Books on piano practice method?

[ranjit]

I have generally seen book recommendations on piano technique. But are there any good books on piano practice methodology? Articles or monographs would be fine as well.

I'm trying to find a thorough treatment of practice methods. Currently, I am only aware of Bernhard and Chang. However I'm sure Neuhaus or someone similar must have written a book on how to practice better, somewhere.

[frodo3]

I’m guessing there are not many if any books that limit the discussion to piano practice methodology.  Technique books often talk about piano practice methodology in the context of learning a technique and sometimes for practice in general.  Teachers and videos also will discuss piano practice methodology.  Example: Paul Barton gives a great discussion on piano practice methodology for learning Chopin Etude 1 in C, op. 10.  He methodically breaks the piece down into bite size chunks of exercises that specifically are targeted to learning the piece.  You should also be able to do the same - come up with your own exercises to help learn a piece.

Piano practice methodology always will involve 2 concepts 1) Quality and 2) Repetition.  You can have tons of repetition that will amount to nothing without quality and visa-versa. 

Quality involves quality technique, sound, control and accuracy.  Quality will usually require that you play slower at first and gradually increase speed.  Of course, the material that is practiced must also be of quality.  Practicing a poor quality exercise with good technique, sound, control and accuracy will be of no use.

[martinn]

Chang’s book has a reading list. That is pretty comprehensive list of modern piano books ( from 1950 onwards). Well worth looking up those books. But practice specific they are not, practice methods can be in those books alongside other pianism related.

[timothy42b]

Chang's reading list is good.

I'd highlight Abby Whiteside though, as extremely influential and an independent thinker, even though a lot of people disagreed with her ideas. 

[ranjit]

I’m guessing there are not many if any books that limit the discussion to piano practice methodology.  Technique books often talk about piano practice methodology in the context of learning a technique and sometimes for practice in general.  Teachers and videos also will discuss piano practice methodology.  Example: Paul Barton gives a great discussion on piano practice methodology for learning Chopin Etude 1 in C, op. 10.  He methodically breaks the piece down into bite size chunks of exercises that specifically are targeted to learning the piece.  You should also be able to do the same - come up with your own exercises to help learn a piece.

I think what I'm interested in is discussion of how long it takes to see progress, and how that slope grows with time. Also, discussions regarding diminishing returns, how to structure different aspects of practice and how they interrelate.

Thanks everyone for the links.

[frodo3]

I think what I'm interested in is discussion of how long it takes to see progress, and how that slope grows with time. Also, discussions regarding diminishing returns, how to structure different aspects of practice and how they interrelate.

Maybe there is a doctoral dissertation dealing with these items in relation to learning piano or maybe any instrument.  Would require statistical analysis of a sufficient sample size to be of any relevance.  This would be tough to do since there are so many factors such as start age of learning, time spent practicing, program of study, motivation to learn, some base measurement of talent, etc.

[ranjit]

Maybe there is a doctoral dissertation dealing with these items in relation to learning piano or maybe any instrument.  Would require statistical analysis of a sufficient sample size to be of any relevance.  This would be tough to do since there are so many factors such as start age of learning, time spent practicing, program of study, motivation to learn, some base measurement of talent, etc.

Of course, it would be difficult but I do not think it's impossible to come to such conclusions. With some well placed assumptions and anecdotal experience, I think it should be possible come to some good conclusions.

I do not think a total statistical analysis is really necessary for something like this to be of use, although it would be necessary if you wanted something comprehensive.

After reading the Chang book, I realise that it doesn't go deeper into possible practice methods.

[frodo3]

Of course, it would be difficult but I do not think it's impossible to come to such conclusions. With some well placed assumptions and anecdotal experience, I think it should be possible come to some good conclusions.

I do not think a total statistical analysis is really necessary for something like this to be of use, although it would be necessary if you wanted something comprehensive.

After reading the Chang book, I realise that it doesn't go deeper into possible practice methods.

If the study is not done with proper scientific methods, the results are meaningless - PERIOD.  Also, a scientific study with insufficient depth would reach conclusions like - "It can be seen that faster progress in learning piano was obtained by those who practiced more hours." and other obvious conclusions.

To conduct such a scientific study to have any major significance, would require maybe 20 years and a billion dollars.  As it turns out - without any such scientific studies, piano virtuosos are in abundance of supply as it is - so there is no demand for such a study.  ALL just IMO of course.       

Congrats on reading Chang's book!   

[frodo3]

I think what I'm interested in is discussion of how long it takes to see progress, and how that slope grows with time. Also, discussions regarding diminishing returns, how to structure different aspects of practice and how they interrelate.

Actually – let me start over having looked at your original post again with more thought.  I should give more thought before replying.  Sorry about that.  You do ask a good question.  Sorry for the length!!!  Don’t feel you need to read this.  It was fun for me just to think about this.

Let’s look at progress on a piece of music for an individual.  Let’s say the piece is the THIRD FOURTH movement (EDIT: oops! ) of op. 2 No. 1 by Beethoven – his piano sonata no.1 in F-Minor.  We have a jury of 3 expert pianists/teachers.  20 individuals that never played this piece are chosen by audition.  The jury picks individuals that they believe can learn this piece at desired performance tempo (EDIT: Prestissimo) with reasonably good quality sound and accuracy in a period of about 40 hours based on their teaching experience and expertise. We do not want students that are too advanced or not advanced enough.   Maybe this is too restrictive of a standard for the jury.  Maybe have jury pick students that they feel this piece would be challenging but not too challenging. But maybe this is too subjective?  So many questions.  Let's go with the 40 hour standard for now.  EDIT: All students in study should be at about the same level.

So, we look at 20 such piano students and measure their progress over time. We require that these 20 students practice exactly 2 hours a day on this piece for the next 60 days – total 120 hours of practice.  At the end of each day, the jury members award a score from 0 to 10 for each of the 20 students based on a performance of the piece at the end of the day.  Points are deducted for playing below the required performance speed, for playing with poor quality sound (poor phrasing, dynamics, articulation, uneven sound, etc), and for making mistakes (wrong notes, rhythmic inaccuracies, stops and stutters, etc.).  Memorization is NOT required.  The scoring system will be carefully defined and agreed upon by the judges.  Example – a student would score a 10 only if he/she shows world class potential and gives a stellar performance.  The scoring is carefully designed so an improvement from a score of 5 to a score of 6 is the same as the improvement from a score of 9 to a score of 10 (for example).  So improvement is calculated by simply taking the new score less the old score. NOTE: It is an extremely difficult task to define this scoring system and the jury must apply it uniformly.  Let’s assume it is possible.  Scoring is to the nearest 1/10th – Examples: 7.4, 9.2, 5.0.

Now from this data we should be able to answer your questions!  Take the average of the scores for the 20 and plot it on a time graph.  Have statistician do best fit curve.  Let’s look at the slope which will show the point of diminishing returns.  Should be around 40-50 hours I'm guessing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now let’s do the same for 60 more piano students – all chosen the same as before.  This time they will be broken down into 3 groups of 20: A, B, C.  Each person’s practice will be monitored by one of the judges.

Group A practices the piece following a set of guidelines for practice.
Group B practices the piece following a different set of guidelines for practice.
Group C practices the piece following an even different set of guidelines for practice.

Expert pianists work to come up with 3 contrasting sets of guidelines for practice.  These guidelines need to be carefully developed. 

When all is done, have a statistician perform a statistical analysis of the data to see if there are significant differences in the 3 methods of practice.  Also look at original 20 students that practiced using their own unguided practice methods. Total cost for study - $400,000?? – Not bad but I would be interested to see the results.

Edit: Have Additional $?  Now do same studies with piano students that can learn Clementi op.36 No.1 Sonatina first mvt to acceptable level after 20 hours practice - 60 days practice at 1 hour per day..  Modify practice methods in groups A, B, C so appropriate to this level of student.

[ranjit]

That is a good idea for a statistical study. I just feel like there are better ways to arrive at possible answers. It's hard to get students to commit to practice methods which they do not normally use, and even if they did, they would not be able to execute them as well as those who are familiar with the methods. Of course, it would be hard to make a double blind study of the kind you mention which takes into account many different factors. However, even a longitudinal study of a large population can provide valuable, statistically significant insights. They would not have the same level of indubitability, but it's often a better method when we have so many different variables.

[frodo3]

That is a good idea for a statistical study. I just feel like there are better ways to arrive at possible answers. It's hard to get students to commit to practice methods which they do not normally use, and even if they did, they would not be able to execute them as well as those who are familiar with the methods. Of course, it would be hard to make a double blind study of the kind you mention which takes into account many different factors. However, even a longitudinal study of a large population can provide valuable, statistically significant insights. They would not have the same level of indubitability, but it's often a better method when we have so many different variables.

Actually - I believe this study is of very little, if any value.  It would be impossible to come up with an adequate scoring system.  I have a better way to do this study but I will spare you from all the details.   

By the way - the students would be paid for their participation and also be given incentive money for improvements.  This may bump up cost of study to $600,000 USD. 

If you want to post details for your proposed study, I will comment on this next month.  I am looking for very detailed description of how the study will be done.  No generalities - just specifics.  Also estimate cost.   

[brogers70]

Apart from the methodological problems of designing and performing the study, there's another problem. How do you get piano teachers to use the results? Even in medicine, which is more of a science and less of an art that piano playing, it has been very hard to get doctors to use evidence-based medicine when what the evidence tells them to do contradicts their own experience (e.g. one of their patients has a rare serious side effect after taking a drug and the doctor underprescribes that drug in the future based on his clinical experience, even though the data shows he should use it and that the benefits much outweigh the risks).

I expect that piano teachers would, largely, be even more inclined to ignore even well-designed studies and say something along the lines of "Well, such studies are contrived and artificial, I have years of experience teaching and it know what practice methods work for which students; it's more an art than a science and trying to reduce it to something clinical and objective will take the life out of it."

[frodo3]

That is a good idea for a statistical study. I just feel like there are better ways to arrive at possible answers. It's hard to get students to commit to practice methods which they do not normally use, and even if they did, they would not be able to execute them as well as those who are familiar with the methods. Of course, it would be hard to make a double blind study of the kind you mention which takes into account many different factors. However, even a longitudinal study of a large population can provide valuable, statistically significant insights. They would not have the same level of indubitability, but it's often a better method when we have so many different variables.

P.S. - Each of the student participants will be trained for 3 months on the assigned new practice methods using the first and 2nd mvts of the first Piano sonata by Beethoven in advance of the study.   

Let's just make the budget for the study equal to $1 million USD. 

[frodo3]

Apart from the methodological problems of designing and performing the study, there's another problem. How do you get piano teachers to use the results? Even in medicine, which is more of a science and less of an art that piano playing, it has been very hard to get doctors to use evidence-based medicine when what the evidence tells them to do contradicts their own experience (e.g. one of their patients has a rare serious side effect after taking a drug and the doctor underprescribes that drug in the future based on his clinical experience, even though the data shows he should use it and that the benefits much outweigh the risks).

I expect that piano teachers would, largely, be even more inclined to ignore even well-designed studies and say something along the lines of "Well, such studies are contrived and artificial, I have years of experience teaching and it know what practice methods work for which students; it's more an art than a science and trying to reduce it to something clinical and objective will take the life out of it."

Good points on all.

[ranjit]

I expect that piano teachers would, largely, be even more inclined to ignore even well-designed studies and say something along the lines of "Well, such studies are contrived and artificial, I have years of experience teaching and it know what practice methods work for which students; it's more an art than a science and trying to reduce it to something clinical and objective will take the life out of it."

This is precisely what I wanted to optimize -- I saw the state of piano pedagogy and it wasn't very evidence based, and I wondered to myself if I could find a more scientific way to learn. Eventually though, I've kind of realised that people often come up with very efficient methods through intuition which really closely match those in a lab setting and can even go beyond. So now I'm not so sure anymore.

[ranjit]

Actually - I believe this study is of very little, if any value.  It would be impossible to come up with an adequate scoring system.  I have a better way to do this study but I will spare you from all the details.   

Longitudinal studies are quite effective if done properly. Pretty much all of the studies we have on musical prodigies, for instance, are longitudinal studies.

However, I do see issues arising because everyone will focus on different areas, making it so that one person's sight reading is weak while another's ear needs work, one works on fast passages while the other works on fine shading, etc.

[frodo3]

Longitudinal studies are quite effective if done properly. Pretty much all of the studies we have on musical prodigies, for instance, are longitudinal studies.

If you want to post details for your proposed study to your original question that I show below, I will comment on this next month.  I am looking for very detailed description of how the study will be done.  No generalities - just specifics.  Also estimate cost.  You can do a longitudinal study if you want.  You need to consider - how do you measure progress?  How do you convert what is heard in a performance to a numerical score so these scores can be analyzed?  If you don't convert to a numerical score, how will you measure progress and how can you analyze this progress?

I'll be looking for your post.      

However, I do see issues arising because everyone will focus on different areas, making it so that one person's sight reading is weak while another's ear needs work, one works on fast passages while the other works on fine shading, etc.

I was focused on the specific request you made shown next and I believe I came up with a study for this. 

Ranjit asks - "I think what I'm interested in is discussion of how long it takes to see progress, and how that slope grows with time. Also, discussions regarding diminishing returns, how to structure different aspects of practice and how they interrelate."

I was focused on progress in the learning of a piece of music. The nonpractical and imprecise scoring method I outlined in an earlier post was:

At the end of each day, the jury members award a score from 0 to 10 for each of the 20 students based on a performance of the piece at the end of the day.  Points are deducted for playing below the required performance speed, for playing with poor quality sound (poor phrasing, dynamics, articulation, uneven sound, etc), and for making mistakes (wrong notes, rhythmic inaccuracies, stops and stutters, etc.). The scoring is carefully designed so an improvement from a score of 5 to a score of 6 is the same as the improvement from a score of 9 to a score of 10 (for example).  So improvement is calculated by simply taking the new score less the old score. NOTE: It is an extremely difficult task to define this scoring system and the jury must apply it uniformly. 

I believe I have a simple and workable solution for the scoring method that is very precise and I will describe if asked.

[ranjit]

Not a researcher myself so I don't have an approximate way to approximate cost But if I design a research study, I'll post it here.

Your scoring method looks at tempo, articulation phrasing dynamics, and mistakes. In other words, it's focused entirely on the craft aspect of piano playing, but doesn't take into account musicality. I see musicality as different from simply phrasing and following the score appropriately, so this is not covered in this scoring approach. Otherwise, it is probably very similar to what examiners already use.

You could probably just ask a random sample of 5 (or 10) ABRSM examiners to rate the performances and get a fairly reproducible scoring system. In principle this is due to the law of averages, much like estimating the number of candies in a candy vending machine by taking the average of 100 guesses.

[frodo3]

Your scoring method looks at tempo, articulation phrasing dynamics, and mistakes. In other words, it's focused entirely on the craft aspect of piano playing, but doesn't take into account musicality.

You may know the story: When Paul Wittgenstein gave a performance of Ravel's masterpiece - his piano concerto for LH alone - he changed the music that Ravel wrote. He wanted to be creative I'm guessing.  When Ravel complained after hearing his performance, Wittgenstein shouted "Performers must not be slaves!”.   Ravel shot back "Performers are slaves!”

[lostinidlewonder]

Practice method to me is defined as how to learn a piece from start to finish in the more effective use of time. There are many tools used for practice method which include but is not limited to, fingering analysis, sectioning works, simplification of works, controlled pausing,  identifying patterns such as movement groups (when your hand moves and says at rest), positional patterns and logical statements regarding how one position is held and how one position may move to the other, how to visualise a group of notes with a conscious statement or a muscular feeling in the hands, developing the three forms of memory (conscious, muscular and sound) etc etc etc. Defining all of these with actual examples and clear statements is a huge job and I think no one dares do it because of the vast spectrum that exists for all of these for the early beginner all the way to the most advanced. I'm sure there are books that take this on a superficial level though, but this can be deceiving and people may undervalue ideas because it is not presented in a relevant level that fits their personal needs. So yes, practice method is a huge beast and depends on the specific individual to really appreciate its use on their own terms.

[Bob]

I bet there's a treasure trove in graduate and doctoral theses.  It would just be how to find that.

[ranjit]

I bet there's a treasure trove in graduate and doctoral theses.  It would just be how to find that.

I'll look into this and see if I come up with something.

[kosulin]

Practice methods for different ages, for amateur beginner, advanced student, and concert pianist would differ tremendously.
Here are titles that Ive  read:
- Playing the Piano for Pleasure, by Charles Cooke (1941)
- The Mindful Pianist, by Mark Tanner (Faber, 2017)
- The Psychology of Piano Technique, by Murray McLachlan (Faber, 2017)
- Piano Practice - practice routines and techniques for concert pianists, by Bryan Wallick (University of Pretoria, 2013) - degree study with 3 pages of bibliography.

There is also Practising the Piano, by Graham Fitch - multimedia series and blog which might answer some of your questions.

You might want to look for books aiming at piano teaching methodology, they usually cover a lot of topics related to teaching kids, beginners and other students, including recommended routines, etc.

There are books in Russian which are very hard to find and which were never translated - by Goldenweiser, Kogan, Feinberg, etc.

[ranjit]

Thank you, that is a great list!

[kosulin]

Oh, and I completely forgot one more book (very advanced IMO) which could be titled "Practice by Example":
Cervino, Alessandro; Laws, Catherine; Lettberg, Maria; Lisboa, Tânia. The Practice of Practising (Leuven University, 2011)
This is somewhat unusual book consisting of 4 chapters, each one is devoted to one piece (written by J. S. Bach, Elliott Carter, Morton Feldman, and Alfred Schnittke respectively), and explore the process of score analysis, learning, technical and performance preparation for this piece.

[electrodoc]

I would like to add to Kosulin's list two more helpful books:
Graham Fitch: Practising the Piano.
This is a downloadable book of approx. 300pp.
Pub. Informance. Copyright: Graham Fitch.
Covers many aspects of practise: Slow practise; fast practise; Use of metronome; Rhythms; stopping practise; Chains; Skeleton practise; Rearranging the hands; Transposition; Silent practise; etc.
Part 2 concentrates on aspects of technique: muscular tension; soft practise; the closed hand; finger independence, etc.

See also Graham Fitch's many You Tube video presentations (free).

Also of note is: "The Complete Pianist" by Penelope Roskell (Available from Amazon.)

I hope that this will be of some help.
Electrodoc.

[lelle]

Have you checked out the Gieseking and Leimer book on Piano Technique? They talk a lot about mental practice, it's quite interesting if a bit dry.

[kosulin]

I was looking for something in my guitar library, and hit a book I completely forgot about:
- Practicing Music By Design, by Christopher Berg
It is mostly instrument agnostic, has a bit of bias towards historical developments, and can be a good reading as well.

Penelope Roskell’s ‘Complete Pianist’ mentioned earlier is more like encyclopedia of different techniques, with exercises, and detailed explanations for developing various technical skills IMO. Do not expect to read it through. But it also has big chapters devoted to studying, artistry, healthy habits, etc. And these are a good read for anybody IMO. What is special about this book - it is complemented by few hundred small videos on editionpeters.com/completepianist. You can scan a QR code in the book from your phone to open a video related to a topic explained. Or open the site in a browser and watch whatever video you want.

[danesi]

So this might not be a practice book, but have you all forgotten about the timelessness of Czerny? Might be just as useful as a whole literary art described to finger strengthening exercises and the like. 

[anacrusis]

So this might not be a practice book, but have you all forgotten about the timelessness of Czerny? Might be just as useful as a whole literary art described to finger strengthening exercises and the like. 

Playing exercises without knowing what you are doing, what you are trying to achieve or how to achieve it is sadly not very helpful. You can literally make your technique worse playing Czerny the wrong way!

[kosulin]

Sheet music, would it be scales, Czerny, or WTC, cannot be considered a practice method book.
Technique is just a tool.
Proper practice should develop:
- piece analysis skills
- hearing
- imagination
- expression
- technique
- healthy habits
Practicing is so much more than doing scales, finger exercises or other technical studies. Technique just allows to properly transform what you see in the score and hear in your head to what comes from the piano. But a good practice approach should develop your artistry complemented by proper technique.

[Bob]

I still have never really found "it" for how to practice or learning in general, esp. something that's beyond a beginner level.

[ego0720]

…Graham Fitch: Practising the Piano.
This is a downloadable book of approx. 300pp.

Graham Fitch. Part 1 volume 1-3, part 2 volume 1-3, part 3 (no volumes), part 4 (volumes 1-3).  I feel like I’m buying by the chapters and it’s a marketing mess. He puts his evaluation very high. Anyone read his books and agree with his pricing? Does he cover grounds can’t be found elsewhere?

My gripe is that I wish it was a compendium.

[ogdred]

Hi Ranjit,

I am a little late to this thread, but have you read Sheryl Iott's Thinking and Playing Music: Intentional Strategies for Optimal Practice and Performance? It's a very different approach from the other books that have been discussed here, more from research in cognition and learning than pure anecdotal. She is heavily influenced by Edwin Gordon's Music Learning Theory, which you are probably familiar with.

The book is divided into three main sections, with strategies for beginning, intermediate and advanced musicians. Iott is a pianist, and most of the examples are from piano literature, but the book is not solely about improving piano technique, as it is intended for any musician.

I am only about halfway through, but I have found some of the strategies interesting, especially as intentional versus passively acquired skill.

[lelle]

Hi Ranjit,

I am a little late to this thread, but have you read Sheryl Iott's Thinking and Playing Music: Intentional Strategies for Optimal Practice and Performance? It's a very different approach from the other books that have been discussed here, more from research in cognition and learning than pure anecdotal. She is heavily influenced by Edwin Gordon's Music Learning Theory, which you are probably familiar with.

The book is divided into three main sections, with strategies for beginning, intermediate and advanced musicians. Iott is a pianist, and most of the examples are from piano literature, but the book is not solely about improving piano technique, as it is intended for any musician.

I am only about halfway through, but I have found some of the strategies interesting, especially as intentional versus passively acquired skill.

It's always valuable to have new contributions even in old threads That book sounds interesting, might check it out.

[ego0720]

Hi Ranjit,

…Sheryl Iott's Thinking and Playing Music: Intentional Strategies for Optimal Practice and Performance? … heavily influenced by Edwin Gordon's Music Learning Theory…

Thanks! I’m probably gonna pick her book. I looked at Edwin Gordon but it seems more theory than application. I have a feeling of too much pedantry or dryness to keep my adhd at bay.

This is a different topic but I kinda noticed a few musicians have adhd. I wonder the brain processes too fast and we never learn to just calm down naturally (ie stop thinking).

[ogdred]

Thanks! I’m probably gonna pick her book. I looked at Edwin Gordon but it seems more theory than application. I have a feeling of too much pedantry or dryness to keep my adhd at bay.

I also had a look at Gordon's Learning Sequences in Music, but couldn't really get into it. I do feel that his concept of audiation is an important one (hearing music in your head before playing), and that is definitely where my weakness is, but didn't get enough immediate return in terms of practical ideas. I think that Iott's book is a more practical overlay on Gordon's theory.

This is a different topic but I kinda noticed a few musicians have adhd. I wonder the brain processes too fast and we never learn to just calm down naturally (ie stop thinking).

I am ADHD/ASD as well, certainly I find keeping to a consistent practice routine almost impossible. For whatever reason, I am able to hyperfocus on sight reading in the past year, and have been able to keep that up somewhat obsessively.

[lazze]

I still have never really found "it" for how to practice or learning in general, esp. something that's beyond a beginner level.

I'll have to join the choir here. I've played the piano for 22 years, have a master's degree in music, but I have no clue how to practice.. never found out to this day, hence why I also rarely practice.

[anacrusis]

I'll have to join the choir here. I've played the piano for 22 years, have a master's degree in music, but I have no clue how to practice.. never found out to this day, hence why I also rarely practice.

Why not practice despite not knowing how? I'm sure you'll learn more in the trenches than on on the side