New Music Notation

[keypeg]

Just in case there is interest - and because the original question actually comes from a quest to get at music from other angles - here is how "Fuer Elise in F#m" played out for me, with my particular background.  Because I tried it that day.

So I'm 95% relative pitch, though some latent pp seemed to develop accidentally via an exercise I was given for something else.  Moreover, the only way I had for relating to music, for decades, was via the kind of Solfege I was given in a primary grade one year.  That is: major scale with Do as Tonic; minor scale with La as Tonic - modal like the medieaval monks sort of.  I used to write music down in my own short hand "m r d" = Mi Re Do.  I've had to develop the other side of it, where A is a specific pitch and place on the piano (hard to explain).

Fuer Elise also happens to be a piece I learned early through the hand-me-down book I was given as a child.  When my parents moved house and left the piano behind, they gave me a guitar, and I brought the entire piece over to guitar, using the way I hear music to do it.  For decades, Fuer Elise has been "Mi Ri Mi Ri Mi Ti Re Do La" (with the minor Tonic being La).  This sort of made me hear the relative major at the same time, and it's a messed up system.  (V7 is heard as starting on Mi with an altered note.)

So the first thing that happened to me was that darned Mi.  In Kodaly Solfege that would have been So.  Well, knowing how I relate to music, I decided to focus on the relative major = A major.  In either case, the first note in F#m is C#. (which is also Mi in A major).

I then had to build a "keyboard map" of A major or F#m - which black and white keys.  Then you're just jumping up and down the degrees of that scale - how I had always perceived music.  The first chord is Im or i, the 2nd chord is V7 (but in my messed up Solfege that would have been vi and III (i.e. raised 3rd degree).   I've done some work with chords by now: realizing that the 2nd chord is C#7, I switched to the chord playing skills I have gained.

That gave me the first couple of measures of Fuer Elise, and it didn't take long. bit it did take longer.

What I was drawing on was also very close to Puck's system.  If music is diatonic, and you can perceive it along degrees of the major and minor scales (which is what C major does for many people by association, aka the "white key scale"), this helps you transpose into all other keys.  I had that part.

But I have a weak "keyboard map" - i.e. that muscle memory of A major, F# minor, Db major etc.  Anyone wanting to use Puck's system for transposing should have their grasp of major and minor to be solid, including and especially in relationship to the black and white keys of the piano.

It is also good to have a grasp of chords.  When you have that Im V7 Im going on, It's easier and faster if you already have chords in your hands, mind's eye, or whatever.  There are skills that get used; notation systems by themselves work hand in hand with that set of skills.  Which is a conclusion we both came to regarding Puck's demo: that his other skills are part of that demo.

[keypeg]

I think we can reasonably assume that any such pupil von Bulow had was a formed concert artist, just as we can assume everyone who got a second lesson with the Weimar Liszt was (there being plenty of cases where he had given one lesson charitably, and a second was not forthcoming).

Concert artist is a profession.  As learners, we're concerned with prerequisite skills.  Therefore, these concert artists had training numbering years - and we'd want to know what training they had in order to be able to meet v. B's expectations.

let's put it this way, I would assume that with most students past the beginner level if you said "play an IV V I cadence in C major" and then to play / transpose it in F# major that would not present any problem ......

Let's stick with the I IV V I cadence, for the moment.  There is a lot of poor teaching out there.  It is possible for a student to reach "intermediate" level without knowing that IV or V exist.  If you're choreographed: finger numbers; copy me; copy the video; slog through over and over until you produce the music somehow.

You cannot even assume that the student can even play the I IV V I cadence, if the student never got taught about it.  That is why I raised the point.

I had no teacher first time round as a child, and in some ways that was good because at least I explored and observed, which was better than the "poor teaching" scenario.  I had that book of sonatinas, with a tone of Clementi.  I passively absorbed the chord sequences like an unschooled child speaks grammatical sentences; when I finally studied traditional theory decades later, I was merely getting names for patterns I already had in my system.  In a sense, having no teacher was better than having a poorish teacher who might have stunted my growth through tricks.

however how easy is it for a good student to, for example, play a Beethoven slow movement from the score but in the "wrong" key? My guess is that typically it's pretty difficult: I can do it (and clearly so can perfect_pitch) but my experience is that this is not the majority view. Maybe things were different in 1850?

Which goes back to: How were they trained?
Also - was it everyone?  When there started to be a "piano in every (upper middle class) parlour", did the housewife also end up being able to do this?  Was her training the same?  What is it that those with these abilities got trained to do from the earliest age to the point where they ran into a Van Bulow who expected these abilities from them?

By any chance, are there clues to this in how good jazz musicians learn?

In my mind, this thread isn't really about "new music notation" (alone), but the OP's quest to get beyond the present framework.  This isn't the first student who has tried to stretch past that.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Let's stick with the I IV V I cadence, for the moment.  There is a lot of poor teaching out there.  It is possible for a student to reach "intermediate" level without knowing that IV or V exist.  If you're choreographed: finger numbers; copy me; copy the video; slog through over and over until you produce the music somehow.

You cannot even assume that the student can even play the I IV V I cadence, if the student never got taught about it.  That is why I raised the point.

I find this quite staggering tbh. Maybe my musical education was atypical in that I worked with legitimate musicians, but when I was a kid, it was an absolutely required prerequisite that if you sat grade 8 piano practical, you also had to have passed grade 5 theory, and that would mean you knew about basic cadences.

[keypeg]

I find this quite staggering tbh. Maybe my musical education was atypical in that I worked with legitimate musicians, but when I was a kid, it was an absolutely required prerequisite that if you sat grade 8 piano practical, you also had to have passed grade 5 theory, and that would mean you knew about basic cadences.

Until the Internet, we all lived within our own experiences and circles, and that forms our picture of "what is".  As we collect here, that picture is still there.  Those who have had your kind of background can't picture anything different, while others don't know anything is missing in theirs.

The way I got to this awareness:  Initially I'd learned on my own for decades.  Then I took violin lessons as an adult and something was amiss.  I started to find out what that was; also got a piano again after 35 years while looking at "how music is learned and taught."  I ended up interfacing with teachers and also fellow students, including in PMs.  The teachers told me what they encountered, how they taught, and some, misteaching that they themselves had had to correct during their own journey.  That's how I got my own broad picture.  If you trace the background of some students, interacting - including those who had lessons as children - you'll often find huge holes or misperceptions in what they learned or didn't learn.  The thing is that if you didn't learn it, you also don't know what's missing.  I've explored these things with various fellow students over the time since joining PW and PS, and teachers have also told me of things they encounter in transfer students.

[perfect_pitch]

however how easy is it for a good student to, for example, play a Beethoven slow movement from the score but in the "wrong" key? My guess is that typically it's pretty difficult: I can do it (and clearly so can perfect_pitch) but my experience is that this is not the majority view. Maybe things were different in 1850?

They didn't have TV's back then, or Tiktok. Seriously - think about how much more your students would practice if they weren't glued to YouTube or social media for hours a day.

[keypeg]

They didn't have TV's back then, or Tiktok. Seriously - think about how much more your students would practice if they weren't glued to YouTube or social media for hours a day.

Seriously - this bothers me - because it discounts everything that was just written about the topic as if I had said nothing.  (I'd appreciate you reading it, and giving your thoughts).  In order to be able to do these things, one must be given the prerequisite knowledge - from someone or somewhere.  I mean, I just wrote at length about it.
And "in those days" not everyone was able to do those things.  Those who were taught.  What percentage of the population was that?  Would you mind having a look at what I wrote about that?

[perfect_pitch]

Seriously - this bothers me - because it discounts everything that was just written about the topic as if I had said nothing.  (I'd appreciate you reading it, and giving your thoughts). 

First of all - I did read everything you read. You also have to realise we are dealing with a LARGELY different generation than those in 1850. Bach himself and the organists at Weimar probably had to transpose on the spot, and it was probably part of their training as a musician. Maybe teachers would use simple pieces and get students to transpose to flesh out their proprioception at the piano.

My point was that people in 1850 didn't waste a lot of their free time, and usually used it to a great extent to do something meaningful. A piano in a house was seen as a prized possession back in the 1850's and usually parents would have their children practicing for a good hour or two daily at least.

Why don't I teach my students transposition? Because my students these days spent every day of the week doing something different. On Monday they do yoga after school, on Tuesday they do horse-riding, on Wednesday they do Basketball, on Thursday they do Ballet, on Friday they do Swimming, on the weekends they do their team sports... and very FEW of them have more than 15 minutes a week to do any practice... but will happily admit that they go on their iPads and watch YouTube videos, or watch their favourite game on Twitch for hours on end playing frickin' Fortnite.

I wasn't trying to be crass or to ignore what you said - but the mindset of todays young generation is VASTLY different to those in the 1850's. Transposition isn't necessarily really needed in todays world. Once we get keyboards that can transpose, most people who can't transpose just used the transposition feature. Heck... even guitars have Capos to help them play in a different key.

What else can I say?

[keypeg]

I appreciate both the fact of your reply, and that you read my writing.  It is often aimed at fellow students, and so wordy in order to fill in possible missing info that make it a chore to read.

The question of "why students nowadays/vs. then" has to be broken down more.  Clearly a teacher of your calibre would teach students throroughly, including giving them the prerequisites - what holds you back is the amount of work they are willing to do.  If you charge your worth, you're also likely to get some spoiled kids who are lazy because they don't appreciate what's coming at them.  But there is also mediocre teaching, poor teaching, and teaching that doesn't go beyond going through graded books as fast as possible. The prerequisites aren't there.

There are students who work, and work, and work, spinning their wheels, because they're not given the tools, and don't know what's missing. There is that side of it TOO.  If a student "can't transpose" - have they heard of a V chord?  Shockingly, maybe not.  Were they taught about key signatures in a way that makes anything past 2 sharps or flats scary-ominous?  Also happens.  We've got that too.

In the "old days" - I don't know who got taught what?  The aristocrats had the "Renaissance man and woman" who was supposed to be well versed in all the arts, and were carefully taught.  I remember reading in music history that music was dumbed down and made more predictable once there was "a piano in every (upper middle class) household".  Did these people also learn how to transpose?  On the fly?

On a practical level, if I want to learn to transpose, or how to improvise (like the OP), the question becomes, "What kinds of things do I need to learn to set me up for this?"  And "Did I get these things?"  And then do the work to get them.  There will not be shortcuts.

[perfect_pitch]

Exactly. I think nowadays, it's a question of what to teach the student that will be helpful for them to learn the music. While I don't usually teach 'much' in the concept of written theory during the piano lesson (as all Primary school students do music classes where they do Aural and Theory, plus I have only 30 minutes with each student), I'll make sure they know every symbol in their piece of music - the terms, the articulation, and ESPECIALLY the note names so they know how to read the music.

I don't teach them transposition because I'd say hardly any pianist these days NEEDS the ability to transpose. Heck, if you need to accompany someone doing an Aria and they need it transposed, you have Sibelius that can do that on the spot to scores.

We've now got tools that can do this for us. I think it's a little like Math in the 1850's - they didn't have calculators, but they had to use a slide rule to do their maths which involved more thought and focus from them. Now with calculators - you literally type in the sum and it gives you the answer. Has this made people dumber with mental maths... possibly; maybe that explains why there are still some kids today in Years 5 & 6 learning their times tables.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Let's stick with the I IV V I cadence, for the moment.  There is a lot of poor teaching out there.  It is possible for a student to reach "intermediate" level without knowing that IV or V exist.  If you're choreographed: finger numbers; copy me; copy the video; slog through over and over until you produce the music somehow.

You cannot even assume that the student can even play the I IV V I cadence, if the student never got taught about it.  That is why I raised the point.

Let's put it this way: if a student hasn't acquired the basic knowledge of chords, then they are seriously handicapped if they ever intend to progress beyond the utterly rudimentary (and the teacher is a lousy teacher, unless the object was merely to get the student to play the odd scale and read chords). Any pupil who wants to get beyond the purely functional needs to have the wherewithal that enables them to analyse the score they are playing from and extract and process therefrom. Concepts, often interlinked, like structure, modulation, separation of parts, etc. Whilst these aren't things you would typically introduce to a first year student, they are things any student who intends to go to music college and further education absolutely should be made aware of. Everyone has to start somewhere, but if they have no idea of choral progressions and relationships, they can barely be said to have a grip on some fairly basic aspects.

Simply put, a little basic harmonic knowledge goes a long way in terms of giving a pupil an understanding of what is happening in the piece he/she is learning. It will even subconsciously assist with memorisation if that is something ultimately on the agenda.


I'd agree with perfect_pitch that the ability to transpose at sight isn't mandatory in the way the above things are for a student looking to progress, but I'd say that it's definitely beneficial if you can do it. Imo it assuredly helps with improvisation and it's also a useful attribute in terms of developing harmonic understanding.

[keypeg]

Which brings us back to the reality that many students get shoddy education.  The thing with this is that if you're missing things, you don't know you're missing them, because you need the knowledge in the first place.  Similarly, if you're introduced to music things in a manner for "fast results" in the moment, that same thing can handicap you later.  The person learning that way will think this is "how music is" and won't know there are alternative perceptions that give a lot more flexibility.

[leonieschmidt]

I so agree with Keypeg's last paragraph. Yeah, transposition might be a somewhat dubious skill, but what I admire about it is what it also trains and enables musicians to do, harmonic knowledge and facilitating improvisation being one of them.

The problem is that what Puck and PP are doing is hardly within the norm of what professional musicians are doing. Re-arranging whole suits (referring to PP's medleys here) and improvisation isn't really what is expected from a classical musician nowadays, which reflects in today's classical concerts which I don't find too enthralling most of the time (although my parents made me go to a lot of those, I must admit).

I have another question: What do you guys (and gal) think of Jacob Collier? (Taking the risk of proposing too many young male musicians to you ) He clearly has a well documented 'professional' upbringing (I think both his parents are musicians, his mother a violin professor at an English university if I remember correctly). He did come up with some new concepts and is very productive in terms of compositions. Do you think that he proposes new concepts that are worthwhile looking at?

[perfect_pitch]

Which brings us back to the reality that many students get shoddy education.  The thing with this is that if you're missing things, you don't know you're missing them, because you need the knowledge in the first place. 

I don't know if that's really true in a sense. Do students really need to modulate on the spot? While it helps playing Church hymns, it hasn't really ever come up apart from that. I doubt I'll ever be asked to play Mozarts Piano concerto in d minor... in e minor.

Improvising? I think in order to improvise you need to FIRST have a GREAT ability on the keyboard, understanding of the scales, modes, keyboard proprioception - and sure, theory does help. If you only see them 30 minutes a week however, that's VERY hard to do.

I think as teachers (and I mean the good, hard-working qualified teachers), we teach everything we feel they need to know. Unless they want to pursue Jazz music, I don't really teach them improvisation - however that doesn't stop them coming up with little themes of their own to play to me.

I think sadly enough it does come down to something Keypeg said...

what holds you back is the amount of work they are willing to do.  If you charge your worth, you're also likely to get some spoiled kids who are lazy because they don't appreciate what's coming at them. 

[...]

There are students who work, and work, and work, spinning their wheels, because they're not given the tools, and don't know what's missing. There is that side of it TOO.

I've actually never heard of Jacob Collier... I'll try and look into him (I've just gotten back from work and I'm knackered. 1 more day to go till the school holidays).

The problem is that what Puck and PP are doing is hardly within the norm of what professional musicians are doing. Re-arranging whole suits (referring to PP's medleys here) and improvisation isn't really what is expected from a classical musician nowadays, which reflects in today's classical concerts

Thank you - although I wish that sentiment better reflected my YouTube view count... meanwhile, anyone who posts a 'Fortnite video' or someone playing the intro to that 'Dr. Dre' song gets millions of views. I mean seriously... THIS:

...has 2.7M views... yet this:

has doesn't even have 4K views.

Sometimes I just don't understand the world.

[keypeg]

I don't know if that's really true in a sense. Do students really need to modulate on the spot? While it helps playing Church hymns, it hasn't really ever come up apart from that. I doubt I'll ever be asked to play Mozarts Piano concerto in d minor... in e minor.

I'm talking about much more basic things.  If you've been well taught, and you teach solidly yourself, and if you are in a neighbourhood where you tend to get those kinds of students, you will have no idea how bad it is out there.  I also have the impression that music teaching all round is better in Australia than in some parts of the world.  I don't suppose you ever got a transfer student who maybe supposedly was doing grade 5 but can't tell you where middle C is.  And when you look at his material, it's full of finger numbers scribbled in by the teacher who had a "copy me" approach?

I think sadly enough it does come down to something Keypeg said...

I've actually never heard of Jacob Collier... I'll try and look into him (I've just gotten back from work and I'm knackered. 1 more day to go till the school holidays).

I didn't write about Collier this time round, but might have mentioned him some time in the past.  It's my main teacher who pointed him out to me, with great enthusiasm which has not waned.

Thank you - although I wish that sentiment better reflected my YouTube view count... meanwhile, anyone who posts a 'Fortnite video' or someone playing the intro to that 'Dr. Dre' song gets millions of views. I mean seriously... This .........

Sales tactics, hype, clickbait, who knows.  It's the same for everything.
Years ago i was on the phone with my someone, who had the TV on with some music program - finally I couldn't stand it anymore and wanted to know what the godawful cliche music was.  Fortunately I didn't qualify.  She was all enthusiastic - You should see how that violinist could jump in the air nd still never miss a note.  Well, that fellow had decent violin skills, but he got the views and the fame through circus tricks and "popular music" that "people could relate to".  Them's the ways of the world.

It can be that way in teaching too.  Get through 8 grades in two years with finger numbers, choreography and all - three pieces per grade - and then have some other teacher fix the mess as it all falls apart; and that teacher, who "goes more slowly", loses students to the first one's hype.   Caveat studens.

[lostinidlewonder]

Sometimes I just don't understand the world.

What is popular online is not necessarily good, you get used to that kind of pattern. The world outside of the internet is much more real and valuable where the virtual world is full of superficialists.


Early beginner students of mine may go through transposition of root position 5 finger position pieces to re-enforce the first 5 note positions of major scales. Transposing basic pieces can be interesting but the vast majority do not find it THAT interesting and much prefer learn something else. I really only encourage them to do it so they can play the same piece in many keys and get the feeling for those keys without having to learn different pieces to do so, it is also very quick and fast to apply. But to extend this transposition request further into pieces where you are moving about in multiple position within a single piece is just rather claustrophobic.

I am not a "Jazz" teacher so my perspective is from being a "Classical" instructor, those who deal with sheet music. You will lose the majority of your students if not all if you insist they have the capability to transpose all the piece they have just learned. Students put in a lot of effort just to master a piece and then we are to go ahead and challenge them to transpose it into a different key? As if that is something we should be doing? Students will want to move onto something else, playing a piece in a different key has the opportunity cost of severely restricting education material into a tiny box, highly claustrophobic. Any teacher who enforces their students to be able to play their pieces in several keys merely have lost contact with what is useful and interesting for students of the piano to learn.

There is not one practical piano exam in the world that I am aware of which demands students be able to play a given piece in any key that an examiner demands, no university examination requires that you play say a Beethoven Sonata in a key that is randomly chosen.

One should have the capability to SIGHT READ a piece written in any key but to require students be able to transpose from their head, this is just being rather ridiculous and no piano student is missing out on anything if they choose not to transpose in their heads any piece they play.

[leonieschmidt]

Two thoughts there: Wouldn't we all rather trust a musician who can transpose a piece on sight? And: Isn't it actually not about transposing itself, but about what capabilities come with it (similar to an athlete doing exercises that are not part of what they will actually be doing at the competition, but are strengthening muscle groups needed for them)?

[lostinidlewonder]

Wouldn't we all rather trust a musician who can transpose a piece on sight?

When discussing actual musical education what "trust" are you talking about when it comes to a student of music? What has "trust" got to do with transposition of written compositions? No one really wants to hear Beethoven Sonatas in different keys, people have better things to do with their life learning a piece in different keys when there are more pieces out there to learn than you have years in your life to life to accomplish them all.

[leonieschmidt]

"No one really wants to hear Beethoven Sonatas in different keys"... That's exactly what I was saying. Most people don't have perfect pitch, so the difference would not even be noticeable for them. So this isn't what transposing is for. I think that - just as music notation itself cannot be 'heard' but always needs the performing musicians as the 'middle-man/woman' - transposing itself is a means to an end. In this very case: more creativity, more possibilities when playing, sight-reading, improvisation, possible higher quality of composition (all things we don't really expect in a performing classical musician anymore, even in a soloist in a big orchestra). I feel like if you take the time to learn how to transpose (but maybe that's just my experience) it only seems like you spend more time short term. What you gain in the long run is much better. Kind of like kids learn how to write with a pencil, then with an inky, then with a real pen, then with the keyboard, instead of just one kind of pen.

This also reflects in most famous musicians (Friedrich Gulda, Jaco Pastorius, Herbie Hancock, Chick Corea) being very versatile in multiple genres. I think they were that good because they walked the extra mile, not the other way round.

And I do "trust" someone I know can do something more than someone who can't. Let's take PP's video for instance. It's good, and I believe him and - although he wasn't able to dissuade me from still trusting in Puck's notation rather than his - I think he'd definitely have things he could teach me that belong to (and go well beyond) transposition.

[lostinidlewonder]

"No one really wants to hear Beethoven Sonatas in different keys"... That's exactly what I was saying.

Yet you asked PP to play Fur Elise in a different key as if that is an important issue to contend with. So at what level does transposing a piece become irrelevant to you? Let me answer, transposing classical pieces really is not necessary at all, it more the skill of accompanists.

...transposing itself is a means to an end. In this very case: more creativity, more possibilities when playing, sight-reading, improvisation, possible higher quality of composition (all things we don't really expect in a performing classical musician anymore, even in a soloist in a big orchestra).

I feel you place transposition too high in importance. What do you exactly mean "means to an end"?  Sight reading, how does transposition help that any great amount when for example honing in one what you can sight read successfully and building a repertoire to study sight reading specifically with (which a challenging task which will develop sight reading skills much better than any transposition skill) is so much more important? Crafting compositions really is not going to improve if you can transpose, if you write something ugly no amount of transposing is going to help you and the same goes for improv.

I feel like if you take the time to learn how to transpose (but maybe that's just my experience) it only seems like you spend more time short term. What you gain in the long run is much better. Kind of like kids learn how to write with a pencil, then with an inky, then with a real pen, then with the keyboard, instead of just one kind of pen.

This doesn't say much at all. You go ahead and try to teach children to transpose many pieces they learn they will leave you as a teacher. There are much more important things to study, like exploring repertoire, sharpening practice method, building sight reading skills, learning your scales, chords, arpeggios etc, all much more important than merely being able to transpose a piece into different keys.

This also reflects in most famous musicians (Friedrich Gulda, Jaco Pastorius, Herbie Hancock, Chick Corea) being very versatile in multiple genres. I think they were that good because they walked the extra mile, not the other way round.

What other way around? In terms of classical education transposition really is not that important at all. If it was so important you would see entrance examination for music schools demand that you demonstrate transposition skills, none that I am aware of ask for such things, it would be tested in examination boards across the world, you don't see that happening.

And I do "trust" someone I know can do something more than someone who can't. Let's take PP's video for instance. It's good, and I believe him and - although he wasn't able to dissuade me from still trusting in Puck's notation rather than his - I think he'd definitely have things he could teach me that belong to (and go well beyond) transposition.

This is rather irrational though, again you place transposition too high in importance. Practice method, technical skill, musical expression, fingering logic awareness, repertoire awareness are all examples that trump transposition skills, I could list many more skills that are much more important. So to merely say you trust someone as an educator because they can transpose is a rather flippant measuring stick to say the least especially since the skill is lower down on the importance list.

[keypeg]

Two thoughts there: Wouldn't we all rather trust a musician who can transpose a piece on sight? And: Isn't it actually not about transposing itself, but about what capabilities come with it (similar to an athlete doing exercises that are not part of what they will actually be doing at the competition, but are strengthening muscle groups needed for them)?

Trust, in what capacity?  As an audience member?  As a student?  If it's as a student, then I trust someone who can teach !!!!  What is your purpose here?  And what is your purpose in general?
I am primarily a student and so sort of in your shoes, though I am also a trained teacher outside of music and looked into music teaching with my teacher.  As a student I want to learn.  I couldn't care squat if someone "can transpose" if that's what I want to learn to do, unless that person can also teach me how to do it.

[lostinidlewonder]

Trust, in what capacity? ..... If it's as a student, then I trust someone who can teach !!!!

Exactly keypeg +1

[keypeg]

"No one really wants to hear Beethoven Sonatas in different keys"... That's exactly what I was saying. Most people don't have perfect pitch, so the difference would not even be noticeable for them. So this isn't what transposing is for.

If a pianist is accompanying a singer who it turns out can't sing in that key, then the ability to to transpose becomes kinda important.  I once heard a recital where the singer slipped down a semitone and simply could not get back to where he belonged.  The accompanist did some deft sleight of hand for a plausible key change and continued the rest of the music in the same key as the singer. 

If you have been left with weak areas - which I believe you have, otherwise you'd not refer to "easy keys" and "hard keys" - then it would be good to go after the skills or outlooks that can turn this around for you., expand your musical world.  I'm not suggesting anything that I'm not doing myself. One way would be to consult a really good teacher who can help you sort this out.  Puck isn't just using notation to do what he does.  He is also using underlying skills. 

[perfect_pitch]

I didn't write about Collier this time round, but might have mentioned him some time in the past.  It's my main teacher who pointed him out to me, with great enthusiasm which has not waned.

Sorry, I was trying to reply to remarks made by you and leonieschmidt. The quote above about having students who don't try is where I was referencing you... and then went on about Jacob in reference to leonie bringing it up.

Also, while I don't have too much time left before I have to leave for work, I think Lostinidlewonder and Keypeg have made a great many points about transposition (while being cool to watch or listen to), doesn't really fare that high in the real world of piano teaching or performance. As I said  earlier - no one cares about hearing a piano concerto in d minor, in e minor and most people wouldn't realise it's in a different key anyway (as lostinidlewonder pointed out).

And as Keypeg said, I also feel Puck is using more skills than the notation system he shows in his videos.

[leonieschmidt]

Yep, most people wouldn't notice (I pointed that one out, too). I think some things Jacob Collier does (switching tunings mid-song) are things that a) cannot be done live and b) will be lost on most of the audience. – In either case, transposing is just something that I've just been doing habitually for the last month, and I - personally - don't feel like it's a waste of time for me. It makes me contemplate more what I'm playing, the progressions that I'm going through etc etc... I actually tried playing jazz standards with a clarinet friend a couple of days ago in a couple of keys, and it actually worked out after 15 minutes (started from C-major, then incorporated F-major etc). I'm not saying that this would be impossible with the old notation, I just fear that it would be harder to do. The training effect would still be very much there, of course. I don't think it's all that much about the notation we use, I think it's about what we do with it. 

[keypeg]

I think some things Jacob Collier does (switching tunings mid-song) are things that a) cannot be done live and b) will be lost on most of the audience.

Jacob Collier can definitely do this live, because he has an extraordinary ear and capacity.  I've discussed this a lot with my teacher, who can observe a lot more than I can.  Collier also uses his abilities to teach, to create awareness.  It is not "lost" on listeners because he is much more than an entertainer.

In regard to tunings, there are things that musicians do which create an effect in music.  The audience will not know what has been done, but the effect will be there - that is the essence of the "magic" in music.

I'm glad that Puck's notation is giving you new avenues.  That's what it's all about.   

[keypeg]

Sorry, I was trying to reply to remarks made by you and leonieschmidt. The quote above about having students who don't try is where I was referencing you... and then went on about Jacob in reference to leonie bringing it up.

Got it.  I missed Leonie having referenced Collier, and thought that I might have at one time, because I've been quite taken by what he can do, what he teaches, and how he does it.

[leonieschmidt]

Ahm, Mrs Keypeg, I beg to differ in this case: Let's take Collier's 'All I Need' for instance, there's a tuning shift somewhere close to the first chorus. Not only is it impossible to retune instruments while playing (one could do so when all musicians are using synths, but even then they would all have to be synced or programmed in advance which would take away from it all, I think), 99 percent of musicians (even most with perfect pitch) would have a hard time pulling it off, especially live. Also, what's the point if the audience doesn't even notice it? I think it becomes ever-so-close to becoming a circus trick. I am absolutely sure it is no such thing for Mr Collier, but shouldn't an audience always be the main focus of a musician, entertainer or not? I sometimes find myself listening to him and just mentally checking out, which is perfectly fine because most of what he says I have a hard time following... but I'm tempted to chalk it up to concepts he's discussing sometimes being a bit too 'out there' and hard to apply for the average musician. Off the top of my head, I can only remember Mr Collier marking a circle of fifth as subtly minor in nature, because the first notes of it cover the minor pentatonic scale... until I found someone else having made that discovery 20 years ago.

I do, however, find his enthusiasm and joyfulness an outstanding quality and a true hallmark of a good teacher!