How to actually master a piece?

[future_maestro]

     I've been playing piano for 10 years. During the last four to five years, I've learned some moderately hard classical pieces, like The Entertainer by Joplin, Beethoven's Pathtique 2nd Movement, 1st movement of Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata, and a few others. These are not on the easy list, but certainly not on the hard list.
     Although I played these pieces well, I never was actually able to "Master" them, meaning that I always would make a mistake at some point when I played them, or never got some parts exactly right.

     I would like to know how some of you performers actually "Master" a piece to the point where you can play it without making a mistake. Does it take years of practice? Or do you have to meticulously practice the song and make sure you don't learn anything the wrong way?

Thank you in advance for your responses!

[stravinskylover]

First of all, and I hate to be "that guy," but I have to say this: Those are pieces, not songs! One of the things that bugs me is when people call piano works "songs" rather than pieces. I'm kind of surprised that you've been playing for 10 years and you still call pieces "songs."

Now that that is out of the way, my thoughts on the matter. Here is my method for "mastering" a piece:
1) Play through the entire piece once
2) Practice the areas where you make the most slips
3) Play through a section of the piece at a slower tempo with metronome, and slowly increase the tempo until you reach the desired tempo. Don't increase the tempo until you can play all the notes flawlessly at the slower tempo.
4) Repeat step 4 for each section.
5) Once you have finished every section, play through the whole piece at a slightly slower tempo than your desired tempo, and work your way up to full tempo.

This method is quite a pain and it is a little boring, especially with your repertoire, but I don't think it should take a long time to be able to play the pieces you mentioned without mistakes.

[landru]

I hope you get some good replies, as this topic interests me as well. I get to 90 or 95 percent but there is always something...

But to try to answer your question. If you want to master a piece then you need to learn how to master a piece. Now this is different than learning the techniques required - if you are learning pieces at the limit of your technique then it is a bit much to also ask yourself to master the piece at the same time.

So to learn how to master a piece - then you need to have a piece that doesn't pose a problem to you - probably two, three or four levels beneath your limit. Since you aren't investing your time on technique and other problems, then you can spend it on "mastering" it. If you are like me, this is a different kind of learning. I learn the piece as a whole and can practically sight read it. But then the work of memorizing it and making the fingering rock solid makes the mastery about to happen.

I think you'll find that you'll learn stuff about how to play a piece without mistakes that you can apply to your learning of your harder stuff. Like anything, you can learn how to do almost anything, so why not "learn" how to master a piece?

[sucom]

I tend to agree with Stravinskylover that it is important to be able to play a piece flawlessly 'slowly' first and then gradually increase the speed.  I wouldn't use a metronome, however, on any piece which required areas of relaxing or give but for pieces which require smooth, fast passages, then yes, give me that metronome and I will notch it up by 5 each time until I reach my target speed.  This does require the utmost patience but the results are well worth the effort and perseverance involved.

I'm also tempted to believe that memorising a piece also helps because then you can give it your full concentration and focus as you play.

[stravinskylover]

I guess the metronome is optional, but I use it because I automatically speed up if I don't.   

[outin]

I tend to agree with Stravinskylover that it is important to be able to play a piece flawlessly 'slowly' first and then gradually increase the speed. 

I guess I am "backwards". It's much easier for me to first learn the piece in tempo and then go back to slow practice (and sometimes HS) to work on the details. I have tried the other approach but I just cannot memorize and learn with slow practice before I have the whole piece in my head in tempo. I need that mental "raw image" to attach the more complicated details to. Of course I learn the phrases and measures slowly first, but never the whole piece.

[carl_h]

I agree with Outin.
Once you have the piece memorized, you can start playing it in your head and determine exactly how you want it to sound. Before you know this, how will you master it?
So you know what you want, now you start playing it. I do this both slowly (carefully paying attention to every note and every momevent involed) and on tempo (sometimes slightly over tempo if I feel confident, but never that much faster that it will alter the technique used).
I find the slow tempo very important, if you never do this you might rely too much on muscle memory in time.
More time must be invested on the harder section but don't take the 'easy' ones for granted.

But remember, no one cares about a wrong note here and there if the music is good (I think/hope :p).

[j_menz]

But remember, no one cares about a wrong note here and there if the music is good (I think/hope :p).

Not quite true, people would rather there were no wrong notes. That said, there are far greater sins.

[outin]

Not quite true, people would rather there were no wrong notes. That said, there are far greater sins.

Do I dare to ask what those might be...

I personally cannot stand wrong notes and will try to squash any I see flying around

[j_menz]

Do I dare to ask what those might be...

Rhythmic failings, tonal failings, dynamic failings and a lack of point.

[outin]

Rhythmic failings, tonal failings, dynamic failings and a lack of point.

Oh, you meant shortcomings in one's playing, horrible sins indeed 

But the last one may be the worst of all it is very difficult to read when points are missing I would try to avoid that at all times

[carl_h]

What I actually ment by that statement: Wrong notes happen, best if they don't ofcourse!
But, don't let them influence the rest of the performance. My teacher has a student and she cares so much about it that whenever she plays a wrong note, she gets really frustrated and the performance suffers.

Rubinstein himself admitted, after a concert in Berlin in 1875, "If I could gather up all the notes that I let fall under the piano, I could give a second concert with them." People loved his playing tho!

[bronnestam]

"To play a wrong note is insignificant;
to play without passion is inexcusable."
    - Ludwig van Beethoven



Amen!