Piano App Feedback

[pitchpave]

Hello everyone, we're gathering insights for a piano practice app idea and would greatly value your feedback. If you're interested, please visit [www.pitchpave.com] to participate in our short survey and/or leave your suggestions in the comment box provided. Your input will help shape the development of the app. Thank you kindly!

[ego0720]

If you are going to ask for our opinion, on a forum that is about conversations and exchanges of ideas rather than an -advertisement-, the least you can do is to provide why you think it would be better than some of the other AI apps that are already established and what gap that is currently not met.  And engage here.

I'll start with your website: "Imagine your piano practice redefined with cutting-edge AI technology where instant feedback ensures progress that is both rapid and enduring. This vision of PitchPave aims to transform practice into an art form, where precision meets passion in every piece you play."

This is vague. I currently use apps that already gives me feedback that is instant (via microphone). When the market is split in so many ways, there is fatigue in yet another "me too" app.  There can never be too many good apps but there are so many beginner-intermediate apps without a more clear path towards a specialty.  I imagine that you will be addressing something more specific than those who are new to the art. 

[pitchpave]

I appreciate your candid feedback and understand your concern about the saturation of similar apps in the market. PitchPave is still in the development stages, and our goal is to shape it with the invaluable insights from learners. It's not yet a fully-fledged application; it's a set of ideas that will be refined through the feedback we're receiving. While I can't divulge too much detail about our plans at this juncture, I can assure you that we are committed to providing a variety of feedback types and covering a broader spectrum of musical elements than currently available tools. Our app is designed to offer a structured learning path that is both tailored and directed, aiming to give more clarity and guidance than what's out there. Thank you for taking the time to engage with us—your input is vital in helping us create an app that truly meets the needs of dedicated piano learners.

[geopianoincanada]

My approach towards piano is very old school. My belief is that if old school was good enough for the great famous composers and pianists over 100 years ago, it's still good enough today. So you won't find any support for an app in my home let alone any horrid AI rubbish.

[ego0720]

My approach towards piano is very old school. My belief is that if old school was good enough for the great famous composers and pianists over 100 years ago, it's still good enough today. So you won't find any support for an app in my home let alone any horrid AI rubbish.

Ultimately, I agree with you that the journey for the student to become proficient is lead by hard work with material that is already established over the centuries.  And there is no shortcut except to plow through what already is in the literature and "old school" people or those with that mentality -the chosen ones- will find a way.  The problem is the "old school" ethics is declining and its a reality we must accept and try to adapt to the next gen to assist with the art.  Its frustrating for us who think "old school" but we have to include technology in adapting skill transference to the next generation.. or forever lose that connection.  I am ambivalent on this point and still pondering.. is it a natural part of our evolution?  Are we reaching a stage in the cycle where this is to be expected?  Another user cited me Socrates and how he expressed disappointment in human memory when "writing" was made available 1000 years ago (context was every predecessors attitude towards next generation on their declining ethics or IQ because of "technology" or newer methods that makes things easier).  If this mentality had gone for over 1,000 years certainly something is inaccurate.  On tackling Socrates, I had a problem in that analogy because if writing was the reason humans are utilizing less of their memorization skills.. and thats bad for humanity.. it doesn't account for the increase in critical thinking skills that develops as a result of writing.  If writing had been eliminated then, our memorization may have increased but we certainly wouldn't have been able to document works in the last millenium to advance our knowledge across time.  The art of memorization was compromised, from the advent of writing, only to open new door for new information that otherwise wouldn't have been built from the foundation of those before.  The question begs then, is "technology" necessarily bad?  This is the same premise for AI-based softwares.  We should consider new technology as to how it can benefit the experience. It can hurt too so all considerations should be acknowledged.

For many who otherwise wouldn't have discovered piano, the AI has helped bring piano to a wider audience.  I think AI so far has helped bring new students in and has been good for business.  And I currently use one.. seen the rest.. all have been more or less similar.  I still think its good for the beginning students for 1 year or two to engage.. and after that I just can't imagine using it in the intermediate or advance stages without then consulting a human expert.  I can see where AI could grow.. but the cost benefit analysis in the case for intermediate and advanced will not be justified unless that population is willing to pony up adequate support or motivation for said project. I have my doubts there would be strong interest in catering apps in this part of the demographics as they will seek help by other professionals.  Unless the app can be created quickly, easily, and is sustainable -- I don't know what are the upfront costs. But I also understand that AI improves by the large number of submissions .. so the larger the base the better the AI can get.  For the latter group, I think it is not "powered" enough to make the AI worth the effort unless one can incisively penetrate a large portion of that market (that is diffracted because of direction, multiple paths, and lacking in unison esp among experts as to what constitutes the best next step -- many differing opinions on this and is left on the individual teacher). Thus bringing us back to where the money goes.. an app that attracts the casuals. Those are the cash grabs.

I'm interested to see where some AI apps pop up but it would be beneficial -before- an app is developed to have a clear direction on where its going.  Too many times what could have been avoided easily with clarity and purpose does not pan out well.. to wing it so to speak and hope for the best.  Sometimes this does work but more often than not leaving things up to chance doesn't do it right.  However it may be an experience for those involved with the development to benefit for yet something bigger down the road..