should i start learning more difficult pieces?

[luk0ss]

Hello! i play piano for about a year now. i play pieces like waltz in c minor op 64 no 2, mazurka op 33. no.4,
mazurka op. 17 no. 4, some preludes from op 28 (no4, no7, no20). i play all this pieces in the right tempo and i think that i can play them well. should i start learning more difficult pieces like rondo op.1 in c minor or rondo a la mazur op 5? lately i was thinking to start learning one of them. please let me know what i should do and what chopin pieces would be the best for me to learn. thanks!!!!

[anacrusis]

It's not recommended to learn those difficult pieces when you have just played a year. First of all they are so difficult that you're going to struggle and not be able to play them in tempo, and your probably not going to play them well even at a slower tempo. Second of all, trying to force yourself through pieces like that when you are not ready is going to teach you many bad habits that will harm your progress. It's likely to be frustrating and suck. But sure, we can't stop you and if you want, try your hand at them just for the enjoyment of it. Just make sure to drop them you hit the inevitable wall and they feel even the slightest bit uncomfortable, and not try to force anything, it will do damage to your technique.

You could probably try the famous Nocturne op 9 no 2 if you want a more appropriate piece.

[droprenstein]

I'd strongly, strongly discourage it. Based on the fact that you can't read music, I'd argue that you can't play the pieces you listed very well. Why? Because the tutorials you learn from doesn't give you any information on the dynamics, articulation, or help you internalize the rhythm. Listening back to your recording of 64/2, it's apparent that you haven't learned any of that. Playing the notes isn't enough. Pianists spend years, I do mean years, perfecting their articulative and dynamic control, and learning how to internalize rhythm. You can't just skip all of that because you want to play Chopin. Chopin is very dangerous to beginners. I've seen far too many people fall in love with Chopin before they're ready to play his pieces. He's a great composer, but even his easiest works require a level of delicacy and control far beyond what most people can get to in a year. I, myself, played my first Chopin piece in the middle of my second year. In fact, at this stage, you should have great respect for anyone who can play any Chopin piece well. Even if that wasn't true, it seems you only play Chopin pieces. That's a bad idea in every way. Being a well-rounded musician is important. We all have favorites, but we don't get to only play our favorites if we want to be good pianists, and you were unlucky enough to have a favorite that doesn't suit your level. As for recommendations, you can't go wrong with some easy Bach and Beethoven pieces. Many of Beethoven's sonatina's aren't bad for beginners to learn, and the Anna Magdalena notebook has a few slightly more difficult pieces, but mostly consists of very much beginner-level pieces. So no, you shouldn't be attempting Chopin at all, let alone his more advanced pieces like the Rondos. You'll learn Chopin later on, and when you eventually do, you will play much better than you could hope to play today. Firstly, learn to read music. Next, learn some beginner pieces I listed, maybe others that you find yourself, but ensure that they don't go above Henle level 3. Maybe some of Czerny's easier exercises as a challenge project, but unless you want the angry ghost of Chopin judging you from beyond the grave, hold off on playing his music until you're more advanced. Best of regards.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Go for it.  You’ll figure it out yourself whether you can or can’t do it.  Don’t listen to anyone who tells you you can or can’t do something

[pascalxus]

If you're really itching to play a harder piece, you could try to go for it but the progress will be much slower.  It may be possible but it'll take a long time to get good at playing those pieces.  That's opportunity cost. 


If it takes you 5 times longer to play a hard piece than an easy piece, it means you could've learned 5 easy pieces in the same amount of time.  This is a very common thing I see, where people try to play harder and harder pieces.  I would recommend, find more easy pieces like Clementi opus 36 and other easy mozart pieces (the simplified versions of them).  Once you have about 30 of those under your belt, you can start getting ready for Bach invention 8 and 1 and 4. 


One benefit of playing lots of easier pieces is that it increases you sight reading ability ALOT more than playing the same 4 pages 1000s of times over and over.  And, you'll still get the benefit of improving your technique as well.


Don't be in a rush.  You have a lifetime to play piano.  I myself, have over 20 years of experience and although I'm capable of playing pieces like Fantasie impromptu, I mostly practice easier mozart pieces, bach inventions (even these can be quite challenging but excellent practice pieces), clementi, and lots of easy to medium sight reading pieces.

[mjames]

Go for it.  You’ll figure it out yourself whether you can or can’t do it.  Don’t listen to anyone who tells you you can or can’t do something

This guy right here understands it. There are literally users on this website (though they're long gone by now) whom managed to learn works like Chopin's op. 23 after only playing the piano for two years - though they're extremely talented.

Point of learning and playing music is all about experimentation. Experiment and see what you're capable of. If you fail, no big deal, just leave it alone and learn it sometime in the future.

To be fair though I was initially self taught and did some "jumps" as well, but there were nowhere near as drastic as yours. I think my most difficult pieces within the first 2 years were Chopin nocturnes and 2 Rachmaninoff preludes. Going from those pieces to the op 5 is a BIG jump.

 Rondo a la mazur is a piece I attempted and successfully performed in public about 5 years or so into playing piano. And I had a good deal of difficult pieces (Chopin's polonaises for example) under my belt by then. Learning it was difficult even with the help of a teacher. It's a bravado piece so you'll need to be well acquainted with the instrument to actually learn it. The piece utilizes the piano's entire geography (none of the pieces you listed have that feature), you have to be comfortable with an array arpeggios in several keys, comfortable with quick descending runs on your left hand, descending minor double thirds (the piece is in vivace mind you), large chords - pretty much everything in the piece you'll be encountering for the first time. I don't think it's feasible to be introduced to all of that in a piece as difficult and as long as this (it's like what, 12 pages long?). There's a good chance it'll kill your motivation for the instrument, because you'll spend a long time trying to learn it. If I was a teacher I'd advise against it and tell you learn a nocturne or something, but like I said there are people here who learned balldes within 2 years of playing the instrument. You might be one of those freaks, so why not go ahead and try it out?

Good luck!

[droprenstein]

In retrospect, I think my last post isn't totally accurate. I'd still discourage learning pieces far beyond your level(I've wasted years trying to do this), but if you're up for the challenge, I can't stop you.

[lelle]

This guy right here understands it. There are literally users on this website (though they're long gone by now) whom managed to learn works like Chopin's op. 23 after only playing the piano for two years - though they're extremely talented.

Point of learning and playing music is all about experimentation. Experiment and see what you're capable of. If you fail, no big deal, just leave it alone and learn it sometime in the future.

To be fair though I was initially self taught and did some "jumps" as well, but there were nowhere near as drastic as yours. I think my most difficult pieces within the first 2 years were Chopin nocturnes and 2 Rachmaninoff preludes. Going from those pieces to the op 5 is a BIG jump.

 Rondo a la mazur is a piece I attempted and successfully performed in public about 5 years or so into playing piano. And I had a good deal of difficult pieces (Chopin's polonaises for example) under my belt by then. Learning it was difficult even with the help of a teacher. It's a bravado piece so you'll need to be well acquainted with the instrument to actually learn it. The piece utilizes the piano's entire geography (none of the pieces you listed have that feature), you have to be comfortable with an array arpeggios in several keys, comfortable with quick descending runs on your left hand, descending minor double thirds (the piece is in vivace mind you), large chords - pretty much everything in the piece you'll be encountering for the first time. I don't think it's feasible to be introduced to all of that in a piece as difficult and as long as this (it's like what, 12 pages long?). There's a good chance it'll kill your motivation for the instrument, because you'll spend a long time trying to learn it. If I was a teacher I'd advise against it and tell you learn a nocturne or something, but like I said there are people here who learned balldes within 2 years of playing the instrument. You might be one of those freaks, so why not go ahead and try it out?

Good luck!

I'm one of those who'd advice against learning things too far beyond your ability. Why? Because it easily establishes bad habits if you try to force something you are struggling with to work. I was one of those people who started tackling a bunch of pieces far beyond my level at one point during my piano studies. I was reckless, and I think a bit arrogant, and wanted to hurry along to the pieces I liked. It worked, sort of, until it didn't and I got riddled with pain and poor technical habits for years. That's why I would warn against tackling things far beyond your level without expert guidance.

[ego0720]

I'm one of those who'd advice against learning things too far beyond your ability. Why? Because it easily establishes bad habits if you try to force something you are struggling with to work. I was one of those people who started tackling a bunch of pieces far beyond my level at one point during my piano studies. I was reckless, and I think a bit arrogant, and wanted to hurry along to the pieces I liked. It worked, sort of, until it didn't and I got riddled with pain and poor technical habits for years. That's why I would warn against tackling things far beyond your level without expert guidance.

Everyone will go through this ego phase bc of human nature (some don’t grow out of it). For most we eventually hit that stagnant wall bc of missing those core fundamental skills. As long as we recognize it and learn to change course it’s normal. The OP is smart enough to even ask this question to acknowledge the problem. There are many out there who don’t see the problem of mismatching skills.

I say experiment and listen to your body. But also read the advice posted here.. as all very good and based on experience.

Piano is hard to start and hard to master.  Be proud you overcame 1 barrier bc that’s a great accomplishment. But you can’t stop there. Make sure you also look at other aspects of performance. Ultimately it’s a feeling.. if brain logic is doing all the work.. you haven’t crossed the finished line. Your fingers got to do the dancing as if the ghost of [insert composer] possesses it. There is reason for a good piece of music so make sure you not only play the notes but interpret the song. That interpretation is what makes music. That is also why I subscribe to the belief that there can never be too many great pianists.

[lelle]

Everyone will go through this ego phase bc of human nature (some don’t grow out of it). For most we eventually hit that stagnant wall bc of missing those core fundamental skills. As long as we recognize it and learn to change course it’s normal. The OP is smart enough to even ask this question to acknowledge the problem. There are many out there who don’t see the problem of mismatching skills.

I get that. But if it at all possible, I think it's better to acquire those core fundamental skills at the beginning, and not after the fact. It will save people a lot of frustration and grief and wasted years

[ego0720]

I get that. But if it at all possible, I think it's better to acquire those core fundamental skills at the beginning, and not after the fact. It will save people a lot of frustration and grief and wasted years

You have goodwill and I recognize that.  And if somebody had told you how to do it right the first time that is ideal. But your appreciation for good technique went up after learning what not to do.  I would not call it "wasted years". More like organic development.  I'm trying to make you feel great even if you did it wrong.  Because that's the process that helped you continue.  You would not be as great a player today if you hadn't gotten that experience.  People just have to be mindful that there is an art to piano and many lessons to be learned from those who preceded us.  There is so much information that its almost a barrier.  The most important thing is that we do it and recognize problems as they come. Of course evolve.  We should be open about changing our regimen as more information comes in.  Everyone is at a different stage in training so the best management is awareness.  I'm a liberal. I think ppl should try things and not be afraid.  Adapt to the problems as they manifest.  We should be better than we were and not better than tomorrow.