Is 17 too old to start learning the piano?

[hollysmith123]

When I was younger, I used to learn piano however I wasn't very good and never really took it seriously. I think I first started lessons at 5 for a few months and then again at 7. I didn't practice very much back then but I could still play some pieces. I had lessons when I was around 13 again but I moved in the middle of having them and only restarted them at 15 for about 4 months until I moved again.

Over the years I have taught myself little things on the piano on and off and I have been able to play along to certain songs after learning them by ear. They're pretty basic though. I have trouble playing with both hands for more complicated pieces but I can for the basics.

If it contributes to anything, I'm classically trained in singing and currently at Grade 5.

Is it too late for me to learn the piano and eventually play very complicated pieces?

[faulty_damper]

No, it's not too late.  I started at 20 and was accepted into music school two years later and now have my degree in music, which is functionally useless, btw.  And yes, I can play extremely difficult pieces very well without any difficulties.

[iansinclair]

Heavens no!  Go for it and enjoy!

[cabbynum]

Look up the pianist James Rhodes.

[cometear]

And yes, I can play extremely difficult pieces very well without any difficulties.

We haven't seen any proof of this yet.

[chicoscalco]

And yes, I can play extremely difficult pieces very well without any difficulties.

Define "extremely difficult", define "very well" and define "without any difficulties". This is all very subjective and relative.
...
And don't get me wrong, I'm not assuring it's your case, but normally people who tend to think this way are the ones that don't "play extremely difficult pieces very well without any difficulties."

[faulty_damper]

I can pretty much play anything I want and not worry that I won't be able to play it.  That's how I define my terms.  So basically, the stuff most people struggle with, I don't.

[chicoscalco]

I can pretty much play anything I want and not worry that I won't be able to play it.  That's how I define my terms.  So basically, the stuff most people struggle with, I don't.

Pretty much play? That's what bothers me. I may be wrong 'cause I'm not a native speaker, but the way you say this, nonchalantly, it seems to me this "pretty much play" of yours is nothing but pressing your fingers agains the keys, not making music. I would very much like to hear your Bach in the audition room, if you have the time.

[faulty_damper]

When I have the money, I'll be buying some decent recording equipment.  But it's not to post in the audition room.  I rarely ever visit that forum and have no interest in posting in there.  All I'm interested in is making music for myself and a few select friends whom no longer live in the same city or country because I know they'd appreciate listening to some piano music they like.

Anyway, my previous statement was for the OP, not you nor anyone else who has an axe to grind or think they need to prove something to someone.  That's just your insecurities compelling you to do that.  If you really wanted to prove something, sign up for some competition or something and prove it there, not some internet forum.

To the OP, how you learn to play is more important than being able to play because you can play using even the worst technique and still sound relatively decent.

[awesom_o]

I can pretty much play anything I want and not worry that I won't be able to play it.  That's how I define my terms.  So basically, the stuff most people struggle with, I don't.

 Most people struggle with finding musical meaning in Chopin's 2nd Sonata.

Are you telling us you didn't struggle with that?



Seriously though.... pictures, or it didn't happen!

[cometear]

I can pretty much play anything I want and not worry that I won't be able to play it.  That's how I define my terms.  So basically, the stuff most people struggle with, I don't.

You claim you can play anything you desire. This would mean you have an immaculate technique. I wholeheartedly believe that anyone with a technique as solid and capable as yours will also have incredible musicality. So considering you have the capabilities to play anything you want with amazing musicality you should be up with the greatest pianists of our time. Then you claim that you keep this extraordinary and miraculous gift to yourself and a few friends. I highly doubt that anyone who could play at your caliber would keep this to themselves. If what you say is true you would not be afraid to blow us all away in the petty audition room and you would not be afraid to blow away the judges contestants in international competitions. This leads me to believe you are not what you make yourself up to be. I believe I can speak for the majority of people on this forum.

[etogmajor]

Dang, this post went south quick...

The reason people wanna verify this guy's story is because the story was meant to be inspirational, but it's not usually good to lie to inspire someone, and the story doesn't sound plausible.
(FYI - modern science has ALWAYS been able to explain how bees fly. As soon as science could explain how birds fly, it could also explain how bees fly.)

Now, for the OP... piano is fun! Do it. Learn as much or as little as you want to. Of course, if you learn more, you'll be able to play harder pieces faster.

Do people who start when they're older have a disadvantage because it's an impossibility to gain the sure technique that can be easily ingrained into a 5 year old Asian kid? Idk, but I started when I was 13, and while I might never be as good as the Asians, I see progress all the time.

[j_menz]

(FYI - modern science has ALWAYS been able to explain how bees fly. As soon as science could explain how birds fly, it could also explain how bees fly.)

Not so, as there are some significantly different factors at work. A brief summary here.

@OP  - Quite a lot of people take up piano later in life, and many much later than 17. You have certain advantages (motivation and your singing experience) and some disadvantages. How far you progress will depend mostly on how much time and effort you put in, and whether you make the best of that. Some natural aptitudes may also play a part.  There is no reason you won't be able to advance to the level you now want, and beyond.  Also, there is much joy to be had on the journey.

[faulty_damper]

See, the problem that a lot of people have here is that there's a myth that you have to start early to accomplish anything.  It's a myth that even you, OP, believe since you asked.  However, starting early isn't a guarantee of any kind of accomplishment, as any piano teacher can attest.  Speaking as one, most will never accomplish any kind of fluency and will simply give up for a myriad of reasons.

While I didn't start playing as a child, I did have the aptitude to be persistent in my practice.  However, long hours at the bench didn't promise me any kind of improvement.  Even having concert pianists as teachers didn't help since all they seem to think that all I needed to improve was to practice 6 hours a day.

It was only when I stopped taking lessons and started from scratch did I figure out how to play, and it was completely different from the way I was taught.  How can that be?  These people have been teaching for decades and performing for decades and have recorded some very good music.  How could these people, with such qualifications, be wrong?

But they were.  The point is that what gets taught and what actually works are sometimes two very different things.  You can chop down a tree with a spork if given enough time, but wouldn't you rather have a chain saw?

[dima_76557]

You can chop down a tree with a spork if given enough time, but wouldn't you rather have a chain saw?

Neither. I'd rather hug that tree.

[outin]

See, the problem that a lot of people have here is that there's a myth that you have to start early to accomplish anything.  It's a myth that even you, OP, believe since you asked.  However, starting early isn't a guarantee of any kind of accomplishment, as any piano teacher can attest.  Speaking as one, most will never accomplish any kind of fluency and will simply give up for a myriad of reasons.

While I do agree about the silly myth that you have to start early to accomplish anything, I am yet to see some proof that no matter how late you start there's no limit to what you can accomplish (especially if we assume there's no such thing as innate talent that makes one exceptional). You certainly don't need to prove your point by playing for us, but please understand that using yourself as proof does not work very well until you do.

[faulty_damper]

You certainly don't need to prove your point by playing for us, but please understand that using yourself as proof does not work very well until you do.

So in other words, you're saying that the OP really just wants people to play for her.

[dima_76557]

I am yet to see some proof that no matter how late you start there's no limit to what you can accomplish (especially if we assume there's no such thing as innate talent that makes one exceptional).

I am convinced that there are certain disadvantages (especially neurological ones) in late starters if the sole focus is to abuse music as a vehicle to show how good we are. That, it seems, is the deepest and most tragic root of the "technical" trouble most experience. How sad to see yet another thread of this kind. Hugging the trees, ladies and gentlemen, is what we need to learn, not cutting them down. 17 is not too late to learn what (piano) music is really for.

[outin]

I am convinced that there are certain disadvantages (especially neurological ones) in late starters if the sole focus is to abuse music as a vehicle to show how good we are. That, it seems, is the deepest and most tragic root of the "technical" trouble most experience. How sad to see yet another thread of this kind. Hugging the trees, ladies and gentlemen, is what we need to learn, not cutting them down. 17 is not too late to learn what (piano) music is really for.

Of course not! But could one become the new Rubinstein? I don't even mean neurological disadvantages, but the plain fact that there's less time to learn before the body starts to deteriorate and it's often impossible to learn in the way that a child can, without other things forced on you by life. Being a realist is not the same as being negative, one can certainly learn enough to please almost everyone, I think 17 is quite young actually

[dima_76557]

Of course not! But could one become the new Rubinstein?

No. One can only become a newer (maybe better, who knows?) version of one's older self.

[faulty_damper]

Any neurological deficits can be overcome from the process of learning.  There will be certain problems like lack of myelination of the nerves, but this can be remedied through extensive practice.  In my own experience, I could not play fast and delicate passages such as Godowsky's Chopin Study in E-flat, Op.10-6.  However, through extensive practice over the course of several weeks, I was able to do so.  I think I was 25 at the time so this may be considered "late" but I disagree that age is an issue for anything.

[dima_76557]

I disagree that age is an issue for anything.

Except for the strictly physical problems, I'd like to emphasize the following:

- With age, it may become harder and harder to accept oneself.
- With age, one may feel more and more that one has to meet other people's expectations.

Both are incredibly difficult barriers to conquer and can really block development for a long, long time.

P.S.: Your story can work for others if all other factors are the same. For example:
- the ability to correctly diagnose the underlying problem
- the ability to concentrate 100% on a set task
- enough time for "extensive practice".

[cabbynum]

I started at 16, I have not had many problems. I have also had some pretty serious "issues" not piano related that i think have really helped my musical playing. I also get hyper focused on things i like. I happen to love piano, so it is not uncommon for me to spend up 6 hours at the piano. I do not do this to impress other people at all. I am gonna sound arrogant but i really do not mean to and I am simply using myself as an example and what I have noticed.
I work my ass off every single day at the piano. Ive been doing that for about a year and a half. The first 6 months of piano i only played by ear. I think this really helped my improvement. Luckily i was born with a very good set of ears. I know you all think innate ability is BS in piano, but i never learned the basics when i started and i was able to figure out a chopin nocturne and multiple preludes by chopin and bach.
I am rambling a bit so heres my point
if you have good ears.
you get completely obsessed with it.
you practice with all of your focus
you have an extreme amount of drive
and you have a good teacher, then i do not see what is standing in your way.

I will say however, that you lose a lot of the "normal" teenage things when you decide to do the above. I have almost zero social life, i am home schooled. I went to a regular school lost year and keep in touch with none of them. I have one friend really.


sorry again for rambling and if i sound arrogant at all. I truly do not mean it that way. Im just the easiest example for myself.
None of the pieces i am working on right now are at a performance level so please do not start bombarding me with requests to post in the audition room.
Here is what i am focusing on right now
Bach
Prelude and fugue no.12 book two
beethoven op.57 no.23
chopin nocturne op.48 no. 1
chopin scherzo three

sorry for errors, i have been awake for way too long

[outin]

Any neurological deficits can be overcome from the process of learning.  

I guess you mean neurological deficiences associated with the age difference between a child and an adult? Otherwise it would be a pretty ridiculous statement...

I do not completely disagree with that. But time and many other factors will still be the issue.

[outin]

I know you all think innate ability is BS in piano,

No, at least I don't.

[cabbynum]

No, at least I don't.

Good! Because when I looked at a piano for the first time it just made sense. Now I wasn't whipping out hard pieces that first day but, the piano makes sense to me.

[faulty_damper]

I guess you mean neurological deficiences associated with the age difference between a child and an adult? Otherwise it would be a pretty ridiculous statement...

I do not completely disagree with that. But time and many other factors will still be the issue.

Why do you insist upon this?  The body and mind are incredibly plastic as research has shown, especially with skill learning.

[dima_76557]

The body and mind are incredibly plastic as research has shown, especially with skill learning.

What research are you referring to concerning piano playing? It is my impression that most researchers don't seem to have a clue about how much more difficult it is to play the piano artistically well than it is to simply play at a certain speed with certain indicated dynamics. The latter is indeed something almost everybody can learn with enough training but it will not impress anyone.

[faulty_damper]

I'm not aware of any research on piano playing, but I was referring to skill training research where the more difficult the skill is to learn, the greater the neurological differences when viewed through MRI, compared to subjects who learned simple tasks.  As well, other research in the psychological literature shows this, too.  The more difficult the task, the greater the brain adapts to accommodate that activity.

By analogy, would you not consider language learning a complex task?  Surely, there have been people who moved to another country as an adult and learned to speak the language fluently, without their foreign accent.  Though this is rare, and the common thought in psychology is that there is this "critical period" for language development (hence the reason for the accent), recent research shows that there may not actually be such a period.  The reason why people speak with a foreign accent is because they are relying on their native language's tonal palette to create the target language instead of learning the new tonal palette.

The Sam Chwatt Speech Center deals with this issue to try to eliminate it.  Sam Chwatt died recently, but if you ever heard him speak, you'll be impressed by all the different regional dialects he possesses.  He worked with many actors to help them with speech in the movies.
https://www.samchwatspeechcenter.com/

[outin]

Why do you insist upon this?  The body and mind are incredibly plastic as research has shown, especially with skill learning.

The research does indicate plasticity, but it does not claim that it is limitless. Why do you insist on misinterpreting/misrepresenting the research?

[dima_76557]

By analogy, would you not consider language learning a complex task?

It may be objectively complex in terms of how the brain works, I don't know really, but it can certainly not be compared to the almost inhuman body coordination and enormous concentration you need to do even half of what the great pianists are/were capable of.

[faulty_damper]

The research does indicate plasticity, but it does not claim that it is limitless. Why do you insist on misinterpreting/misrepresenting the research?

The research doesn't say it's limitless since there hasn't been any research to test this question.  However, those that do study it have said that they don't know what the limits are, if there is one.  I agree with this assessment.  My background is in learning and memory, so I am biased to think that nearly everything can be learned and done so at a high level so I'm actually very interested in exploring this.  Many things have been wrong about this issue before, e.g. the "critical period" explanation for language learning I mentioned earlier.  I'm certain that something such as piano playing is one of those things.

[faulty_damper]

It may be objectively complex in terms of how the brain works, I don't know really, but it can certainly not be compared to the almost inhuman body coordination and enormous concentration you need to do even half of what the great pianists are/were capable of.

That's an assumption that piano playing is something more difficult to speech.  I disagree with that assumption since many people do struggle with learning a foreign language, often times never being able to fully speak fluently.  Likewise, the exact same thing can be said of piano playing.  So, "many people do struggle with learning how to play the piano, often times never being able to play fluently."

[dima_76557]

That's an assumption that piano playing is something more difficult to speech.  I disagree with that assumption since many people do struggle with learning a foreign language, often times never being able to fully speak fluently.  Likewise, the exact same thing can be said of piano playing.  So, "many people do struggle with learning how to play the piano, often times never being able to play fluently."

I think we are talking different quality standards then. Playing fluently is not even an issue; that's comparatively child's play. I am talking about high artistic requirements. It would be a slightly better comparison if we required from someone to cite a poem in a foreign language in a way that satisfies even the most critical native speakers of that language in all respects, and most importantly artistically.

[outin]

The research doesn't say it's limitless since there hasn't been any research to test this question.  However, those that do study it have said that they don't know what the limits are, if there is one.  I agree with this assessment.  My background is in learning and memory, so I am biased to think that nearly everything can be learned and done so at a high level so I'm actually very interested in exploring this.  Many things have been wrong about this issue before, e.g. the "critical period" explanation for language learning I mentioned earlier.  I'm certain that something such as piano playing is one of those things.

Why would you say there's no research to test the limits? How much do you know about research done outside US?

The limits are very obvious to those who study the differences between individuals. There's evidence that even though the structures do change with certain kind of activity, the fundamental structural differences are pretty resistent. Also with adults not all of the changes are permanent and may disappear quite soon after the extensive training period is over.

The fact that some of the theories about learning are outdated does not mean that you should assume the opposite is always true.

[faulty_damper]

@Dima,
So you're referring to musicianship, not technical issues.  Then musicianship is very much like learning to speak a foreign language, not with the voice but with the piano.  I've noticed that those that listen to classical Western music the most tend to be the best musicians.  The ones that don't listen to it at all sound pretty unexpressive even if they can play advanced repertoire.  I knew this one guy in school who listened to rock/metal and he banged on the piano.  Even his Bach was banging and harsh in tone.  He seemed only to think that the piano is to show off by playing fast and loud since that was the music he most liked to play.

[faulty_damper]

Why would you say there's no research to test the limits? How much do you know about research done outside US?

I've yet to read any research that has tested the limits of human capacity. 

The limits are very obvious to those who study the differences between individuals. There's evidence that even though the structures do change with certain kind of activity, the fundamental structural differences are pretty resistent. Also with adults not all of the changes are permanent and may disappear quite soon after the extensive training period is over.

Sorry, but those experiments didn't last more than a couple of months, probably due to budget constraints.  I'd like to see something last far longer than that, like how long a pianist usually practices.

Also, part of learning is forgetting.  Forgetting is vital for the efficient function of the brain.  It's no surprise that once a person stops doing something for long periods that they forget.  E.g. my Korean friend who came to the US to study, every time she goes back home, she says that her Korean sucks!  Now, how can that be when she was born and lived there for more than 20 years of her life before coming to the US?  It's because not speaking Korean for several months at a time causes forgetting to occur.  But after a couple of weeks back home, speaking Korean everyday, she gains her Korean back and is able to speak as she once did.

[awesom_o]

@Dima,
So you're referring to musicianship, not technical issues.  Then musicianship is very much like learning to speak a foreign language, not with the voice but with the piano.  I've noticed that those that listen to classical Western music the most tend to be the best musicians.  

I really like what you said about musicianship being like learning to speak a foreign language!

However, I have several friends who are not classically-trained and do not listen to classical music, but who are EXCELLENT musicians nonetheless.

I have plenty of other friends who immerse themselves in classical music, but aren't particularly skilled.

[outin]

I've yet to read any research that has tested the limits of human capacity. 
Sorry, but those experiments didn't last more than a couple of months, probably due to budget constraints.  I'd like to see something last far longer than that, like how long a pianist usually practices.

The limits of human capasity can be and are studied indirectly.
I've recently seen some pretty interesting results, but unfortunately nothing has been published yet. We'll just have to wait and see...

I think it's not very fruitful to argue about HOW good one can get starting at 17 compared to starting at 4. One can obviously get pretty good starting at 17 if everything else is favorable and that should be enough.

I personally do not care about living in a fantasy land, so I just don't get why one wouldn't like to think realistically about the future, but that's just me. If it helps to achieve one's goals or feel better about them to believe that anything is possible, nothing wrong with that. One will just fall down a bit more when the reality check comes  

[gregh]

What research are you referring to concerning piano playing? It is my impression that most researchers don't seem to have a clue about how much more difficult it is to play the piano artistically well than it is to simply play at a certain speed with certain indicated dynamics. The latter is indeed something almost everybody can learn with enough training but it will not impress anyone.

I suspect they know the difference. But hitting the right notes at a certain speed with certain indicated dynamics is something you can MEASURE unambiguously, something you can put a number and an error bar to. You can't measure artistry until a phrase like "the standard deviation of the artistry is..." makes sense.

[gregh]

Hollysmith, are you still there? Dang, I think she left.

I'm into my forties now, and I just started learning piano. I don't practice as often as I would like, but things slowly shape up as I work on them.

Young people do have an advantage. Besides having nimble minds, they don't know how bad they sound at first and nobody expects them to sound good, they have parents who can impose a practice schedule, and they don't really have any responsibilities except for homework and household chores.

Adults, in contrast, have busy lives and they carry the weight of the world on their shoulders. They also know what an adult at the piano is expected to sound like, and they know they don't sound like that. I suspect there's also a feeling that if a child can do it, they should be able to do it better, even though a college degree or a home business just doesn't leverage into piano performance in any way. Adult beginners get frustrated when they're not quickly up to speed with the things they want to play, and tend to quit easily. But I suspect they're still a good market to pursue, since they have more money to spend.

But they can learn piano if they get that straightened out. I am. I'm also learning a foreign language.

[dima_76557]

@Dima,
So you're referring to musicianship, not technical issues.  Then musicianship is very much like learning to speak a foreign language, not with the voice but with the piano.  I've noticed that those that listen to classical Western music the most tend to be the best musicians.  The ones that don't listen to it at all sound pretty unexpressive even if they can play advanced repertoire.  I knew this one guy in school who listened to rock/metal and he banged on the piano.  Even his Bach was banging and harsh in tone.  He seemed only to think that the piano is to show off by playing fast and loud since that was the music he most liked to play.

Music *is* a language. If it's "foreign" to you (you do not have a natural affinity with it), you'll have lots and lots of trouble and almost insurmountable barriers.

Different music styles are simply different dialects of that same language, slang if you wish. The same goes there. An older native speaker who hears youngsters talk in slang about their stuff will not understand what they are talking about. A foreigner, though, who doesn't know the general language equally well but who has affinity with the subject the youngsters are talking about may do very well in such a group.

Besides, as Gregh and I have pointed out already, if you are too self-conscious (focused on yourself and quick results instead of on the subject), you'll be in trouble. There must be lots of love, genuine interest in the subject for you to be able to learn and develop well.

If you don't understand the underlying conceptions of the target group you will be communicating with, you'll be in trouble, etc. You may know the same general language equally well, but misunderstandings between people who are "native speakers" occur all the time, especially between men and women on more "sensitive" subjects. Some people seem to have a natural ability to get everything right and avoid conflicts without too much training, and others never learn. Etc. etc.

[dima_76557]

In addition:

Try something really easy like one line: "To be or not to be, that's the question" and see if you can get accepted in a British Drama School. Not too many native speakers can do that correctly, and most won't even get to the "that's the question" part before they are kicked out of the audition. That's what GOOD piano playing is about.

[j_menz]

In addition:

Try something really easy like one line: "To be or not to be, that's the question" and see if you can get accepted in a British Drama School. Not too many native speakers can do that correctly, and most won't even get to the "that's the question" part before they are kicked out of the audition. That's what GOOD piano playing is about.

"That is the question", not "That's the question". RADA is quite picky on things like that. A bit like doing a mordant instead of a trill in a Mozart sonata. 

[dima_76557]

"That is the question", not "That's the question". RADA is quite picky on things like that. A bit like doing a mordant instead of a trill in a Mozart sonata.  

I did that on purpose to see if anyone would notice it. Actually, I wanted to write "to bee or not to bee", but that would have been too easy for everybody to notice.

[dima_76557]

Another very important addition.

I have a book here at home by Barron's called "American Accent". The book says that there are certain things Americans do with accents, melody, intonation, etc. that make them distinct from other native speakers of the English language. If you don't feel those inflections and don't use them, you will never be "one of them".

DOGS eat BONES. The nouns are more informative than the verb, so they should be stressed. They almost "eat" the word "eat".
They EAT them. Pronouns are generally not as important, not as informative as the verb (there are exceptions, of course), so they should not be stressed, etc.

Another thing I like in English is that different stress gives an entirely different meaning to the sentence you say (although in Russian, you can do the same, we have word order, cases, etc. to stress that kind of nuances):

I didn't say he stole the money. (somebody else did)
I DIDN'T say he stole the money. (you are lying)
I didn't SAY he stole the money. (I merely hinted at it)
I didn't say HE stole the money. (somebody else did it)
I didn't say he STOLE the money. (he may have borrowed it)
I didn't say he stole THE money. (rather some other money)
I didn't say the stole the MONEY. (rather the jewelry).

I am not even talking about how to pronounce certain consonants, vowels, etc. to get it all right. That is also an element in piano playing. If you play Mozart before an audience in Vienna and you are not ready for this kind of expectations about how Mozart is generally understood, you will not be "one of them" with your speedy scales, and it may be your very last concert over there.

If you are a classical pianist and you try some Jazz before an audience of Jazz lovers, you should feel their inflections very well, otherwise you will be perceived as "stiff", "cold", etc.

P.S.: If you want to say something, you have to make a point, ALWAYS.
You could say: "I love you", "It's you I love", "You're the one I love", etc. but you have to MEAN it for him/her to get the message. That's music.

[outin]

Another thing I like in English is that different stress gives an entirely different meaning to the sentence you say

All the languages I can speak have this feature to some extend, is it not so in Russian at all? That's interesting...

[dima_76557]

All the languages I can speak have this feature to some extend, is it not so in Russian at all? That's interesting...

It exists, but it doesn't come natural to do it that way. In English you almost have to do it that way, I guess, because the word order is rather strict, but in Russian you can turn around virtually all the words in any direction, and the cases will express what you want to say. The emotional content will also change depending on this or that word order. Add intonation and you get many, many ways to express yourself. Even the usage of a comma or the omission of it can give a different meaning!

P.S.: Added an image of a famous example in the Russian language.
The first sentence means: "Execute, no mercy."
The second sentence means: "Execution impossible, - mercy."

[hfmadopter]

All the languages I can speak have this feature to some extend, is it not so in Russian at all? That's interesting...

Polish is similar, my old Grand Mother from Poland never could understand contractions, for instance. Or, the same sentence with two meanings, such as stating something but with an accent or air of question vs fact. I.E. I think you are very smart vs I think you are very smart ? The second way leaving doubt. Or almost as bad to her would be "I don't think you are very smart" ? Again leaving doubt plus a contraction. Beautiful woman but that would have left her shaking her head and frowning and perhaps saying something like, you too much mix words ( because mixed she would not get either). But then again as a 7 or so year old kid at the time I knew about three Polish words and semi meaning to as many phrases. She and my dad would speak in Polish, my mother and I having no clue what they were talking about. They could have been saying we were  buffoons for all we knew !

[outin]

It exists, but it doesn't come natural to do it that way. In English you almost have to do it that way, I guess, because the word order is rather strict, but in Russian you can turn around virtually all the words in any direction, and the cases will express what you want to say. The emotional content will also change depending on this or that word order. Add intonation and you get many, many ways to express yourself. Even the usage of a comma or the omission of it can give a different meaning!

P.S.: Added an image of a famous example in the Russian language.
The first sentence means: "Execute, no mercy."
The second sentence means: "Execution impossible, - mercy."

That will be good to remember next time I'll go to Russia

My language has both features, we have the case system (maybe more than in any other language), but in speech it's also meaningful how you stress the words. I am not sure how much of this is original and how much comes from the historical influence of the Western languages.