get scolded by piano teacher

[nyiregyhazi]

N, God dammit! We all get your point! Everyone gets your point. We simply don't agree with it. Why do you have to argue everything to death, until the topic is locked, or until the other ones give up? Just leave it at your argument. You're really not helping anyone. Frankly, I (I guess many others too) have stopped even reading your replies. We all know that it's gonna say "No, you're wrong. I'm right". They always do, and it's not even funny anymore.

Your reply to this one will be "Tell me one place where I say that anyone is wrong" I will then tell you to read your own replies, and you will find some tiny little detail in the thing I wrote, and claim that I'm wrong in that too. Just leave it, once.

I make no secret at all if the fact I'm saying she's wrong, so I'll respond with no such thing. Debate is when you tell someone why you feel they are wrong and give supportive reasoning. The fact I'm doing so here is not in denial. Anyone who feels I'm the one who's wrong (to say that progress comes more readily by accepting problems and tackling them head on, than by making external excuses for weaknesses and limiting how often your teacher gets to see where you struggle) is more than welcome to do just that in response to me. It's how debate works.

[pianoman53]

It's how debate works.

Clearly not! You really can't think that that's how you do it? You say, in a very rude way, that someone is wrong. When this someone replies, you constantly changes what they said, put words in their mouth, or simply answer a question no one asked. Why do you have to try to convince people, constantly? I mean, isn't it enough to tell your point, and if we idiots are to stupid to appreciate your apparent genius, you just leave it? No?

[pianoman53]

And why do you even call it debate? It's about one person's preference in how to be taught. She clearly has her personal view on that. You don't even know her, so it's amazing how you can write the things you wrote, without getting extremely ashamed of yourself!

It would be different if it would be about nuclear or something that actually mattered for many people. You're just being a douche to Outin, and tell her that she is wrong. That's not called debate, it's called being very rude.

[nyiregyhazi]

Clearly not! You really can't think that that's how you do it? You say, in a very rude way, that someone is wrong. When this someone replies, you constantly changes what they said, put words in their mouth, or simply answer a question no one asked. Why do you have to try to convince people, constantly? I mean, isn't it enough to tell your point, and if we idiots are to stupid to appreciate your apparent genius, you just leave it? No?

By all means cite what I changed. If outin is on the right path, she'll arrive a point where she can execute new music fluently and without mental blocks about how to read, first time around,-without having to make excuses for anything. Sorry to be the messenger, but I don't think that's very likely with her present attitude. We're all students here and we all have to be honest with ourselves and willing to look our problem areas right in the eye, if we want to keep making progress.

[czernyragtimepianoplayer]

I'm an 56 y/o Early Intermediate Level 'self-taught' pianist, and I had one teacher who said some strange things to me like: "Why don't you look at the piano keys more often?", You'll never learn any Bach piano (She never gave me any reason why not, I think I'm learn pieces from Notebook of Anna Magdalina very well now.), "You're not playing the 'chromatic scale correctly at all, you 3rd finger isn't flopping over properly!", etc., etc., etc....  And, she charged me $30.00/hour, so at her saying all of her rubish to me - I stopped taking lessons from her!  Remember YOU are doing the 'heiring' of the worker or rather YOUR piano teacher -- so " IF " they don't 'cut-it', then perhaps the very best thing to do is to fire YOUR teacher, and look for one that is much more better for YOU!   

[outin]

By all means cite what I changed. If outin is on the right path, she'll arrive a point where she can execute new music fluently and without mental blocks about how to read, first time around,-without having to make excuses for anything. Sorry to be the messenger, but I don't think that's very likely with her present attitude. We're all students here and we all have to be honest with ourselves and willing to look our problem areas right in the eye, if we want to keep making progress.

Although I do have my doubts about your motive being a sincere willingness to help me with your posts, let's assume so. I thank you for your extensive efforts. Unfortunately you are too misguided to come up with something really useful. I have quite recently been through a full scale testing by a professional and also had long discussions about what kind of survival strategies are recommended (as found useful by their ongoing research) to tackle the issues that do affect not only my piano playing but also certain daily life activities. I was given a lot of material about latest research as well, which I have read and got a good overview of what is known and what is still unknown about the physiological and neurological processes affecting learning with the specific type of problem I have. Many of those strategies I have already learned to employ before, otherwise I could not have had any success with university level science education.

If your advice contradicts what I have received from a professional, which one do you think I should follow? After all you have presented no credentials to convince us that you are a great teacher or an educational specialist, especially with students who have special needs. You have only given us evidence that you can yourself play the piano quite well. Being able to do and being able to teach others  how to do require different abilities and knowledge. If you really expect me to take your word over someone who specializes in exactly the kind of problems I have, you will have to come up with something much more substantial than what you have so far. I suggest you stop and think before you start writing the next long post: Do I really have anything new to say or back up my claims?

[brogers70]

Although I do have my doubts about your motive being a sincere willingness to help me with your posts,

Me too. And although this is almost certainly obvious to you, you are not under the slightest obligation to justify yourself to nyiregyhazi. I think it's pretty clear to lookers-on what's going on here and you have nothing you need to prove to anybody. There are lots of generous, helpful people here who give good advice without a side order of "And how wrong you are!".

[nyiregyhazi]

Although I do have my doubts about your motive being a sincere willingness to help me with your posts, let's assume so. I thank you for your extensive efforts. Unfortunately you are too misguided to come up with something really useful. I have quite recently been through a full scale testing by a professional and also had long discussions about what kind of survival strategies are recommended (as found useful by their ongoing research) to tackle the issues that do affect not only my piano playing but also certain daily life activities. I was given a lot of material about latest research as well, which I have read and got a good overview of what is known and what is still unknown about the physiological and neurological processes affecting learning with the specific type of problem I have. Many of those strategies I have already learned to employ before, otherwise I could not have had any success with university level science education.

If your advice contradicts what I have received from a professional, which one do you think I should follow? After all you have presented no credentials to convince us that you are a great teacher or an educational specialist, especially with students who have special needs. You have only given us evidence that you can yourself play the piano quite well. Being able to do and being able to teach others  how to do require different abilities and knowledge. If you really expect me to take your word over someone who specializes in exactly the kind of problems I have, you will have to come up with something much more substantial than what you have so far. I suggest you stop and think before you start writing the next long post: Do I really have anything new to say or back up my claims?

Are these scientists experts on what makes for reliable success in instrumental skills? I'm not unsympathetic to special needs, but the problem is that the process by which skills are acquired doesn't make allowances for special needs. It's still the case that if you go slow enough to get things clear and precise, you learn fast. Whereas if you allow concentration to lapse and go wrong (which means that guessing has occurred by definition) you develop unclear neural pathways that do not become reliable. Labelling yourself by a condition doesn't change that. It only makes it all the more important to learn to techniques to get things right first time. Tapping each key before sounding it is valuable because you learn to know BEFORE the mistake occurred and thus prevent confusion at source.

[nyiregyhazi]

Also, do you forget how to read words from a page fluently if someone is watching? If so, there are genuine issues. Assuming not, however, it's just a matter of not having acquired a skillset to the level to make it effortless in situations both with and without pressure. Labelling yourself as someone who is expected to struggle and get stuff wrong is a self fulfilling prophecy. If you develop the techniques to avoid guesswork and to be slow and clear enough to expect accuracy first time around every time (no matter how slow you go and no matter who is watching) there will be massive improvement. Learning difficulties make it more important to focus on always having clear and precisely understood intentions, not less so. You can either label yourself as someone who is disadvantaged (and blame mistakes on that, rather than on the clarity of your approach). Or you can ignore those issues and focus on the fact that guesswork is poisonous to progress and do every single thing within your power to improve on your ability to avoid it (both in unpressured and pressured situations alike).

[outin]

Also, do you forget how to read words from a page fluently if someone is watching? If so, there are genuine issues. Assuming not, however, it's just a matter of not having acquired a skillset to the level to make it effortless in situations both with and without pressure.

I am not dyslexic and my reading and writing skills are way above average, so I don't see how my reading of words from a page would in any way be relevant here?

[outin]

Me too. And although this is almost certainly obvious to you, you are not under the slightest obligation to justify yourself to nyiregyhazi. I think it's pretty clear to lookers-on what's going on here and you have nothing you need to prove to anybody. There are lots of generous, helpful people here who give good advice without a side order of "And how wrong you are!".

I know...I am just a bit too eager in my desire to educate people

[outin]

Are these scientists experts on what makes for reliable success in instrumental skills? I'm not unsympathetic to special needs, but the problem is that the process by which skills are acquired doesn't make allowances for special needs. It's still the case that if you go slow enough to get things clear and precise, you learn fast. Whereas if you allow concentration to lapse and go wrong (which means that guessing has occurred by definition) you develop unclear neural pathways that do not become reliable. Labelling yourself by a condition doesn't change that. It only makes it all the more important to learn to techniques to get things right first time. Tapping each key before sounding it is valuable because you learn to know BEFORE the mistake occurred and thus prevent confusion at source.

Note reading as a specific problem area was also discussed in some of the material I got. They may not be experts on instrumental skills, but they are experts in learning and neuropsychology.

Of course one has to go slow. Did I ever say one shouldn't? Or said it's ok to make mistakes?

You just don't know what you are talking about when you say "allow concentration to lapse and go wrong". If it was only a question of allowing something or not, there would hardly be any problem at all. I am not into labelling, I am just being practical.

"the process by which skills are acquired doesn't make allowances for special needs"
You are making an assumption that you cannot in any way back up by facts. Where did you get the idea that there is only one way to acquire such complicated skills as playing the piano? The playing itself at the finest level may not accept allowances, but the process certainly does. Otherwise I wouldn't have learned what I have.

[nyiregyhazi]

I am not dyslexic and my reading and writing skills are way above average, so I don't see how my reading of words from a page would in any way be relevant here?

If concentration issues do not affect your ability to accurately read words straight off, why blame them for your lesser ability to read music straight off? Clearly the really significant issue is how effectively you've developed the relevant skill set.

[nyiregyhazi]

Note reading as a specific problem area was also discussed in some of the material I got. They may not be experts on instrumental skills, but they are experts in learning and neuropsychology.

Of course one has to go slow. Did I ever say one shouldn't? Or said it's ok to make mistakes?

You just don't know what you are talking about when you say "allow concentration to lapse and go wrong". If it was only a question of allowing something or not, there would hardly be any problem at all. I am not into labelling, I am just being practical.

Practicality is what I'm speaking of. When people say every note out loud and state the interval before playing it and then tap the relevant key with the right finger before sounding it, they don't go wrong.  People who have blocks haven't spent enough time processing enough detail to the full to be able to reliably process details unconsciously- the same as reading and processing words will be. Getting things right should be possible whether someone is watching or not. Concentration is not a vague abstract thing. It's a matter of how specifically we prepare ourselves to get things right first time and above all to know that it will indeed be right before moving. You said you have blocks in lessons if trying to read new stuff (so it's certainly not a wild leap to deduce that you struggle to do things right first time, without guesswork). I'm just telling you straight up that if you don't the same blocks when reading English text, that simply means there are skills which are under developed but which can be improved on and that any concentration issues are secondary to issues of approach. Everyone is capable of improving their procedures, when they are willing to be open to what they can change for the better- so fingers are properly linked up to the brain at all times. At this point, it is no more possible to have a temporary block on how to read notes than on how to read words. A block means the internal procedures need to be urgently improved on.

If I'm wrong, don't bother with a written defence. Just prove me wrong by evolving into a fantastically reliable reader who doesn't have blocks.

[outin]

If concentration issues do not affect your ability to accurately read words straight off, why blame them for your lesser ability to read music straight off? Clearly the really significant issue is how effectively you've developed the relevant skill set.

Concentration issues affect my ability to read notes because of the specific problems I have with note reading that I do not have with text reading. What part of that do you not understand?

[outin]

I'm just telling you straight up that if you don't the same blocks when reading English text, that simply means there are skills which are under developed but which can be improved on and that any concentration issues are secondary to issues of approach.

You are wrong because you forget one major difference between text and notation. Text is one dimensional, there's hardly any need for spatial recognition. Notation has an extra dimension, and for someone who has a problem with spatial recognition and numeral processing instead of form recognition this is the key difference. The concentration issues are not the cause of the problems, but they enhance them. Which I'm sure I already told you many posts ago...

[brogers70]

I know...I am just a bit too eager in my desire to educate people

My wife is a teacher and has worked with students with learning disabilities. One of the really frustrating things for the older ones is to have spent years with ignorant (sometimes well-meaning, sometimes not) people telling them "Oh, you're really smart, you just have to try harder."

[outin]

If I'm wrong, don't bother with a written defence. Just prove me wrong by evolving into a fantastically reliable reader who doesn't have blocks.

If I did I would indeed prove you right and myself wrong. Which in this case would only make me really happy. I'm a realist though.

[outin]

When people say every note out loud and state the interval before playing it and then tap the relevant key with the right finger before sounding it, they don't go wrong.

Of course they can go wrong. They can easily say the wrong note.

[louispodesta]

I'm an adult piano learner and just started to learn piano from a professional teacher. Previously I played a little bit electrical piano, which is totally different.  I'm really bad at sight reading and keep making mistakes in class with the new piece, which makes my teacher really mad at me and stop me many times. I feel sad about it. Is it common? and what's the effective way to improve my sight reading?

When I was young, I could memorize any new piece for my next lesson, so I never learned how to properly sight read.  When I was in music school, the very best accompanist in the U.S. could not teach me how to read.

So, at the age of 50, I made up my mind that I could do it, and I did.  Mind you, I am not a great sight reader, but I improved well enough to read through 44 piano concertos in 5 years.

Therefore, you need to realize that the physical skill of basic sight reading is exactly the same as learning how to type.  It is familiarity with the keyboard, so you can get around without looking down.

The first book you get is "You Can Sight Read Vol.I," by Lorina Havill who taught it at Juilliard for years.  It has exercises where you play single notes, double notes, triads, and then seventh chords up and down the piano in octave sections.  You start out as slow as you can in order to obtain accuracy.  Even though it doesn't seem possible at first, if you practice this every day for just a few minutes, you eventually get to where you can feel your way around.

Next, there is a ten book series entitled "Four Star Sight Reading and Ear Tests, Daily Exercises For Piano Students," by Boris Berlin.  These are very short paperback books that contain very short pieces at various levels of sight reading.  They also have sight singing drills and rhythmic practice sections, which are essential to sight reading.  I recommend that you get volumes 7-10.  They are very inexpensive.

Set the metronome at the lowest possible setting, and then read for about 20 minutes a day, and no more.  If you go more than that, it will turn into drudgery and you will hate it.  A great idea is start every practice session by practicing your sight reading.

After you have read through to volume 10 at a slow and steady speed, then you go back to volume number seven, slightly increase the tempo, and then read through to volume 10.  This is the text they have used at the Royal College of Music forever because it works!

In about a year or two, your sight reading will have improved by about 300%.  A good basic yardstick is being able to sight read through Mozart or Haydn piano sonatas at a moderate tempo.  From there, you can decide on whether you want to study accompanying and increase your ability accordingly.

So, practice the first book to develop your ability to get around the keyboard without looking down, and then the Four Star series to practice actual reading.

Good luck to you, and remember, if I could do it, anybody can do it.

[outin]

My wife is a teacher and has worked with students with learning disabilities. One of the really frustrating things for the older ones is to have spent years with ignorant (sometimes well-meaning, sometimes not) people telling them "Oh, you're really smart, you just have to try harder."

It must be really frustrating. I was fortunate not to really fall behind on anything. I did change my career plans though because I realized it's not worth doing so much extra work with things that come automatically to others.

Don't worry, these discussions with N are like



Most damage will be to the environment  
 

[nyiregyhazi]

Of course they can go wrong. They can easily say the wrong note.

That's a guess ie a direct contravention of everything I'm saying is important for deep learning to occur. The reason people need both relative and absolute reading skills is that you cannot go wrong without knowing when you have two ways of calculating a note. When you read a note both individually and by interval compared to other notes, error is exposed by contradiction. Only by being too one sided do mistakes go by unnoticed. As I said, this poisons the mind as it never gets to make associations with enough reliable accuracy for certainty to develop as to what means what. The brain is filled with unclear and even inaccurate associations. This is exactly why those who have learning difficulties must be even more rigorous about avoiding guesses and not more forgiving. As a teacher that doesn't mean I'd be stricter on someone who struggles, but for an adult in the situation there are ways within the power of the individual to tell themself that guesses will never do, if they want to go as far as possible. A foolproof method that doesn't give false positives and an attitude of not settling for anything less than certainty is needed for learning to sink in.

[outin]

That's a guess ie a direct contravention of everything I'm saying is important for deep learning to occur. The reason people need both relative and absolute reading skills is that you cannot go wrong without knowing when you have two ways of calculating a note. When you read a note both individually and by interval compared to other notes, error is exposed by contradiction. Only by being too one sided do mistakes go by unnoticed. As I said, this poisons the mind as it never gets to make associations with enough reliable accuracy for certainty to develop as to what means what. The brain is filled with unclear and even inaccurate associations. This is exactly why those who have learning difficulties must be even more rigorous about avoiding guesses and not more forgiving. As a teacher that doesn't mean I'd be stricter on someone who struggles, but for an adult in the situation there are ways within the power of the individual to tell themself that guesses will never do, if they want to go as far as possible. A foolproof method that doesn't give false positives and an attitude of not settling for anything less than certainty is needed for learning to sink in.

Funny that you would choose the expression "calculate a note". That describes quite well what is done and also explains why identification of notes is so difficult to certain individuals. Calculating twice does not necessarily make it any more secure or easy than calculating once, when the calculation is the source of the problems. A "normal" person would see a contradiction and that's what you are counting on. But it actually doesn't always work that way. Sometimes it may, but not in a way that would be secure and consistent.

Besides, try calculating something that is jumping up and down and changing places

You still haven't presented ANY facts or credentials that would back up your basic claims. What you have are strong beliefs. People have all kinds of beliefs and I'm fine with that. People who run on beliefs can usually not be convinced no matter how many facts you give them.

[nyiregyhazi]

Funny that you would choose the expression "calculate a note". That describes quite well what is done and also explains why identification of notes is so difficult to certain individuals. Calculating twice does not necessarily make it any more secure or easy than calculating once, when the calculation is the source of the problems. A "normal" person would see a contradiction and that's what you are counting on. But it actually doesn't always work that way. Sometimes it may, but not in a way that would be secure and consistent.

You still haven't presented ANY facts or credentials that would back up your basic claims. What you have are strong beliefs. People have all kinds of beliefs and I'm fine with that. People who run on beliefs can usually not be convinced no matter how many facts you give them.

How much evidence does it require to think that staring at a B under the radical misapprehension that's it's an F would cause the brain to learn incorrect pathways? You'd sooner doubt the obvious that ask whether there's a perfectly credible way to do better? Look at how hard it is for a student to unlearn a bad fingering that has been repeated. If someone spends any time looking at a note and failing to know they have misunderstood the meaning, they are actively filling their brain with incorrect beliefs. These are not easy to go back and eradicate. It's scarcely different to starting a child's first maths lessons by telling him that two plus two is five.

If you really want to think that a disability is in an impossibility, then limit yourself. That's a closed door, not an opening. However, anyone who can sometimes read notes correctly can learn to always read notes correctly. The issue is whether you have adequately cross-referenced intervals and absolutes and whether you have learned a totally infallible method for understanding the difference between certainty and suspicion as to what a note might be. If you get something wrong, you've guessed. It may not be as easy for you to be sure as it is some people, bit you can learn your personal limits and learn never to guess. From there you'll read with less effort. Even speaking as a good reader, it's not unknown for me to physically tap each ledger line with a pencil to check an extremely high note . if that's what it takes, that's what I do. Is anyone actually incapable of counting lines and spaces correctly to determine an interval? No, they get it wrong because it was just a guess. Success stories are not based on labelling yourself as incapable and prone to errors but upon doing whatever it takes not to make errors, when learning the basics. There is always a way to be sure. That's where meaningful progress begins. Look for reasons to think that you can learn to do better via more precise and reliable methods. Not ways to make a self fulfilling prophecy that you can't.

[outin]

How much evidence does it require to think that staring at a B under the radical misapprehension that's it's an F would cause the brain to learn incorrect pathways? You'd sooner doubt the obvious that ask whether there's a perfectly credible way to do better? Look at how hard it is for a student to unlearn a bad fingering that has been repeated.

Actually it has never been difficult at all for me. I do that all the time with little trouble. Even after playing a section for weeks I can easily change the fingering. But I do know how hard it normally is, so I don't say that you are wrong, only that what applies to you and your students does not apply to me.

The problem here is that you cannot see beyond what is obvious to you. It is probably almost impossible to understand the implications of a very different brain function without either having one yourself or doing a lot of research. A good analogy would be that it's impossible to understand quantum physics without first letting go of the common principles of mechanism.

[nyiregyhazi]

Actually it has never been difficult at all for me. I do that all the time with little trouble. Even after playing a section for weeks I can easily change the fingering. But I do know how hard it normally is, so I don't say that you are wrong, only that what applies to you and your students does not apply to me.

The problem here is that you cannot see beyond what is obvious to you. It is probablyk almost impossible to understand the implications of a very different brain function without either having one yourself or doing a lot of research. A good analogy would be that it's impossible to understand quantum physics without first letting go of the common principles of mechanism.

How many notes per second? I'd wait until you can change a prelearned fingering while tearing through ten or more notes per second before proclaiming yourself immune to the pitfalls of having to unlearn faults., it's easy to choose a new fingering if you have made a conscious decision to put your mind to it and gone slow. It's when instincts must be called on that prelearned pathways reemerge. In reading the problem is that you have to know what the note is to decide to overrule a prelearned expectation (which makes for a catch 22 where you must be able to read the note correctly to overrule the habit of reading it wrongly). Even in easy pieces, good readers process huge amounts of information simultaneously which demands perfect instincts rather than suppression of wrong ones. That is exactly what never comes to exist when you allow guesses during the basic ground work.

[outin]

How many notes per second? I'd wait until you can change a prelearned fingering while tearing through ten or more notes per second before proclaiming yourself immune to the pitfalls of having to unlearn faults., it's easy to choose a new fingering if you have made a conscious decision to put your mind to it and gone slow. It's when instincts must be called on that prelearned pathways reemerge. In reading the problem is that you have to know what the note is to decide to overrule a prelearned expectation (which makes for a catch 22 where you must be able to read the note correctly to overrule the habit of reading it wrongly). Even in easy pieces, good readers process Hu amounts of information simultaneously which demands perfect instincts. That is exactly what never comes to exist when you allowable guesses during the basic ground work.

Aren't you being a bit childish now? You clearly witness this difficulty of changing fingerings in your students in much lesser speeds. I don't have to wait until I play 100 notes per second no more than you need to wait until you encounter a rare student that contradicts your ideas. Indeed I may never play 100 notes per second, and wouldn't really mind if I never do. Maybe you should wait until you are a bit older and wiser before setting your beliefs in stone.

This ability/disability of not developing those instincts you describe by repetition has it's downside of course. But I don't consider what I have a great disability or dwell in my problems, considering I have no way of knowing whether some of the things I am exceptionally good at are explained by the same imbalance of my brain. Just like blind people have exceptional hearing skills.

It's just good to know what I'm up against and have realistic expectations. It's a limiting factor in sight reading, slowing me down and causing mistakes that are not explained by the difficulty of the score or lack of practice or knowledge. Sometimes any sight reading is impossible. But I can still read well enough to learn my pieces correctly without my teacher having to make corrections on the notes when we start working on something together. I am also not going to change the ways I practice, especially not now that I have started to progress really well, just because some dude thinks he knows more than I do about something I clearly have much more knowledge and experience of.

[nyiregyhazi]

Aren't you being a bit childish now? You clearly witness this difficulty of changing fingerings in your students in much lesser speeds. I don't have to wait until I play 100 notes per second no more than you need to wait until you encounter a rare student that contradicts your ideas. Indeed I may never play 100 notes per second, and wouldn't really mind if I never do. Maybe you should wait until you are a bit older and wiser before setting your beliefs in stone.

This ability/disability of not developing those instincts you describe by repetition has it's downside of course. But I don't consider what I have a great disability or dwell in my problems, considering I have no way of knowing whether some of the things I am exceptionally good at are explained by the same imbalance of my brain. Just like blind people have exceptional hearing skills.

It's just good to know what I'm up against and have realistic expectations. It's a limiting factor in sight reading, slowing me down and causing mistakes that are not explained by the difficulty of the score or lack of practice or knowledge. Sometimes any sight reading is impossible. But I can still read well enough to learn my pieces correctly without my teacher having to make corrections on the notes when we start working on something together. I am also not going to change the ways I practice, especially not now that I have started to progress really well, just because some dude thinks he knows more than I do about something I clearly have much more knowledge and experience of.

.

There's no such thing as an unexplained mistake unless going fast. Unexplained mistakes are the result of guesses or incorrectly formed mental associations that lead to wrongly interpreted notes. The fact that every note can be a choice and not a necessity is why you can change fingerings. Evidently the irony is lost on you, but you need the experience to be tackling demands that cannot be done without dependence on acquired instincts to realise why instincts are hard to change. The problem in students is that they expect another go to work. Anyone can choose what finger to take by going slow and deliberately enough, so as to override instinct (it's just that this no longer works at speed where predeveloped instinct has to be there for success) . Just the same as anyone can learn not to guess notes by going slowly and deliberately enough. The difference between learning difficulties and a standard brain is how slow that needs to be.

[pianoman53]

.

There's no such thing as an unexplained mistake unless going fast. Unexplained mistakes are the result of guesses or incorrectly formed mental associations that lead to wrongly interpreted notes. The fact that every note can be a choice and not a necessity is why you can change fingerings. Evidently the irony is lost on you, but you need the experience to be tackling demands that cannot be done without dependence on acquired instincts to realise why instincts are hard to change. The problem in students is that they expect another go to work. Anyone can choose what finger to take by going slow and deliberately enough, so as to override instinct (it's just that this no longer works at speed where predeveloped instinct has to be there for success) . Just the same as anyone can learn not to guess notes by going slowly and deliberately enough. The difference between learning difficulties and a standard brain is how slow that needs to be.

Now I'm almost 100% certain that you're trolling. Just leave it! It's bloody annoying

[nyiregyhazi]

Now I'm almost 100% certain that you're trolling. Just leave it! It's bloody annoying

If you're annoyed don't read my posts. But pointing out that mistakes are always subject to will and that anyone can learn to self verify (if they are familiar enough with the right techniques) enough to prevent them at source is hardly trolling. If you offered a pianist a hundred pounds per right note and said you'd dock them two thousand pounds per error, very few pianists would make a loss, if they were allowed to take as much time as they wanted. If pianists take an equivalent amount of care when forming the preliminary associations, they very rarely sincerely misread a note. Mistakes come from "having a go". Allow that early on, and you'll probably never come to read easily and with certainty - because your brain is loaded with memories of misconceptions about what means what.

Anyone who doesn't think that taking the time to observe when you don't feel prepared for the note (and stopping to verify it by whatever methodology will give certainty) will improve reading skills (at all levels) should simply take the time to try it, before deciding that ease of reading is beyond them.

[outin]

The difference between learning difficulties and a standard brain is how slow that needs to be.

It's a bit hard to believe you seriously wrote that? Just like people with dementia just need to want to remember, and if they go slow enough, they will?

But it certainly opened my eyes to the level of ignorance you have and explains much. I understand now that I have expected too much from you. It is probably not at all a case of you not willing to understand, you simply don't have the basic knowledge and/or imaginative abilities to do so. I don't even think it will help if you take your own advice and just read my posts slower...

[pianoman53]

If you're annoyed don't read my posts. But pointing out that mistakes are always subject to will and that anyone can learn to self verify (if they are familiar enough with the right techniques) enough to prevent them at source is hardly trolling. If you offered a pianist a hundred pounds per right note and said you'd dock them two thousand pounds per error, very few pianists would make a loss, if they were allowed to take as much time as they wanted. If pianists take an equivalent amount of care when forming the preliminary associations, they very rarely sincerely misread a note. Mistakes come from "having a go". Allow that early on, and you'll probably never come to read easily and with certainty - because your brain is loaded with memories of misconceptions about what means what.

Anyone who doesn't think that taking the time to observe when you don't feel prepared for the note (and stopping to verify it by whatever methodology will give certainty) will improve reading skills (at all levels) should simply take the time to try it, before deciding that ease of reading is beyond them.

So just read my post slower, and you'll understand what I mean.

[nyiregyhazi]

It's a bit hard to believe you seriously wrote that? Just like people with dementia just need to want to remember, and if they go slow enough, they will?

But it certainly opened my eyes to the level of ignorance you have and explains much. I understand now that I have expected too much from you. It is probably not at all a case of you not willing to understand, you simply don't have the basic knowledge and/or imaginative abilities to do so. I don't even think it will help if you take your own advice and just read my posts slower...

Dementia is not a relevant comparison unless that's very specifically what we are referring  to here. Anyoe who knows at least one note on the stave (and we'd really tend to hope that a pianist knew the last note they played) and who can count lines or spaces can get a note right first time. If they didn't they guessed it - which is the real problem behind the cycle of false positives. When someone doesn't know a note, you should always be capable of knowing that you don't know. Mental verifications are what prevent errors and cement ability to know with certainty.

I'm not saying it's as easy as for people who don't have issues but it's never the case that errors are necessary and never the case that people who struggle are going to be anything but confused by anything but consistent information. It's a simple choice as to whether you blame a condition or whether you hold yourself accountable for recognising when you're not sure about a note - and thus give your brain the opportunity to get used to consistent associations. People who do well ask what it's in their power to do better, not how much they can refuse to be accountable to themself for. Paralympics medal winner don't get there by asking what they can blame but what they can do to succeed.

[bernadette60614]

If you look back at any of my prior postings, you'll see that I complained incessantly about my piano teacher for months.  But, over time I have realized:  If I was a great pianist, I wouldn't need a teacher!

A teacher's job is to teach you. And, he/she doesn't teach you anything by sitting passively by mentally planning dinner while you play a piece.  He/she is teaching when he/she corrects you....it isn't scolding, it is pointing out areas in which you need to focus to make your practicing better.

I have long, fleet fingers and a terrific sight reader.  Fast planning, rapid sight reading are my strengths. I don't need to work on those.  However, I hate to count, my tempo in one page of music seems to be just random. So,my teacher is constantly correcting my counting and pushing me to reach a steadier, most consistent tempo.

Our teachers are paying attention and making us better.  I, too, am an adult...and I've been reasonably successful professionally and personally and it was humiliating at first for me to be "scolded", but I've gone from Faber's Adult Piano Adventures to Schubert Impromtus under this teacher's guidance.  If not for her, I'd still be bashing around on the piano rather than playing it!

[bernadette60614]

Also, when I get nervous I tend to get anxious fingers...they tremble, my mind seems to go blank.

What helps me:  Slow it down!  Yes, slow it down. 

What also helps me:  Before you start to play the piece, look at the key signature, look at the sharps/flats/naturals and get a general sense of the scheme of the piece.  If you start that first measure knowing that every F, e.g., is sharp then fix that in your mind before your fingers hit the keyboard.

A lot of this is just learning how to learn.  Not something which I think is taught enough in any arena.

[bernadette60614]

Based upon my experience, here's what helped me:

Buy a book of simple piano pieces..something you enjoy, but something you feel reasonably confident sight reading.

Devote 10 minutes of each of your practice session per day (I always do this at the end) and just play the piece..don't worry about technique, just play it. 

It sounds to me as if your teacher is asking you to sight read a new piece and under that pressure and the self-described inability to read notes correctly first time round, you're being corrected. So just try it at home when you don't feel pressure!

I think that learning how to play new pieces under some pressure is a skill which can be practiced like any other.

GL! 

[happygela]

I think I have improved a lot after this post and developed a good relationship with my teacher. Although still under much pressure every class, I seem to get used to it and don't feel nervous any longer playing in front of him or even anyone else. This is good actually. But still, sometimes he can still be very mad at me when I just can't reach his standards.

[faa2010]

I think I have improved a lot after this post and developed a good relationship with my teacher. Although still under much pressure every class, I seem to get used to it and don't feel nervous any longer playing in front of him or even anyone else. This is good actually. But still, sometimes he can still be very mad at me when I just can't reach his standards.

I understand you. I have dealt with many type of teachers during my entire life, and I think that as long as he doesn't discourage you (intentionally or not), emotionally traumatizes you or has other personal intentions (ie, only get paid while he is nice and deceives you that you are progressing while in the reality you haven't), everything should be fine.

Sometimes in this kind of cases everyone is looking who is to blame: the teacher, the student. But it could be that both behavioral patterns don't match, so there is no chemistry and the learning process won't be as one wants.

Just one question, does he shout at you and tells you things like "you shouldn't continue playing because it is an insult", "even a kid can understand this", "the person who taught you before was not a professional, he/she is only a teacher of kinder or elementary" or "my time is only worth for people who can have a bright future in a music career"?

In case that kind of things happens, then it is better to start looking for someone else. Please don't do the same mistake as me by tolerating that ill behavior.