all piano music is build upon a structure of chord progressions along with a melody, played in a rhythmic way.
Isn't that the approach they take to rock guitar/piano; or to some extent jazz, already?
In teaching, it is helpful to develop what you feel is the very basic make-up of a musical and pianistic foundation in general, and then to be able to use this as a means for measuring progress and success (or areas that need strengthening), as well as building knowledge and skills. In cooking, for example, there is a difference between thinking of every particular of a recipe as though it is merely an ingredient, and all ingredients being of equal value to a recipe, vs. seeing what really needs to be in place as a foundation in order for the recipe to truly work. I think it can be similar in playing. The real teaching method is behind the scenes; it's the puppeteer pulling the strings - the reason behind the moment. Within what principle do rhythm, chords, and harmonic understanding fit into? Each individual will learn differently for various reasons, some of it is simply because they have varying interests, some of it is because they simply have their own set of strengths and weaknesses when it comes to learning in general. You may find that a single ingredient does not necessarily work with everybody, even if it's a great thing in and of itself. But, if you have a binding agent, or a basic principle that you are pulling from when you teach, you will find that if one idea doesn't work in a particular way for one person, there is something else you can do to help them gain understanding.
Music is supremely mathematical and logical by its very nature (...)
If you can point me to any resources on the web, or any information, about other similar teaching methodologies I'd be very grateful.
I suppose the crucial element is the abandonment of musical theory.
Regarding my assertion that all music (as I understand the term) is "built upon a structure of chord progressions along with a melody, played in a rhythmic way". And your comment of: "Not all, just some". Could you quote a specific example of contemporary music where this would be the case so that I can understand the context of your comment.
https://www.bing.com/search?q=learn+piano+by+chords&src=IE-TopResult&FORM=IE11TR&conversationid=Seems to yield plenty, though maybe I'm missing something from your approach.
For me, both twelve tone serialism ... are not "music" in the conventional sense but are rather experiments in noise.
What do you mean? You might as well claim that traditional music from different cultures around the world is not music if it doesn't follow our conventions...
Well, Arnold Schoenburg was from Austria, and John Cage was from Los Angeles so they were not really from a different culture.
Hans Christian Anderson was most observant when he wrote "The Emperor's New Clothes".
I am just not equipped to understand how, for some, this "music" represents an enjoyable experience - but perhaps that's just because I am not clever enough to understand it!
That's just a Bing search for "learn piano by chords". It is clear that any method of musical tuition involves chords, but do you have a specific teaching methodology in mind (ideally with a link to some resource that better explains it) that echoes the suggested approach to this?
My proposed teaching method suggests the minimalist use of music theory in order to achievie an end result where the student can undoubtedly play the piano (though not to understand musical notation and musical theory in any depth).
Regarding twelve tone serialism and Cage's Etude Australes. For me, both twelve tone serialism and Cage's Etude Australes are not "music" in the conventional sense but are rather experiments in noise. I think that almost any person (without formal musical training) listening to Cage's Etude would reach a similar conclusion when applying the word "music" in its common usage in the English language.
10 responses already and no one has yet questioned "Metholdolgies" when surely it's "Mentholdoggies"...Best,Alistair
If you can point me to any resources on the web, or any information, about other similar teaching methodologies I'd be very grateful. I suppose the crucial element is the abandonment of musical theory.
Eventually (if the student wanted to) they could progress to the circle of fifths and learn to play in every key... and all without learning what a crotchet or quaver are or the mathematics of key signatures.
I should stress again that I'm totally in favour of improvisation as a part of learning. But there's no way I'm going to applaud the idea that the bits that you picked up instinctively on talent don't need to be taught, or that they would typically be picked up by experimentation alone.
Would I have been better served with a set of paints, given some elementary instruction upon how to mix and apply them to the canvas, and encouraged to make a mess? Difficult to answer, I really enjoyed painting by numbers and maybe I would have thought myself a failure by making a mess. Or maybe I would have discovered an ability within to express myself via this medium.
So I still feel it may be worthwhile to experiment with teaching students to play well with a minimal amount of theory and then, if the student so desires, fleshing this out with the ability to sight read and understand some underlying theory later. The input of others (who have had far more experience of teaching piano in the real world than I), would be most welcome (especially from those that have actually attempted such a technique with success or failure).