I don't know whether you are one of these, or your teacher is a control nut.
My teacher found I was great at steady JS Bach very early and never nagged me about the metronome again.
As far as speed, I find that practicing at a modest speed for perfection comes first.
Hi all. the way Art Tatum improvises at insane tempos.For some reason, I find it much easier to sound 'virtuosic' when I improvise. Should I quit practicing scales and technically hard passages with a metronome? Should I tell my teacher about this dilemma? It's really a fascinating mystery on why I suddenly GET it if I just 'play around' without any restrictive beat playing along. What are your thoughts on this?
by and large classical pianists are just basically dumbfounded by improvisation. To them--you are reading sheet music somewhere in your head--you have planned each of those notes and practiced delivering them flawlessly---how can you tell them that it's all on the fly? That what you hear in your head comes out of your hands effortlessly? They simply cannot understand and many are insanely jealous of that ability. Your teacher is amazed by it I would venture to guess--but will NEVER tell you that...lol
the metronome is a good thing though--if you hate that droning beep--try using drum tracks instead. Steadiness of tempo is everything and practicing with a steady beat helps so much.
Art Tatum --- I love him too... I think you are a jazzer at heart.
But why then did I get the arpeggio faster without doing it along the metronome?
And to think that most of the names printed on the upper-right hand corner of the charts we read were masters at it...
If one thing is for certain, a working metronome never lies. If your pulse is not perfectly even, the metronome will tell you. That said, the metronome is a great TOOL but nothing more than a tool to aid you in your practice. If you need a fast passage to be perfectly even, use a metronome.
Because playing faster and playing steadier are not the same thing.
But I said that I could keep up with the 180 bpm ticking sound AFTER I practiced the arpeggio without any metronome.Seriously though. I have to consider asking my teacher again why she's so strict about it. I just feel like I am limited by the speed restriction of the metronome. I understand it's to keep me from rushing, but do I need it ALL the time?!
of course they were... I think that has something to do with it actually. In music school they tell you -- without saying it directly--that you are incapable of attaining the music prowess of the masters---nothing you do will ever compare to what they have done. That the only true pianists are those who can flawlessly play Liszt--or Rach--or Beeth--or whoever. It actually creates almost a phobia in the student. They become afraid to express themselves with their own music which they consider to be substandard at best. Any composing is painstakingly slow and methodical--because that's how they were taught.I read that Chopin improvised the Opus 66 at a party of some sort then went home and wrote it down. To someone with no improv skills that sounds so amazingly impressive... but to those of us who can improvise...it's not so hard to understand how he did that.Formal classical piano teachers seem to delight in downplaying improv and ear-playing skills--because so many are unable to do it themselves. They drill the creativity right out of you...
Hi all.Lately, I've been fixated on the prospect of being able to play at extremely fast speeds. So I challenged myself to play C# Major arpeggios at quarter=180, something quite radical for me (I have been struggling to get it clean at quarter =132 before now), so I tried all sorts of ways to be able to do it.My teacher is firm and consistent about me using a metronome, particularly if it's a steady-rhythm piece, like an etude/classical sonata/Bach WTC. So I've been accustomed to doing so.The arpeggio is the typical four-octave version, both hands. I tried many ways to do it; I tried practicing every four notes starting from the bottom, then the next four notes, etc. But I always used a metronome.But then recently I tried something different; I played around the arpeggios without a strict beat (but making sure all the notes are hit correctly), and WOW. After doing that a few times, I played it again with the metronome at quarter=180, and I executed it almost perfectly!I was left to reflect on my improvisatory side. I've noticed that many of my colleagues appraise me for my being able to play at rather quicker speeds than they can, and if there is one thing I regularly do on the piano that they don't, it's that I improvise. I copy the way Gyorgy Cziffra spams arpeggios everywhere on the keyboard while improvising on some tune, or the way Art Tatum improvises at insane tempos.For some reason, I find it much easier to sound 'virtuosic' when I improvise. Perhaps it's because the techniques I do when I improvise are those which are most comfortable for me, but even then; I noticed that I could play arpeggios in certain keys VERY quickly, and easily, with a metronome, compared to those in keys that I don't improvise on much (I rarely improvise in C#, so it's hard for me to play C# arpeggios; but c minor, a key I regularly improvise on, is a piece of cake).Should I quit practicing scales and technically hard passages with a metronome? Should I tell my teacher about this dilemma? It's really a fascinating mystery on why I suddenly GET it if I just 'play around' without any restrictive beat playing along. What are your thoughts on this?
Hi all.Lately, I've been fixated on the prospect of being able to play at extremely fast speeds. So I challenged myself to play C# Major arpeggios at quarter=180, something quite radical for me (I have been struggling to get it clean at quarter =132 before now), so I tried all sorts of ways to be able to do it.My teacher is firm and consistent about me using a metronome, particularly if it's a steady-rhythm piece, like an etude/classical sonata/Bach WTC. So I've been accustomed to doing so.The arpeggio is the typical four-octave version, both hands. I tried many ways to do it; I tried practicing every four notes starting from the bottom, then the next four notes, etc. But I always used a metronome.But then recently I tried something different; I played around the arpeggios without a strict beat (but making sure all the notes are hit correctly), and WOW. After doing that a few times, I played it again with the metronome at quarter=180, and I executed it almost perfectly!I was left to reflect on my improvisatory side. I've noticed that many of my colleagues appraise me for my being able to play at rather quicker speeds than they can, and if there is one thing I regularly do on the piano that they don't, it's that I improvise. I copy the way Gyorgy Cziffra spams arpeggios everywhere on the keyboard while improvising on some tune, or the way Art Tatum improvises at insane tempos.For some reason, I find it much easier to sound 'virtuosic' when I improvise. Perhaps it's because the techniques I do when I improvise are those which are most comfortable for me, but even then; I noticed that I could play arpeggios in certain keys VERY quickly, and easily, with a metronome, compared to those in keys that I don't improvise on much (I rarely improvise in C#, so it's hard for me to play C# arpeggios; but c minor, a key I regularly improvise on, is a piece of cake).Should I quit practicing scales and technically hard passages with a metronome? Should I tell my teacher about this dilemma? It's really a fascinating mystery on why I suddenly GET it if I just 'play around' without any restrictive beat playing along. What are your thoughts on this?By "playing around", do you mean you might play 6 notes to the beat at one spot, then 3, then 4 etc? Nick
I think if Chopin or any of our other favorites could listen to the millions of great performances of their music today, they would be shocked and disappointed at how so many played exactly what they wrote.