ULTIMATE SELF-TAUGHT MONSTER PRACTICE ROUTINE - NOW FREE OF CHARGE!

[maxim3]

[Links at bottom]

"I feel I must learn every single scale, chord, and arpeggio by next month or I will go straight to Hell"

This is really only a simple suggestion for self-taught pianists who believe it is important to master "basic technique" (that is, all the conventional scales, chords, and arpeggios that everyone from Beethoven to Tatum would insist on) but who cannot, for whatever reason, have a proper teacher.

Perhaps you've been plugging away at as many scales and arpeggios as possible for some time, so that you're no longer a complete beginner. But it still seems like an impossible mountain to completely climb -- scales in 'formula patterns,' chromatic scales, 3 and 4 note chords in solid and broken forms, 4-octave arpeggios, etc. etc. What an impenetrable jungle!

Of course you cannot learn it all at once; you do it step by step. This is one of the many reasons teachers are so useful: They know what your next steps should be, and when you are ready to take them. 

Have you heard of those famous music-teaching institutions, ABRSM and The Royal Conservatory (RCM)? If not, do a quick read about them on Wikipedia. Did you know you can freely download the complete piano-learning program, grade by grade, of each institution?

What's more, you can find Youtube videos of qualified people explaining and playing this material for you.

Example: Suppose you've learned all your scales, and you can plunk your way slowly through most of the 3-note arpeggios, and you think you're becoming pretty slick. So you skim through the RCM piano syllabus and find the Technical Tests for each level. On page 48 it says at Grade 5 you should be able to do the scale of A Major, two octaves, hands together, metronome speed 104, eighth notes (two notes per metronome click).

You find that you are able to do that easily! But as a careful student, you next fire up Youtube and find a matching video which allows you to compare your performance of this scale to that of an expert. You sound and look just like the expert! You must be the new Horowitz!

Next you find on p. 48 (and further along in the video) that Grade 5 also requires you to play some solid and broken Dominant 7th chords, which at this stage, you can barely find on the keyboard. Perhaps you are not the new Horowitz.

But you now have a simple and obvious indication of how to proceed: Go back down the grade levels, test yourself against the requirements, find the right videos, and start filling in the gaps.

Links:

RCM Piano Syllabus 2015 (this is the most recent version, they update every few years) -
https://files.rcmusic.com//sites/default/files/files/RCM-Piano-Syllabus-2015.pdf

ABRSM Piano Syllabus 2019 & 2020 -
https://us.abrsm.org/fileadmin/user_upload/PDFs/Piano_Syllabus_2019___2020_complete.pdf

Youtube videos -- there are many useful ones, so just enter different keywords and you will find them. But here are two high-quality examples to give you the general idea:

"Grade 4 RCM Technique Requirements" -
www.youtube.com/watch?v=fh3DzDHwNE0

"ABRSM: Grade 4 Piano Technique Requirements" -
www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA-hJhq-SvA

 = )

[keypeg]

I am concerned if any student, especially an inexperienced beginner, were to talk this as advice.  I understand that this is a routine that you have created for yourself, which you are sharing.

[brogers70]

[Links at bottom]
This is really only a simple suggestion for self-taught pianists who believe it is important to master "basic technique" (that is, all the conventional scales, chords, and arpeggios that everyone from Beethoven to Tatum would insist on) but who cannot, for whatever reason, have a proper teacher.
 = )

Where I think I'd push back is in your definition of basic technique. For me, "basic technique" is the ability to imagine a sound and then produce it on the piano. If you cannot imagine a phrase from, say, a folk song melody or a Chopin Nocturne and play just the tune, shaping the phrase as though it were sung or played on a violin, then it doesn't matter how fast you can play an Eb harmonic minor scale. To produce a beautiful sound and shape a phrase you'll need proper relaxation, arm weight, wrist and hand position and flexibility. Working on scales and arps is certainly necessary and is a great opportunity to focus on mechanics and relaxation, but it's all totally secondary to developing the ability to translate an imagined sound in your mind into real sound on the piano. I'm emphasizing this not because it's bad to do scales, arps, and exercises, but because many of your posts suggest that you are treating them as an (almost obsessive) end in themselves rather than as a means to helping you express the musical ideas you can imagine.

[maxim3]

You're right, "basic technique" is a misleading term.

How about: "technischer Grundfertigkeiten" or "técnica básica"?

[Bob]

*Bob is disappointed.*  I thought there would be more...  It's interest but... It looks heavy toward certain ares of technique (chords, scales).  There's more than that.

If the guides had more that would be interesting to look through, but something easier to read, rather than sorting through literature in them...

[brogers70]

You're right, "basic technique" is a misleading term.

How about: "technischer Grundfertigkeiten" or "técnica básica"?

The point is not the words you use or the language you use them in, but what you consider most fundamental to playing well. I think that you overemphasize scales, arps, and exercises, for the reasons I gave above. Your technique will be helped more by working on playing a simple piece as beautifully as possible than by figuring out the nth transposition of a randomly chosen Hanon exercise. Of course you need to know your scales and arpeggios in all the keys, but moderation in everything.

[lostinidlewonder]

I wonder if when self learning doing examination syllabus is the best path. Exams to me seem like a test of your abilities rather than a focus on skill acquisition although people usually treat it in the latter way and thus many end up floundering at certain grades for extended periods of time which to me is likely to be an inefficient use of time and a frustrating experience.

Learning scales, chords, arpeggios etc these technical skills are important but overly obsessing with them and not connect them to learned repertoire makes studying them in detail quite superflous. Learning all the non sharp/flat major scales and triad chords and their inversions is a good starting point as they are found in a lot of music at all levels, to be able to identify which blocks you are using in music and considering them as a whole rather than single notes is helpful.

Developing practice method and reading skills are the more important issues I find. If you are an early beginner reading may be a little inefficient without a simplified method of reading (eg: starting with single positions and numbers only) or starting at a very easy level which may feel very boring, thus it is good to separate reading skills from repertoire. "How" to practice is a skill that we develop over a long period of time and it should be well known that strong practice method can get you through more work in less time, something that should be very desirable and high on the priority list. Certainly brute force repetitions should be avoided and mindful practice needs to be developed, what this kind of practice involves would make my response rather long so I will leave it as something that one can research and test out themselves.

Understanding what repertoire is out there and what excites you to learn is important, I feel that examinations often strangle this journey of self discovery. Probably one of the most important choices are what pieces to study, you need to build your experience level and learn pieces at an efficient rate and as a teacher this also probably one of the most important duties we have.

You can learn "tough" pieces which take you a while to learn and which motivate you to learn however you must also deal with a lot of music that can be completed quickly, this is to build your experience level, train your practice method, help you understand the flow of learning a piece from beginning to end and with many examples. It is no good thinking that all pieces you learn require a very long time to master and complete. Learn pieces which excite you and encourage you to spend your time learning them. A major aim should be to work with pieces that encourage you to learn and that can be completed efficiently, this should be a main focus. The more you deal with this the higher the bar is raised as to what pieces you can learn at a fast and efficient rate.

[maxim3]

Thank you all for your responses thus far. lost, much wisdom (and what strikes me as good old common sense.)

I was going to post a lengthy progress report, I drafted a bunch of stuff, I find I have a lot to say about this little practice project. But perhaps it is of scant interest. In the end, it's little more than a guy putting a wee schedule together for improving scales, chords, and arpeggios, and there is hardly anything innovative.

So I'll just carry on. So far it seems to be paying off. But if there are any questions, or if I get a convincing request to flap my gums at grotesque length, I'll do my best to please!

[adodd81802]

I feel like... maybe this is out-the-box thinking.

But when you get a driving license, it gives you the basic knowledge to drive a car.

For most people that's a steering wheel, some pedals, a stick for gears(UK is primarily manual)

And some basic concepts that are then optional, mirrors, lights, indicators e.t.c.

Now despite having the ability to drive a car, of which we can get very good at, it's not the same as driving a large van, or a lorry, and though a motorcycle has similar concepts, that's also different, however we can, if we wish, learn also these additional vehicles if required, and do so easier by already having obtained the knowledge for the basic concept of driving.

This is where we come back to the piano.. Once you have learned the basic concepts of what it is to play the piano, there should be no need to obsess over every chord, scale and arpeggio, unless your focus is composition or teaching.

And by basic concepts I mean, firstly your actual setup, hand positions, e.t.c
Then I mean pressing notes (staccato, piano, forte, e.t.c.) and basic thumb under / finger over movements required for moving up and down the keyboard.

That's really all the piano is. Everything after that is specifics which may have some validity in different pieces and scenarios, but only really need to be practiced if required.

Once you have mastered a technique, it doesn't matter what key you play it in, you will soon obtain the same level of ability while progressing pieces of music at the same time, and won't go crazy in the process.

[keypeg]

Maxim, what I'm understanding is that you see all these scales, chords and arpeggios which you see as "must be learned" and these are sometimes called "technique" - There is a problem that there are so many of them that it's overwhelming.  You're looking to places like RCM, ABRSM etc. to put these into order for you and also set some criteria like how many octaves, bpm (MM = xx) etc., and lastly some models as to "how it should sound/ look".  Did I get that right?

I once had lessons for a few years on another instrument that largely went that way.  A lot of things were missing, and I discovered that eventually.  When I took up piano again I knew better, and was also lucky in the teacher I met up with.  There are things underneath all of that, and those are also the things I'd call "technique".  Like - When you play a scale, how you move, the "thumb under" part (for the general name of it), how you use your body, the quality of sound, the types of articulation and how you do this without hurting yourself, cramping up etc.  Those are the parts that I call "technique".

Are you familiar with PianoOlogist and the introductory section he has on how the body works/ how we use the body at the piano?  There are about 40 small lessons.  When you apply those kinds of things, then the scales, arpeggios etc. start playing themselves.  They're sort of like the passkey to unlock everything.  (Those were also the kinds of things I was missing).

Another side,which I think LiW was alluding to, is that the scales, arpeggios etc. are a part of music, and you want to get at them from that side.  For one thing, in music a scale doesn't always go from Tonic to Tonic, and you may want to use different fingering because of where it's going and coming from.

That just scratches the surface.  Any thoughts?

[maxim3]

Maxim, what I'm understanding is that you see all these scales, chords and arpeggios which you see as "must be learned"...

That paragraph hits the nail right on the head. But I emphasize, in case I didn't make it clear, that the orthodox RCM approach is slow and steady; it's supposed to take years and years. As a grownup and experienced musician, I find I don't have to go quite as slowly as a child for certain things; but for others, I do.

I am impatient and hurried by nature, and the RCM syllabus allows me to make a realistic practice schedule while reassuring me that I WILL make progress. It helps me fight my bad tendencies and bad attitudes.

This way, I can get a perfectly respectable amount of work done every practice session on this basic technical stuff, and have plenty of time left over for real music (these days, mainly Czerny op. 599 and Bach's easiest bits)

I am sticking with terms like "basic technique" because that's what the RCM calls it. For example, every grade level has what they call Technical Tests, which consist exclusively of scales, chords, and arpeggios. Rachmaninoff also used this term, and it's amusing to see the Web machines occasionally translate it from Russian as "technology"

Now then: who exactly is this pianologist? Can you give an exact URL please, it seems there is more than one.