Your idea is rather dumb. You want to throw away all other pieces just to study one which actually requires accompaniment? I also don't understand why you want to share such an idea with random people. Are you showing off what pieces you can play or making up stories for fun? You do realize Rach 3 is not Rach's most difficult piece?
Explain why you think it’s unnecessary and harsh. I have strong opinion on such issues and what the op is describing is stupid. Don’t try to censor my professional option on the topic with your sensitivity.
Apologies, I didn't mean to trigger you
I though it was unnecessary because you assumed, and were reading into the question, motivations that were not really evident. Unless you can read the OP's mind I don't see any reason to assume that he is either "showing off", or "making up stories for fun".
And for the record, I'm not trying to censor you. All I said was that I thought you comment was unnecessarily harsh. Why is it totally fine for you to jump on someone and call them stupid for asking a simple question but not okay for someone else to comment that they thought your remark was unnecessary or harsh? Talk about double standards. Why is it so often that the people who go on about "censorship" usually end up being so delicate?
Sounds like a fake apology.
You write a fragment sentence calling my response unnecessary and harsh and you think I’m being triggered asking you to explain yourself? That’s some bad logic right there.
This again is your unfounded opinion. If I have to spell out the situation for you: The op mentioned abandoning many pieces just to study the rach3, it is utterly dumb. The op even suggests doing such things will make those abandoned pieces easier when they return to it, again poor logic.
I called their idea dumb not them, total difference.
You are trying to censor me because if we had your way I will delete everything and just respond in a klavieronin manner, no thank you.
It is utterly fine for me to present my strong opinion that and idea is dumb.
I don’t need to confuse people with politeness, being polite over a dumb idea actually does a lot more harm, maybe you will see that one day. No eggshell walking for me.
Correct. I wasn't really apologising.
I thought you were being triggered because you said; "Don’t try to censor my professional option on the topic with your sensitivity."I'll admit, I may have been reading the wrong tone into that sentence.
My comment was more about the accusation of showing off or making up stories than about calling the OP's idea dumb. I don't totally disagree with your assessment of the idea, I just thought there was no reason to assume ulterior motives for asking the question.
Really? I don't remember asking you, or anyone else… ever… to delete anything.
Agreed! And by the same token, it should be totally fine for others to comment on those opinions. State your opinions in whatever manner you please but don't expect others to hold back if they don't like what you said or how you said it.
This one I'm agnostic about....
You may be right (at least for some people) but I do think there is a difference between being blunt and being a jerk. Saying the OP's idea is dumb I'll accept was just you bluntly giving you opinion. Accusing him of showing off or making things up came across as a bit jerky. I'm not asking you to stop, I was just stating my opinion.
I'm not interested in getting into a big debate over this so I'll let you have the last word.
You call peoples responses unnecessary and harsh without backing yourself up, does that mean you are so happy to see their post remain up there or would you prefer to see it removed?
Does anyone expect any other posts from the OP?? Maybe that should be the question.
That is a good question. I didn't realise that was his first post. And his name is "mr.vitamin_water". Not a good sign. Maybe the spammers a getting a little more sophisticated.
And maybe he is not a spammer but someone who just wanted advice
Definitely prefer to see it remain. That way the pros and cons of each side can be discussed, misunderstandings can be corrected, and we can move on all the wiser.Here's a thought though. My original comment would probably have better reflected my sentiment if I had thought to include an emoji, like so;"Unnecessarily harsh reply! "How much would it have changed our discussion here if that had been my original comment?
I guess time will tell. I hope it's the later.
You think it is unecessarily harsh but then you also elaborated and called it "jerky" type of attitude (without a smiley face lol) when you misinterpreted my question for a statement of fact.
I guess you think if the OP had a legitimate question, he will return. I doubt it.
Learn the entire mcfarren technical manual , all of itDo the Brahms 51 exercises,All.of them
In my defence, I didn't say it was jerky, I said it came across a bit jerky.
There is a distinction here. I chose my words carefully and I stand by them. If you are going to fault me for misinterpreting the minutia of your reply to the OP then I think you have to a least admit that here you have misinterpreted me.
Would you recommend those over, say, the Liszt exercises?
Topic: Rach 3 as a way to improve technique in other works 