What Bach Invention #1 did for me

[1piano4joe]

Hi all,

This might be a post lengthy.

I learned pieces can be:

1. Far from straightforward.
2. Just plain wrong.
3. Badly edited

I learned that I could actually memorize this piece. Originally, I was convinced that I couldn't. It just happened after an unusually long amount of practice. I still don't believe it.

This piece in particular helped me to improve NOT looking at my hands. Since I couldn't possibly memorize this, I figured I had to be able to read it. Looking down, looking up, looking down, looking up worked only for awhile at a slower "learning tempo".

I did have to learn to read bigger quantities at a time. I'm not sure I'm even doing this correctly or if there even is a "correct way".

I'm not sure exactly, what it is, I am doing. Am I looking at groups of 4 16th notes at a time? Sometimes I think I do that.

Other times, I think I'm looking at a whole measure and once my hands start going on autopilot, I look ahead. Is that the muscle memory taking over?

Should I only need to look at the first 2 notes of 4 16ths beat due to the nature of the motif? Just how am I supposed to read this piece? I don't know.

Sometimes I search the score with my eyes to find out just where the heck my fingers are and question if they know what comes next? My fingers just won't wait for me!

I can't help but feel mentally detached from the score. I'm paying less attention to notes and fingering and focusing more on the music/sound/ shape. Maybe this is normal?

Eventually, my fingers started to improve/expand their knowledge of the keyboard. It seems quite strange to play without looking at the score. If I don't look occasionally (whether I need to or not), I get worried about making a mistake and then of course I do.

This piece made me more aware of movements. In particular. The "spider" crawl. Maybe more like an "inchworm".

This piece really honed my practice techniques. Probably, learned a few more as well.

I discovered just how parochial my knowledge of fingering is.

I had to learn to control fast ornaments as well as coordinate them with the other hand.

I can't even believe this next one. I can hear in my head the two voices simultaneously and/or separately. Just like when I am actually playing the piece. It's bizarre.

Should I still use the score? I think I could learn to better coordinate my fingers with my eyes if I do. I don't know.

There are just so, so many things I just don't know, Joe.

[j_tour]

I will just add that, it may only have been several years ago (I don't know....time passes quickly these days), that a real "come to Jesus" moment (no, not getting heavy or anything, just as a metaphor) was when I would wake up in a half-asleep, liminal state and hear the two voices of this particular piece.

Sort of like a dream. 

No, I don't know what it takes to internalize a piece to that degree, just that it can happen, unconsciously in my case (meaning, without any willful effort).

So, you took my advice and learned some while you slept.

Well, that was my experience.

I can't even believe this next one. I can hear in my head the two voices simultaneously and/or separately. Just like when I am actually playing the piece. It's bizarre.

Yeah.  It's odd, and strange, and somehow impossible, but one can do it.  As you know!

[lostinidlewonder]

I did have to learn to read bigger quantities at a time. I'm not sure I'm even doing this correctly or if there even is a "correct way".

It is different for everyone depending on their developmental level but anything that avoids reading every single note one at a time is a good idea that can be improved upon.

I'm not sure exactly, what it is, I am doing. Am I looking at groups of 4 16th notes at a time? Sometimes I think I do that.

The subject is repeated like ten thousand times in the piece so you should anticipate many of the patterns you come across.

Should I only need to look at the first 2 notes of 4 16ths beat due to the nature of the motif? Just how am I supposed to read this piece? I don't know.

You should be able to take the score and hear the entire piece being played out for you exactly as it sounds as you read the music. You should be able to do this from start to finish without any problems. This makes any piece you learn easier to control because the ear can correct any note errors instantly, if you rely totally on the sheets and you don't know what comes next errors need to be calculated from the score which is much slower if your reading skills are not strong. You then should see if you can hear the music when you start from random places, this will prove more difficult. If you can get to the point where you can actually hear all the music just by looking at the score then when you are reading the notes you will not need to read as much since you are binding playing by ear with the reading. Problems do arise when you make errors though, although you can catch yourself making that error it can sometimes make you forget exactly what should come next. It is almost like if one relies on muscular memory too much, a single error can collapse everything that comes next, so too the same can occur with sound memory, if you are playing and make an error the sound in the mind can vanish into the wind and you have to reestablish what you should be hearing. You can merely listen to the piece multiple times with the score in front of you, that can help give you freedom to read the score in larger chunks.

I can't help but feel mentally detached from the score. I'm paying less attention to notes and fingering and focusing more on the music/sound/ shape. Maybe this is normal?

It is the process of muscular/sound memorization taking over with less conscious memorisation (logic statments over coordination/patterns, fingering observations, sight reading skills etc) keeping you in place. The problem is however that this can set you up for estimated type playing if you haven't solved everything completely, you can sort of get the correct sound but it is with poor fingering, unstable coordination, skipped or rushed notes here or there etc.

I discovered just how parochial my knowledge of fingering is.

Fingering in Bach is not always so intuitive even though the music might look quite straight forward. I still can play many pieces from Bach which I learned when I was a child where I used what seemed to me at the time very logical fingerings but which are actually quite inefficient. I still see students of mine choosing my child like fingerings when they try to solve the same passages themselves so these seemingly intuitive fingering solution does trap a lot of people. There are so many ways to substitute Bach's fingerings and still produce a good sound but your hands are simply inefficient and your library of fingering understanding is for the poorer. Bach to me always reminds me that fingering is not always what you might think is the solution.

I can't even believe this next one. I can hear in my head the two voices simultaneously and/or separately. Just like when I am actually playing the piece. It's bizarre.

I think this is good to have a recording of the piece in your head where you can appreciate all the details you could if you were playing. Do it with the sheet music in front of you it is quite a good habit to get into.

Should I still use the score? I think I could learn to better coordinate my fingers with my eyes if I do. I don't know.

The better you get at the piece the less you will require the score. So although "sheet music up" vs "sheet music down" is a binary decision, when the sheet music is up the intensity at which you are using that sheet music is various.

There are just so, so many things I just don't know, Joe.

If we don't know something the more specific we can be about the problem the more direct and useful the answers generally will be.

[mjames]

Quite the analysis. All I took from it was that baroque could sound somewhat cool.

[1piano4joe]

It is different for everyone depending on their developmental level but anything that avoids reading every single note one at a time is a good idea that can be improved upon.

Hi lostinidlewonder,

Thank you for the replies.

Hmm...interesting. I never quite thought about it like that. Does that mean a higher developmental level reads bigger quantities?

This one sentence made me wonder about a few things regarding "reading size" in general:

1. Does/should reading size vary with the grade of a piece?
2. Does it vary with score density?
3. Can it vary from measure to measure?
4. Could polyrhythms, or thick vertical harmonies limit how much further one could read ahead?

What about reading skills in general? For example, I don't think I read bass clef as fluently as treble clef. There are pieces/times where both hands are in treble clef. I think I read these in bigger chunks.

Another example, I don't think I read chords/intervals nearly as fluently as scales. So, maybe smaller chunks here as well. I'm note sure.

I will use a language analogy. English is my native tongue. Treble clef scales, runs are my piano native tongue. I can speak some Spanish but I am very far from fluent. It's a 2nd language that I learned somewhat. This would be bass clef and chords. They are my "2nd piano language". However, the verbal language disparity is much, much greater.

This has come about since piano is not my first/only instrument. Over a decade playing clarinet as a child has made me a fluent treble clef reader reading single notes at a time. I have in fact made great strides over the years with regard to bass clef and chords but I'm not 100% sure I read both clefs equally.

I think that familiarity/experience with clefs affects reading size and fluency. If a piano score was written in both alto and tenor clef instead of bass and treble clef,  I couldn't even play that score at all. For one thing, I don't know the notes on those staffs but even if I did I am sure I wouldn't be reading so fluently.   

Does this sound reasonable, Joe.
 

[1piano4joe]

If you haven't solved everything completely, you can sort of get the correct sound but it is with poor fingering, unstable coordination, skipped or rushed notes here or there etc.

Hi lostinidlewonder,
 
Your replies are simply the best! I don't think I ever "solve everything completely". That being said, I have often found, that there is a better solution. Poor fingering, unstable coordination (never heard of that, could you elaborate with some examples please?) were/are speed bumps for me. I think they cause skipped/rushed notes and uneven rhythms.

Could unstable coordination be a contributing factor to the seemingly "random mistakes"? Maybe they are, in fact, not so random after all?

Solving the movements completely, I'm not sure I even do that partially! There are "very easy pieces" that I just can't play/figure out on my own. I have to watch a YouTube video to see the elusive movements and then go, "Oh, that's how you play that"!

Is it possible that movement issues can cause some of the speed walls?

Very hard to learn these movements on your own, Joe.

Should I still use the score? I think I could learn to better coordinate my fingers with my eyes if I do.

I practiced with some focused/experimentation with regard to my eyes. I found for me, that in this piece, reading one beat ahead works fairly well. That size, keeps me fluid and I don't get lost or overwhelmed by information overload. Evidently, a half measure at a time, best fits my developmental stage. Hmm... that means my eyes keep tempo with the metronome. Interesting, never thought about that.

Thanks, Joe 

[lostinidlewonder]

Does that mean a higher developmental level reads bigger quantities?

It depends what you exactly mean by "higher developmental level" and what the "quantities" are. But as you get better with reading yes you can read more of the music at once and react with what you have to do to produce those notes accurate and more immediately.

1. Does/should reading size vary with the grade of a piece?

With "reading size" I think you mean the amount of the score you can notice rather than the actual size of the notes themselves. If you take a very easy piece you should be able to read while playing larger parts at a time and have a lot of time to solve what comes next with time to spare! Even high grade pieces have parts which are quite easy to read and others which may require time to calculate and thus shrinks your reading focus (a position we like to avoid so that our reading experience is easily controlled).

2. Does it vary with score density?

You could have a progression of many thick chords and it could be much easier than a fast single string of notes doing all sorts of acrobatics. If something is very fast tempo this limits the amount you are able to read the most, these fiddly little passages can really tax your attention and make it difficult to see what reacts with them. Usually sight readers will simply slow down to maintain control or use other tools like pausing, neglecting notes etc to deal with it on initial reads to maintain coherent sight reading flow.

3. Can it vary from measure to measure?

It varies from measure to measure based on your past experience with what you are reading and how confident you are with all the fingering/coordination solutions that you have used in the past to solve what you are reading.

4. Could polyrhythms, or thick vertical harmonies limit how much further one could read ahead?

It depends on the individual. If a piece asks for some kind of unfamiliar coordination that is highly repetitive throughout it is not that difficult to read so long the initial calculation of how to do it is appropriately solved and fully mastered. This is how a piece that might seem difficult at first becomes easier to read the more you repeat through it, the difficult parts become solved and then the same solution is applied throughout. This is only if you really understand what you are playing, if you are merely parroting a phrase of music in isolation and not fully understanding how similar ideas are used else where then this process wont work very well.

I don't think I read bass clef as fluently as treble clef. There are pieces/times where both hands are in treble clef. I think I read these in bigger chunks.

Almost all cases I come across who say they read one clef better than the other simply haven't have enough experience reading the other clef. You learned another instrument so that is why you are better at the treble since you have countless hours practicing reading in that clef. Simply read a whole lot of bass line passages for a month and you will see an improvement.

Another example, I don't think I read chords/intervals nearly as fluently as scales. So, maybe smaller chunks here as well. I'm note sure.

Chords should be easier than scales. One random tip for calculating a thick chord, start with the lowest note first, then solve the highest, the centre should then more readily reveal itself based on its interval relationship to these max and min points of the chord. Also chord progression has particular sounds to them which you get very accustomed to which make calculating how chords move much easier.

...unstable coordination (never heard of that, could you elaborate with some examples please?)

When you memorize a piece and your muscular memory is not so precise and has inefficient movements. You could even call it "estimate playing" where you are sort of getting the right sound but it is tarnished with strange movements, strange mannerisms that have crept in through multiple repeats of the poor motions. For example someone who doesn't understand syncopation can estimate how the notes in both hands interact with one another but it is unstable, has little errors spotted throughout, the mind of the player doesn't even follow the sound of the syncopation and it feels like an unsteady solution which is "sort of" correct but not.

Could unstable coordination be a contributing factor to the seemingly "random mistakes"? Maybe they are, in fact, not so random after all?

Well sure, it can even have a level of error which needs to be covered up with the pedal or blurring notes or rushing through the passage, playing one hand louder to cover up the errors of the other etc etc.

There are "very easy pieces" that I just can't play/figure out on my own. I have to watch a YouTube video to see the elusive movements and then go, "Oh, that's how you play that"!

Is it possible that movement issues can cause some of the speed walls?

Very hard to learn these movements on your own, Joe.

Well that is what makes the piano a tricky instrument to master. It is easy to make sound out of the piano but to play it with the most economical fingering and movements, that is where the challenge really lies. The difference between correct and incorrect can often be small. Many simply solve what is correct by the good feeling they are having in their hand but then again piano can trap you because not everything that is intuitive and feels comfortable is correct, sometimes we need to learn new movements which may feel alien at first but become so ingrained they become a natural reaction. I know many early beginners I have taught find it easier to rest their wrist on the wood of the keyboard while playing, I know this is an extreme example but they really feel it's easier. There are many fingering ideas which we may feel is correct but is not necessarily the best solution that we should be attuned to.

...I found for me, that in this piece, reading one beat ahead works fairly well. That size, keeps me fluid and I don't get lost or overwhelmed by information overload. Evidently, a half measure at a time, best fits my developmental stage. Hmm... that means my eyes keep tempo with the metronome. Interesting, never thought about that.

Often when I read pieces which I easily can handle I predominatnly don't need to read ahead in terms of solving what comes next before I get there, this is since I can just read on the fly and solve it quite easily. If I notice something is coming up which requires a little more I will look at it earlier and solve it before I get to it. It is just a natural reaction to notice what is ahead to see if it is the same as what you are doing since in that case there is no need to read ahead with the intention for precalculation and if the changes look quite simple you will feel confident to simply solve it when you get there. If there is something that is coming up which is different then you should be reading ahead and ensure you will be ready to deal with it.