Why do scales and arpeggios?

[m1469]

 

"But, Mommy, why do I need to do scales and arpeggios?"

Because it's sooo good for your technique!

"Cool!  How?"

Because ... they are in music!

"Cool!  Why don't I just play those in the music then?"

Because ... uh ... well ... there is major and minor tonalities everywhere!

"Ohhhhh ..." ....   ....  "Mom, what is those?"

Uh ... hmmm ... well, just do them!  OK?  

"But why?"

Stop arguing with me, I am the Mother!  

"OK."      *this is sooo dumb.  I hate piano*

[goldentone]

There's the reason to get Hanon, baby.

[m1469]

Parent to teacher:

"Why aren't you teaching my child scales and arpeggios?"

Because we are learning important skills in other ways right now.

"But when I took piano lessons when I was 7, I had to do them and they are VERY important.  What kind of teacher are you??"

The kind with a variety of goals for your child.

"Well, my child should also be counting while she plays scales and arpeggios.  I know, because I play the piano a little bit."

............


"Teacher, Mommy told me I have to practice scales and arpeggios, while counting, everyday before I play what you gave me.  And then I ran out of time to work on the stuff you gave me because of dinner!"

 

[gyzzzmo]

Children who listen too much to their parents should get a proper beating.

[nyiregyhazi]

Parent to teacher:

"Why aren't you teaching my child scales and arpeggios?"

Because we are learning important skills in other ways right now.

"But when I took piano lessons when I was 7, I had to do them and they are VERY important.  What kind of teacher are you??"

The kind with a variety of goals for your child.

"Well, my child should also be counting while she plays scales and arpeggios.  I know, because I play the piano a little bit."

............


"Teacher, Mommy told me I have to practice scales and arpeggios, while counting, everyday before I play what you gave me.  And then I ran out of time to work on the stuff you gave me because of dinner!"

 

I'm with the parent, sorry. For them not to matter you have to able to play them. If they take up time, it will take up even more time still when they inevitably turn up in pieces and have to be taught from scratch. Far better to know the basic movements in advance, rather than get held up by inability to do them in pieces.

[larrys]

Great video, I like that guy!

[kevin69]

For me, a very important part of learning is knowing why you are doing things.
So until you know why you are doing scales, i wouldn't do them.

That said, before starting a new piece i like to play scales in that key for a while so that i get a feel for the key the piece is, both in terms of how the key sounds and getting my fingers used to the key.

[anima55]

For me, a very important part of learning is knowing why you are doing things.
So until you know why you are doing scales, i wouldn't do them.

I agree that knowing why you do things can be helpful.  However, when it comes to scales and arpeggios, I would suggest practising them whether you know why they're useful or not because then you will find them well under your hands by the time you come to realise how useful they are to practise.

[m1469]

I agree that knowing why you do things can be helpful.  However, when it comes to scales and arpeggios, I would suggest practising them whether you know why they're useful or not because then you will find them well under your hands by the time you come to realise how useful they are to practise.

 

It is true that the actual benefits of playing scales and arpeggios (or anything, for that matter) are not simply an intellectual idea that can be communicated with words - if the actual benefits could be transferred merely with words and logic, there would be no reason or need to actually play.  That is true for trying to explain the benefits of doing anything at all; experiencing the benefits occurs by actually doing it, and then in being aware and conscious of what you are doing.  

From my experience, the main benefits from playing scales and arpeggios have less to do with being capable of playing scales and arpeggios, and more to do with understanding the instrument and my mind and body in relationship to it, in a systematic and transferable way.

[kevin69]

I agree that knowing why you do things can be helpful.  However, when it comes to scales and arpeggios, I would suggest practising them whether you know why they're useful or not because then you will find them well under your hands by the time you come to realise how useful they are to practise.

I can see that there would be benefits, but i also know that personally i will quickly lose motivation to practice anything that i don't have a good understanding of the reasons for. I know that i work much better for having specific goals in mind.

"Practice scales so that all the notes have the same volume".
"Practise scales so that all the notes have exactly the same length".
"Practise scales so that you can play softly with one hand and loudly with the other".

These are all specific enough to work well for me.

"Practise scales for better tone."
"Practise scales for hand independence."
"practise scales for better control."

These are all too vague for me.
I've found that i need goals in my practice, and the SMART criteria of goals work very well for me, and number one is being specific.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMART_criteria

[faulty_damper]

When my first teacher instructed me to learn scales and arpeggios, I learned them all.  However, I played them in a way that was detrimental due to bad movements which resulted in physical discomfort and muscle tension.  In fact, the way I naturally moved my arms and fingers to play them, she told me it was wrong.  Several years later, I learned that it was she who was wrong.  The natural tendency for the elbow to swing out is normal and facilitates playing both scales and arpeggios.

So, if you learn them with bad technique, they are more harmful than good.

[fleetfingers]

I can see that there would be benefits, but i also know that personally i will quickly lose motivation to practice anything that i don't have a good understanding of the reasons for. I know that i work much better for having specific goals in mind.

"Practice scales so that all the notes have the same volume".
"Practise scales so that all the notes have exactly the same length".
"Practise scales so that you can play softly with one hand and loudly with the other".

These are all specific enough to work well for me.

"Practise scales for better tone."
"Practise scales for hand independence."
"practise scales for better control."

These are all too vague for me.
I've found that i need goals in my practice, and the SMART criteria of goals work very well for me, and number one is being specific.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMART_criteria

I like this thought...good ideas.

Aside from technique, a good reason to play scales and arpeggios is to become familiar with all of the different keys, what they look and feel like when played, and how they relate to each other in terms of transposition.

[outin]

I never could feel the benefits of playing scales before I actually learned to play some of them better without struggling to remember the fingerings all the time. Now I can feel the difference if I haven't done them for some time. So I guess in the beginning one just does it because "it is good for you". But I don't think they are very useful unless one learns to do them in the right way...which doesn't seem to be quite the same for every teacher either 

[gregh]

I don't think you'd have to convince a jazz player to practice his scales and arpeggios. When his turn at improv comes around, he has to know his key and his changes without having to think about it.

[awesom_o]

I don't think you'd have to convince a jazz player to practice his scales and arpeggios.

Nor would you have to convince an actual classical player. Classical players love to improvise as well!

[awesom_o]

"Practise scales for better tone."
"Practise scales for hand independence."
"practise scales for better control."

These are all too vague for me.
I've found that i need goals in my practice, and the SMART criteria of goals work very well for me, and number one is being specific.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMART_criteria

One of your major goals should be to familiarize yourself with all key signatures to the extent that you are equally comfortable playing in any key.

If you are not equally comfortable playing in all keys, it's going to show in the quality of your interpretations!

[nyiregyhazi]

I never could feel the benefits of playing scales before I actually learned to play some of them better without struggling to remember the fingerings all the time. Now I can feel the difference if I haven't done them for some time. So I guess in the beginning one just does it because "it is good for you". But I don't think they are very useful unless one learns to do them in the right way...which doesn't seem to be quite the same for every teacher either  

I'd have thought it ought to be pretty self-evident that there is no benefit to doing scales without both a concrete conception of the fingering and the ability to reliably expect the execution of the fingers to match up to the conception. Generic finger agility can be attained more easily in hanon. What scales are supposed to do is check the ability to both conceive and execute appropriate fingerings- testing mental organisation of hand positions. Doing something badly wrong is never productive. In fairness though, scales are usually taught poorly- via reams of numbers for every note. When properly organised, based not on excessive numbers of details but rather on small numbers of significant points, they are extraordinarily useful. The primary benefits are not just of linking fingers to particular keys but of learning how to mentally organise big chunks that assimilate many details into a single feeling of adjustment (but one that can be reliably mentally observed and verified- it's not an abstract "feeling" where you just hope physical habits don't run off the rails!) . This carries into all music, not just music that is fingered identically to standard scales. You can't deal with difficult music either by feel alone or by trying to think about every finger. You need to root yourself both mentally and physically around a certain number of "anchor" notes around which large chunks of fingers are fully prepared, or fingering in general will always be erratic.

See here for info on how to properly condense fingering into the smallest amount of necessary information required for certainty.

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


 A student should never approach scales by trying to read off or memorise heaps of finger numbers. You need a concrete conception of the significant turning points before you play a single note and you need to avoid wasting too much attention on anything that simply amounts to walking along consecutive fingers. If anything goes wrong, the plan was either non-existent, or bogged down by too many secondary details to actually include the important points. It's truly disastrous when students just hope the fingers will find their own way, without having full awareness of turning points- but trying to read off or memorise every finger one by one (without appreciating the most important moments) is almost as bad as not thinking of any. You have to know just a small number of places in which you can mentally verify that the right things are happening- so if a mistake occurs it will never pass by unnoticed or become a habit.

[outin]

Generic finger agility can be attained more easily in hanon.

Maybe, but I much prefer doing scales and playing Baroque music.

[nyiregyhazi]

Maybe, but I much prefer doing scales and playing Baroque music.

I wasn't arguing about any virtue of hanon but rather that scales are not the simplest route to generic finger independence or agility (and that they won't provide much without organised fingering) . What they train, that is not so easily available elsewhere, is the ability to assimilate many notes into a singular physical shape and mental intention. Only if this is mastered can they be useful as finger training. Likewise, any music only offers the full agility benefits if you can first comprehensively assimilate notes into a single simple intent. Otherwise it grinds and prevents fingers learning to move with ease.

[gregh]

Nor would you have to convince an actual classical player. Classical players love to improvise as well!

I think it's easy to forget that improvisation is part of every style, including the classicals. Not so much these days, since they started writing out cadenzas, but I've thought it would be perfectly fun to experience classical music in a jazz format.

[j_menz]

I've thought it would be perfectly fun to experience classical music in a jazz format.

Not, I think what you have in mind, but ....

[Bob]

"Old Luke Skywalker teaches you about scales..."

[gregh]

Not, I think what you have in mind, but ....

Well, he certainly seems to be having fun.

[m1469]

The Russian School and principles behind great playing!    I actually like this one, and I'm watching the whole thing

[onwan]

The Russian School and principles behind great playing!    I actually like this one, and I'm watching the whole thing

I watched a few of her videos and I must say-she has some really great ideas.

[Bob]

That's not Luke Skywalker....

*Bob thinks it may be worth watching the whole video.*  And she has a tablet, so....

18 lessons?  On scales?!  I don't think so....

Circle of "feefths."    I'm zoning out.... 


It's sounding like basics.  She's taking "scales" as meaning chords too. Major, minor, chromatic, in thirds, sixths, etc.  It's sounding like "all technique" to me. 

Videos look fairly polished for youtube.  The editing gets annoying in some parts though.  But if you're not watching it, only listening, it's not that distracting.

[gregh]

It's sounding like basics.  She's taking "scales" as meaning chords too. Major, minor, chromatic, in thirds, sixths, etc.  It's sounding like "all technique" to me. 

I went through a book that used chords to introduce a new scale, and then filled in the rest of the notes. That took me aback and got me to thinking whether you can do that.

But it's the chords that motivate the scales. Or the intervals, rather. The Greeks wanted to play fourths, fifths, and octaves. They wanted to play a fifth, and then go up or down another fifth or fourth. Their scale was the notes that let them play the intervals they wanted to play (and that starts a long story that ends with equal temperament..) That basic picture didn't change when the English got big on the third, and I don't think it changed since.

So chords really are kind of the fundamental quantity.