Rach 3 as a way to improve technique in other works

[mr.vitamin_water]

Hi guys,

As I was studying Chopin`s Etudes op. 25, his ballades, and  rach 3, besides other works, an idea came to me: what gains should I obtain had I dropped everything I was focusing on to solely study Rach3? The concerto is my favorite one, besides Chopin's in F minor. It present all colors , rhythms and technique disposition. So I know I would not grow bored at all.   What do you guys think? Do you think that if I do this whenever I go  back to other pieces they will be understood more easily for the brain and fingers?

[lostinidlewonder]

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?

[klavieronin]

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?

Unnecessarily harsh reply!


Personally I do think there is value in really mastering and polishing a piece, if that's what the original question was about, but I don't see why there would be any special benefit from doing this with Rach 3. You could achieve the same result by really mastering and polishing, say, a few Beethoven Sonatas, or the Liszt Sonata, or any number of other options. If it's a question of time and you really, really like Rach 3 then sure, go for it. But, like I said, I wouldn't expected any special benefit from doing this over simply mastering all the other pieces you are working on - which has the added benefit of giving you a bit more variety. I guess it comes down to how much time you have to practise.

[lostinidlewonder]

Explain why you think it’s unnecessary and harsh because without that your very own response is quite unnecessary since it is just an unsupported opinion. 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.

[klavieronin]

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?

[lostinidlewonder]

Apologies, I didn't mean to trigger you

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.

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".

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 infer story telling or showing off because the technical difficulties of all pieces mentioned are at the upper range yet the op is asking beginner like questions about many pieces vs few pieces with regards to study. We can reveal all the technical requirements for the pieces and see that the rach3 excludes a number of techniques learned in the other pieces. Story telling or a super talent who doesn’t need to realise the technical differences between a rach concerto and Chopin etudes. I’m sorry I think on a different level to most and really don’t feel the need to explain everything, I prefer people reveal it themselves once prompted.

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?

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 an 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.

[klavieronin]

Sounds like a fake apology.

Correct. I wasn't really apologising.

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.

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.

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.

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.

I called their idea dumb not them, total difference.

Fair point, I'll take that one.

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.

Really? I don't remember asking you, or anyone else… ever… to delete anything.

It is utterly fine for me to present my strong opinion that and idea is dumb.

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.

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.

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.

[lostinidlewonder]

Correct. I wasn't really apologising.

Well it's obvious and quite unnecessary.

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.

Yes well read what I write in a happy tone and you will not be mistaken because I am quite content responding on pianostreet as I have done 16+ years, why would I post on here in an angry mood for so long? Want to encourage heart attacks? lol

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.

I merely asked a question I did not accuse. You made an error about me calling an idea dumb and thinking I meant the person is also dumb. So now I asked a question and you twist it to think it is a statement of my ideology? I asked a question it is a question asking them to reveal their situation more clearly and logically, I infered two conclusions and presented them as a question.

With all the circumstantial evidence pointing in one direction I feel inspired to express my inferences. If I am wrong that's totally fine, but there is explaining to do to make that so, it is not uncommon to reveal story telling or stretching of truths when something odd comes up on the internet, so it is no problems to question the truthfulness of people. 

Really? I don't remember asking you, or anyone else… ever… to delete anything.

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?

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.

Sure they can critique everything I write, but when I ask them to explain themselves they often cannot and thus admit error on their behalf as you have already done.

This one I'm agnostic about....

Personally the majority of the times I wouldn't entertain stupid ideas with politeness if they asked me for an opinion. I'd rather violently rip someone away from traps without them second guessing that it might be ok to do otherwise.

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.

Well we can continue this dialogue and I can show you how you are mistaken. Simply put you think I am accusing someone of something where I am merely asking a question. Why would I come on here just to be nasty to someone? I come on here 16+ years just to be nasty to people? I come here to offer my professional opinion as a piano teacher, I will offer my advice in anyway way I feel fit, I donate my professional opinion to many people and do not ask for anything in return. I question truthfulness of situations when a situation is created but the questions or results that extend from the those efforts are highly unusual.

I'm not interested in getting into a big debate over this so I'll let you have the last word.

You don't have to, but you are going to get called up for harvesting unfounded opinion on someone and then feeling the need to post it publically.

[klavieronin]

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?

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?

[dogperson]

Does anyone expect any other posts from the OP??   Maybe that should be the question.

[klavieronin]

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.

[dogperson]

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

[klavieronin]

And maybe he is not a spammer but someone who just wanted advice

I guess time will tell. I hope it's the later.

[lostinidlewonder]

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 would have still asked you what you mean. 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. Yes at least I corrected 2 misunderstandings from your side 1) discussing ideas is different than discussing a person 2) asking a question isn't a statement.

Does anyone expect any other posts from the OP??   Maybe that should be the question.

It's highly unlikely given the situation, I'm not sure if they can explain themselves with actual music context with all the pieces they are studying why rach 3 would improve all the other pieces. This is actually a good question since there are many pieces which can help you with other works but how it is constructed in the OP is very peculiar if one measures what they are really talking about.

[dogperson]

I guess time will tell. I hope it's the later.

I guess you think if the OP had a legitimate question, he will return. I doubt it. 

[visitor]

I had some funny zingers to toss in but abstaining yes, difficult music if not too far above your grasp to make reasonable progress at realistic pace can help with execution of other works under the right conditions

1. If you'll focus on the concerto u suggest the peng peng gong arrangement for solo it basically turns the concerto Into a piano sonata ,it's spectacular

2 no generally you do more pieces, more variety, to move the needle, not less music if you drop the other pieces consider side works to replace them with

3, usually the improvement will be with more impact to the idiom and style and sometimes composer specific of the hard piece but so usually felt across pieces later that are less demanding than the stretch piece in question, usually I  see this work with for example tacking an set or entire op of etudes  or preludes etc , lots of variety but consistent styles

Also
Learn the entire mcfarren technical manual , all of it
Do the Brahms 51 exercises,All.of them

[klavieronin]

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.

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.

[klavieronin]

I guess you think if the OP had a legitimate question, he will return. I doubt it.

Wait, do you doubt it's a legitimate question, or do you doubt he will return?

[klavieronin]

Learn the entire mcfarren technical manual , all of it
Do the Brahms 51 exercises,All.of them

Would you recommend those over, say, the Liszt exercises?

[lostinidlewonder]

In my defence, I didn't say it was jerky, I said it came across a bit jerky.

Yet you wrote:

"... 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. "

Even though here you are describing a situation where you mistook a question for a remark, you used blunt and jerk in your first sentence. Then you said "bluntly" and "a bit jerky". So you already used jerk in your descriptors and then decided to modify it (to what intensity who knows but yourself) although didn't modify your first sentence thus both stand and thus sets up a situation of arbitrary difference for the matter.

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.

There is no misinterpretation to admit to though. There was only your misinterpretation of a question as being a statement.

[mr.vitamin_water]

Thank you for all your answers. I am not s spam. My son picked this name for me! lol. I did studied all the pieces aforementioned and was obtaining gradual progress. Some  I was able to be at a level of just polishing them. As a musician you feel some ideas coming to your mind. But I forgot how ungracious some people might be toward other without knowing ANYTHING about them or where they are coming from. I will not explain myself or defend my " musical levels" since this is not a competition and we are talking about music. it supposed to be pure and gracious, but, men, being the wolf of men, choose to devour others. If you think I am a talent or a loser or crazy, etc, you are entitled to your opinion. But I do think that my almost 20 years of experience  count for something. Music and all its ways are extremely subjective ( not talking about imperfect technique)  and I happened to have my own subjective ideas. But any ways! thank you for the kind comments from some of you!

Sincerely,
Philip

[lostinidlewonder]

Gosh the melodrama, wolves lol. Could you explain yourself with music context of the Rach 3 vs all the other pieces and show why you think Rach 3 would act as a catalyst for your development of the other pieces? In your ~20 years of studying the piano are there particular pieces which helped you specifically with other pieces you learned later on? Could you connect those musical contexts for us because that is quite useful knowledge. Perhaps playing the victim card is easier, what to expect from single post poster threads, why does he sign his name when he does a melodrama response but not the op?

[visitor]

Would you recommend those over, say, the Liszt exercises?

I don't have direct experience w the Liszt or had a specific reccomendation to me if them but teacher before my current one was e Viardo for a very long time and she swore by them and assigned them to me , and when worked correctly over a long time they do wonders for my playing , I am more or less always working on them /some

I think the Dohnanyi ones are likely to be very good and compliment tue Liszt , I have been needing to look over the Jonas method and exercises , I suspect they're way more useful than their obscurity suggests