offered my advice directly from what she detailed about herself. From what the poster wrote, thankfully she already knows that emptying her head will not solve this issue. However, I constantly see students who labour under the misapprehension that because something SOMETIMES goes better when they don't think about it, the trick is to empty their mind or to think about something else. This is simply not true. The trick is to first understand the details better (so nothing is the result of guesswork or blind physical habit any more) and to then refine the conscious awareness down to just a few reference notes that trigger the rest. It's very hard to persuade some students. recently one told me how much better things worked when he didn't think BUT the results were not truly reliable at all. fortunately he was intelligent enough to pay heed when I explained the necessity to think more at first and wait until the habits had time to be properly acquired. he's made good progress at getting things more consistent. sadly, some students don't want to hear that, and persist on a track that never leads to reliability, simply because it sometimes goes right without understanding what is going on. sometimes isn't good enough for a high level.


Nowhere more than scales is it more important to have an absolutely rock solid mental picture before starting. Most mistakes are simply down to not visualising the whole octave as a single entity. when I play D flat major, b major or f sharp major, I literally never accidentally hit the wrong white key for thumb notes, as is so common. that's because I consciously map the whole scale out before playing a note. I have reliable physical habits for each one, but the physical habits are not going to guarantee that such minimal differences coupled with such overwhelmingly similarity will sort itself. you can't hope for your thumbs to know what it's your brains job to know. without the conscious brain actively mapping out the scale, it's a lottery. by doing a proper plan, it's almost as if the e natural doesn't exist to me in a d flat major scale. the f is so deeply ingrained in my thought that it's not possible to accidentally start depending on the physical habit from b major. the mental plan completely excludes any alternative physical habits from coming in and ensures that the only habits in play are those for the key of d flat major.


these things are just the very tip of the iceberg. another important ability is to be able to recite the notes of any scale and the fingers on them, away from the piano altogether. if you really understand the makeup of scales, it's easy to do for one hand. saying the fingering of a two handed scale is way harder, but should still be perfectly possible to do reliably, albeit with more thought. you should also be able to state the two thumb notes for either hand in any scale, with scarcely a moments thoughts. when you don't appreciate the construction well enough to have these things on the tip of your tongue at a moments notice, different habits inevitably get confused with other ones. when the brain is fully in charge, you can start refining it down to the smallest amount of conscious thought to play a scale. but it's never truly purely by rote. the fingers should never be trusted to sort out intricate and subtle differences between near identical movements. that's something that must be visualised clearly, via mental exercises.


By the time you've been through that last one of visualising every note and and every finger, the concentration involved is pouring water is positively mild by comparison. picturing how to do what I'm about to do at the piano is more than enough to get my concentration into gear, without any external distractions about pouring water.

[ajspiano]

OP obviously needs some technical instruction, as per some comments made after the OP..

However, I would question whether your teacher gives you technical help in any context rather than just scales..

...since this whole thread seems to be totally abandoning the idea that a large part of why scales are useful is as much to do with familiarity with patterns and keys, rather than that they can be used as a mechanical technique developer..  And that the teacher may not be that concerned with the technique right now, but rather has spent some months ensure the student is familiar with ALL keys, alongside other work that may have included more contextual technique help.

[katefarquharson]

I think the water pouring is a really helpful idea. I respond well to analogies so while I may not physically do it often I'm going to try using it as a trick to engage and focus. The action of pouring the water from the cup to the bottle requires you to be steady, consistent, accurate and maintaining focus right to the end and to me thats what scales (and almost everything else) are about.

If I rush, I mess up. If I take it down a notch they're miles better. I don't have a big problem with scales, it's not the scales it's my attitude. I'm way too hard on myself a lot of the time and create problems that aren't really there or aren't major. Scales are a means to get my fingers going + warming up, explore all keys and patterns (eg. inversions) and prepare for sections in repertoire- for instance I'm working on double octave scales to learn the correct action, I have small hands so I'm learning ways to play them without tensing and causing damage, which is going to be essential in the next piece I'm taking on - Chopin's C minor Nocturne op. 48

OP obviously needs some technical instruction, as per some comments made after the OP..

However, I would question whether your teacher gives you technical help in any context rather than just scales..

...since this whole thread seems to be totally abandoning the idea that a large part of why scales are useful is as much to do with familiarity with patterns and keys, rather than that they can be used as a mechanical technique developer..  And that the teacher may not be that concerned with the technique right now, but rather has spent some months ensure the student is familiar with ALL keys, alongside other work that may have included more contextual technique help.

Patterns and keys - So important to be solid with. I'm starting work on a technique book that takes all sorts of exercises (hanon etc.) and others that some of the great pianists used. With nearly all of them they ask you to do the exercises modulating to many different keys and without study of scales I wouldn't be able to do this.

In regards to wether my teacher gives me technical help in other contexts - he really does. He always says that he wants to give me the tools and technique to be able to make the sound I want and need to get the music to sound how I want it to. Working through repertoire we'll go over sections in detail on specifically how to get the right sound. Examples: A mozart sonata I'm working on right now, my alberti bass was not happening. He showed me how to change the wrist position and work properly on rotation, now I can play it with ease.
Specific technique for bringing out melodies in thicker textures - thinking of 'long fingers' and like they're walking in sand. (it makes sense to me)

I haven't performed for quite a while and I pretty much play on my own and then in lessons. Lesson's shouldn't feel like a performance but I get anxious rather easily.. But we discussed this and how I'm not really being musically stimulated, my situation has changed a great deal the past 2 years so I'm not involved in much (it's a long story and my post is already too long!) and he's suggesting I join one of the universities performance classes and arrange to do some chamber music there too. As mentioned earlier about a change in environment, I think this really is a big factor so playing for others and getting used to different situations will really change things I think.

Long post again, it's difficult to get everything across properly in a forum....