How to approach a new piece, in my case Gymnopedie No.1

[mickelil]

Hi,

Currently, I wish to learn Gymnopedie No.1. However, I am always confused about how to begin the learning process. A lot of pianists recommend the following (and I will put my questions next to them):

- Listening to a/multiple different performances to feel the sound of the song, and help your interpretation of the song.

- Analyze the score. How should you go about analyzing a score? I know that the answer will depend on the piece, but which stages exist and what specific steps usually get accomplished at those stages.

- Identify difficult sections and break them into smaller chunks.

Thanks

[roncesvalles]

First, I would have to recommend you get a teacher, who can instruct you and build you up to where you can play pieces like this.

My general approach to learning new pieces is to sight read them first, even if this reading is well under tempo. This way you get a general idea of the piece, its challenges, where you need to consider precise fingerings, what the dynamic and emotional narrative to the piece is, etc. If you can't do this, it's a sign that the piece will be quite a challenge to you, and you should consider simpler pieces to build up your technique to the point where you can play the work. As a beginner, analysis-wise, I would keep an eye on the general structure of the piece, what its melodies/motifs are, what kind of accompaniment there is, and the harmony on a bar to bar basis. As you get more proficient with music, your analytical eye will sharpen, and these basic analytical awareness will become second nature, and you can focus on greater analytical and musical detail. To play this piece, you should be able to play chords and voice a melody over the chords at a pretty quiet dynamic. You also need to be able negotiate leaps in the left hand while using the pedal, so if you're a beginner you should practice the piece hands separate. It's not a technically demanding piece, but being able to leap with your left hand while keeping the melody stable and using the pedal is tricky at first.

[lelle]

- Analyze the score. How should you go about analyzing a score? I know that the answer will depend on the piece, but which stages exist and what specific steps usually get accomplished at those stages.

It's a very vague and broad request indeed. It depends on how much music theory you already know. But some things to look at:
- Structure. Are there any recurring sections in the piece? Where are they, how do they fit together? Are the recurring sections identical or slightly different/varied? Are there non recurring sections? What function do they fill? Do they serve as transitions between recurring material? Does it follow any formal frameworks you are familiar with, such as ABA form, sonata form...? This helps you orient yourself where you are in the piece, helping you with memorization and making decisions about your interpretation.
- Harmony. If you know music theory, harmony, counterpoint etc, you can analyze what's happening harmonically, again helping you with making interpretation choices and memorization.

Since it sounds like you are more of a beginner, I would maybe focus on getting an overal idea of the structure of the piece, and seeing if there are any chords you recognize, helping you memorize those spots. You don't have to do everything I mentioned at this stage.

[lostinidlewonder]

If your question is how to analyse and practice a small part of the piece then post a fragment of the work and let's discuss how to do it.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Learn the bass line by itself, learn the right hand by itself then play the bass line and right hand together. 

Learn the chords in the left hand by itself.  Some of them are large so you can cheat and omit some of the notes if you can’t reach.  Then do the left hand bass notes and chords together.

Do the right hand and the left hand chords together.

Once you’re comfortable with all that try putting the whole thing together.  Maybe do a few measures at a time or something.  Like measures 1-4, then 3-7, 6-9, etc (unless that’s too easy).  That’s a good general start

[essence]

Remember that in a popular piece like this you will find many terrible recordings on youtube. Listen to a well known pianist.

Analyse the dynamics very carefully, and observe them.

Just listened to this

i=zExXKgNZcs9VG5G8

I am in very much two minds!

His 1984 recording is much more conventional and one to emulate.

His Clair de lune the same - not sure if I like it or hate it, but certainly different.

I do like his Faure, such as the 4th Nocturne. Yes, I think he is a master, and his Satie is fine, even though it might first seem strange. But maybe a learner should not use him as an example, controlling the rubato and holding the overall arch is not easy.

[emnari]

Hii! I love the song you're interested in. Whenever I'm analyzing a piece, I start from the very beginning and work on only a few lines/measures at the beginning before moving on. My first step is always about getting the beat down and I have a metronome (although pretty old) at home to help me count or my mom helps keep count (cus she used to be a piano teacher). I think there's a lot of cool metronome apps online if you don't have a physical one. I usually ask my piano teacher to point out discrepancies before I get to doing dynamics. Once I have the beat down pat, I begin incorporating dynamics with the metronome (no free flowing hands yet!) and work on bringing the melody out. At this point I would work on a single measure like multiple times in a row so that I can fix silly mistakes  once I know I have like the dynamics down, I start playing it without the metronome and then add articulation or whatever...also, I find that listening to piano performances of ur song before you start playing will really get you in the mood for practice! Good luck 

[skari123]

Considering your questions, you should not be worried about analysis at all. Identifying difficult sections and breaking them down is a classic advice given by almost everyone and yet few seem to know how to do it. The main thing is making the learning process less confusing and complicated. If you can't do that, the odds are stacked against you. Everyone is going to have an opinion on what pianists recording you should listen to so you might as well disregard all suggestions and go find one you like yourself. Find 3 recordings you like and pick one from those 3 that you like the most and use it as a model for how you want to play the piece. Listening to 100 different recordings is only going to confuse you with 100 different ways to play that piece. When you have found the recording you like open the score and try to follow the music while listening. What do you notice in the score? Are there any themes/melodies/chord progressions that repeat themselves? What difficulties do you think you will face learning the piece? Don't think just about technical difficulties but also memory and general information processing. What section will be the hardest to memorise? Its going to be hard for anyone to guess what problems you are facing with this piece, but if I make an educated guess you will likely have difficulty coordinating the left hand jumps with the right hand melody part. Playing the left hand part with both hands (bass in the left, chords in the right) will be confusing at first but will likely aid your memory and tracking two streams of music. Learn the melody thoroughly, learn the bassline, and learn the left hand chords. Put two parts together (fx. melody and bassline) and do different configurations of those parts exhausting every option (Bass+chords, Bass+melody, melody+chords). After you have done that putting all three parts together will likely be easier. Good luck 

[essence]

I agree that there will be different opinions on good performances, but I was making sure the learner does not learn from the many bad performances.

I think this is quite good

i=_0NmAvqa1nkFcL9h

apart from saying it is infamous rather than famous!

[essence]

vv

[rachmaninoff_forever]

I disagree with the finding a good recording and then copying it.  That’s like very anti art.  Listen to the music if you like the music.  A “bad” recording can have moments you like and a “good” recording can have moments you don’t like.  And just cause you like a part of a particular recording doesn’t mean you can execute it well enough to sound it better than that person.  In fact trying to emulate a recording almost always sounds worse than the original recording.  It’s better to develop your own taste and listen to YOUR OWN playing and figure out what you like and don’t like. 

Maybe listen enough to know what the song sounds like but other than that I wouldn’t marry myself to any recording unless you genuinely just like listening to it in your day to day

[skari123]

I disagree with the finding a good recording and then copying it.  That’s like very anti art.  Listen to the music if you like the music.  A “bad” recording can have moments you like and a “good” recording can have moments you don’t like.  And just cause you like a part of a particular recording doesn’t mean you can execute it well enough to sound it better than that person.  In fact trying to emulate a recording almost always sounds worse than the original recording.  It’s better to develop your own taste and listen to YOUR OWN playing and figure out what you like and don’t like. 

Maybe listen enough to know what the song sounds like but other than that I wouldn’t marry myself to any recording unless you genuinely just like listening to it in your day to day

How do you suppose you learned to walk? Did you figure it out yourself without resorting to copying others? Obviously not. Copying others is the basis to how we learn to do almost everything so it is impossible not to. We will never be able to copy others exactly and that is often what partly makes us unique. If everyone did everything exactly the same it's safe to say that it would be very boring. I find it interesting that you say that copying is anti art because art is exactly that, copying. Stravinsky didn't write the rite of spring out of thin air, he was using many different folk song melodies as many have pointed out (Although he was not aware of this himself). You cannot create anything out of thin air, nobody is a magician. Of course your recording of a piece influenced by another player is going to sound worse than the player you like, it's the reason you are practising. You develop your taste through listening to other recordings and adapt it to your playing, it's one of the ways you get better at the piano.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

How do you suppose you learned to walk? Did you figure it out yourself without resorting to copying others? Obviously not. Copying others is the basis to how we learn to do almost everything so it is impossible not to. We will never be able to copy others exactly and that is often what partly makes us unique. If everyone did everything exactly the same it's safe to say that it would be very boring. I find it interesting that you say that copying is anti art because art is exactly that, copying. Stravinsky didn't write the rite of spring out of thin air, he was using many different folk song melodies as many have pointed out (Although he was not aware of this himself). You cannot create anything out of thin air, nobody is a magician. Of course your recording of a piece influenced by another player is going to sound worse than the player you like, it's the reason you are practising. You develop your taste through listening to other recordings and adapt it to your playing, it's one of the ways you get better at the piano.

Okay so you’re comparing composition to performance those are two totally different skills and a separate conversation all together.   

Secondly you said to copy ONE recording.  That’s not the same as drawing inspiration subconsciously from hundreds of folk Melodies (you also advised him against listening to a bunch of recordings cause it might confuse him). 

Besides it’s not like the OP an alien or a newborn child and this is their first time ever hearing music.   

You develop your taste by listening to a bunch of different music not just one recording of one song

[skari123]

Okay so you’re comparing composition to performance those are two totally different skills and a separate conversation all together.   

Secondly you said to copy ONE recording.  That’s not the same as drawing inspiration subconsciously from hundreds of folk Melodies (you also advised him against listening to a bunch of recordings cause it might confuse him). 

Besides it’s not like the OP an alien or a newborn child and this is their first time ever hearing music.   

You develop your taste by listening to a bunch of different music not just one recording of one song

Composition and performance of those compositions both deal with art and therefore I decided to use composition as an example of how art has a lot to do with copying others, which you have previously stated as anti-art. I never told OP to copy one recording, I told him to find one recording he really likes, listen to it while following along with the score (no playing involved). This advice I gave had nothing to do with copying and more about getting a basic feel for the music, which is essential to the learning process. My recommendation on not listening to hundreds of recordings before learning the piece has more to do with encouraging OP to listen thoroughly to one recording before moving to others. Devouring 100 recordings is a sure recipe for disaster. Developing your taste by listening to other recordings is obviously not limited to one piece/song.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Composition and performance of those compositions both deal with art and therefore I decided to use composition as an example of how art has a lot to do with copying others, which you have previously stated as anti-art. I never told OP to copy one recording, I told him to find one recording he really likes, listen to it while following along with the score (no playing involved). This advice I gave had nothing to do with copying and more about getting a basic feel for the music, which is essential to the learning process. My recommendation on not listening to hundreds of recordings before learning the piece has more to do with encouraging OP to listen thoroughly to one recording before moving to others. Devouring 100 recordings is a sure recipe for disaster. Developing your taste by listening to other recordings is obviously not limited to one piece/song.

Yeah copying is very anti art in this context.  Most modern pianists sound the same.  Why?  Cause we’re taught to copy our teachers and whatever recording he recommends…. Which is probably one of the same 10 recordings everyone else recommends

Again, how Stravinsky developed his compositional language is a completely separate topic from how someone should learn a Satie piece and is totally taking what I said about copying way out of context. 

If the op wants to listen to one recording he should listen to one recording.  If he wants to listen to 100 recordings he should listen to 100 recordings.  It literally doesn’t matter.  You’re not gonna like get brain overload and not know how to play the song. 

But also OP do you.  You’ve gotten a lot of opinions and thoughts on this so there you go

[skari123]

Yeah copying is very anti art in this context.  Most modern pianists sound the same.  Why?  Cause we’re taught to copy our teachers and whatever recording he recommends…. Which is probably one of the same 10 recordings everyone else recommends

Again, how Stravinsky developed his compositional language is a completely separate topic from how someone should learn a Satie piece and is totally taking what I said about copying way out of context. 

If the op wants to listen to one recording he should listen to one recording.  If he wants to listen to 100 recordings he should listen to 100 recordings.  It literally doesn’t matter.  You’re not gonna like get brain overload and not know how to play the song. 

But also OP do you.  You’ve gotten a lot of opinions and thoughts on this so there you go

If you feel so strongly about copying in any degree being anti-art that's fine by me, doesn't mean I agree with you. I think it's funny how Harold Schoenberg's article on how the age of pianists is dead seems to live forever in anyones head that in some way criticises music and performance. Most modern pianists don't sound the same, it's the reason why people still buy tickets to their concerts. I do think that such an oversimplification on a complex matter like performance styles or how a pianist "sounds" says more about the person holding those beliefs than the big pool of pianists he criticises. Most top tier pianists got a career because they stood out in some way, they made a different impression on the listeners, which must mean that they didn't sound like everyone else. How else would they have been noticed? Marketing and presentation surely do play its part in the whole deal of making a career from music, but I have seen examples of musicians that seem to ride on the opinions of music critics and pure marketing and get nowhere. I once went to a concert with a pianist so boring that I couldn't wrap my head around how he could make a living, and then I found out that he didn't. He still comes by each year to play a recital, sure, but he never has been able to sell half of the seats available in the smallest hall in my local concert hall. He has never been invited to play with the orchestra. However pianists like Trifonov, Argerich, (Insert your favourite pianist here), seem to at least make a decent living playing all around the world, and most people rave about how fantastic musicians they are. Don't those pianists stand out in some way?
Again, my point about Stravinsky developing his compositional style has nothing to do with learning a piece by Satie and everything about how any artist develops a personal style, be it Music performance, painting or literature etc. How does that take anything you said about copying out of context?
There is absolutely nothing stopping OP from doing what he pleases, listening to one or hundreds of recordings. He asked for advice and I simply gave it. Now he can decide whether he disregards it or not, and I will go on with my day.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

If you feel so strongly about copying in any degree being anti-art that's fine by me, doesn't mean I agree with you.

I mean I know you don’t agree with me that’s why we’re having this conversation lol.  The issue is telling someone to find ONE recording they like and copy it is literally the most boring non musical thing you could possibly do.  There’s a difference between doing THAT and listening to a bunch of different recordings of the same and different songs and listening to YOURSELF to develop your own style subconsciously.   

Most modern pianists don't sound the same, it's the reason why people still buy tickets to their concerts

.

Uuuh if you go to anyone’s recital who’s not famous the concert is free and the only people attending are the family of the performer

How else would they have been noticed? Marketing and presentation surely do play its part in the whole deal of making a career from music, but I have seen examples of musicians that seem to ride on the opinions of music critics and pure marketing and get nowhere.

Being LUCKY, marketing, and able to play well enough to convince your average artistic director you’re still good while you’re jet lagged and under practiced.

 

However pianists like Trifonov, Argerich, (Insert your favourite pianist here), seem to at least make a decent living playing all around the world, and most people rave about how fantastic musicians they are. Don't those pianists stand out in some way?

Bro and Argerich aren’t most modern pianists lol.  You’re pointing at two of like the top 15 “best” or most popular pianists to prove that most modern pianists don’t sound the same. 

Again, my point about Stravinsky developing his compositional style has nothing to do with learning a piece by Satie and everything about how any artist develops a personal style, be it Music performance, painting or literature etc. How does that take anything you said about copying out of context?

You don’t develop a personal style by avoiding listening to recordings out of fear that you’ll get confused.  Besides you said your advice had nothing to do with copying.  So if I’m not talking about you, what’s the issue here?  If I throw a stone and it hits holler if it doesn’t then don’t.   

[essence]

I disagree with the finding a good recording and then copying it.  . 

I don't think anybody suggested that, certainly not myself.

skari123 didn;t say 'copy ONE recording' either, unless I have missed something, and I have a life to live.

I think skari talked about copying others (plural) and using good performance as a model.

One thing I find interesting is how many recordings play little attention to the dynamics.

[essence]

I mean I know you don’t agree with me that’s why we’re having this conversation lol.  The issue is telling someone to find ONE recording they like and copy it is literally the most boring non musical thing you could possibly do.

This is not a conversation. This is a misrepresentation.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

I don't think anybody suggested that, certainly not myself.

skari123 didn;t say 'copy ONE recording' either, unless I have missed something, and I have a life to live.

I think skari talked about copying others (plural) and using good performance as a model.

One thing I find interesting is how many recordings play little attention to the dynamics.

His 1984 recording is much more conventional and one to emulate

💀

[skari123]

I mean I know you don’t agree with me that’s why we’re having this conversation lol.  The issue is telling someone to find ONE recording they like and copy it is literally the most boring non musical thing you could possibly do.  There’s a difference between doing THAT and listening to a bunch of different recordings of the same and different songs and listening to YOURSELF to develop your own style subconsciously.   
.

Again with the one recording, really?
I didn't advise OP to do that, and you would know that if you bothered to read my comments before criticising them. Listening to more recordings of the same and different songs gives more variety, there is no arguing with that. But after listening to those bunch of recordings there is a good chance you won't like them all, so you will prefer those you liked more and are therefore going to draw more inspiration from it, subconsciously or not. There is nothing that says that copying recordings means that you stop listening to yourself. People learn differently, and not everyone is going to soak up things to their taste naturally, so they need a more actionable approach, which might mean copying others and then deciding whether they like it or not. It's up to each one to decide what they think is best, and maybe they realise later that their choice was bad and they hit a wall so they try again with a different approach. I'm sorry if it offends you, but deciding that the way you think is best to develop taste and style, and stating that others are bad, boring etc. without considering the endless variability people learn is simply put narrow-minded.

.

Uuuh if you go to anyone’s recital who’s not famous the concert is free and the only people attending are the family of the performer

What is your definition of "most modern pianists"? If you have a pianist that has no other audience than his family, it's safe to say that that individual is not an established pianist, not yet anyway. Even if you have attended many concerts like that it still does not give you enough credibility to state that they all sound the same. Again, that's just oversimplification.

.
Being LUCKY, marketing, and able to play well enough to convince your average artistic director you’re still good while you’re jet lagged and under practiced.

Of course being lucky plays it's role in the formation of a musical career, but that, marketing and being able to play well under pressure is not the only factor. Anyone who has seen a list of chopin competition winners will know that not everyone who was lucky enough to win it are able to sustain a career in the long term.

.
Bro and Argerich aren’t most modern pianists lol.  You’re pointing at two of like the top 15 “best” or most popular pianists to prove that most modern pianists don’t sound the same. 

As opposed to what, going to your cousin's piano recital and deciding that most modern pianists sound the same? You can play with the definition of "most modern pianists" all you want, doesn't mean you have made a point.

This is not a conversation. This is a misrepresentation.

I think this sentences adds up a lot of the things Rachmaninoff_forever has said in previous comments. If he is incapable of having a debate without resorting to purposeful misinterpretation, I truly feel sorry for him. Best of luck to you pal.
 


 

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Again with the one recording, really?
I didn't advise OP to do that, and you would know that if you bothered to read my comments before criticising them. Listening to more recordings of the same and different songs gives more variety, there is no arguing with that. But after listening to those bunch of recordings there is a good chance you won't like them all, so you will prefer those you liked more and are therefore going to draw more inspiration from it, subconsciously or not. There is nothing that says that copying recordings means that you stop listening to yourself. People learn differently, and not everyone is going to soak up things to their taste naturally, so they need a more actionable approach, which might mean copying others and then deciding whether they like it or not. It's up to each one to decide what they think is best, and maybe they realise later that their choice was bad and they hit a wall so they try again with a different approach. I'm sorry if it offends you, but deciding that the way you think is best to develop taste and style, and stating that others are bad, boring etc. without considering the endless variability people learn is simply put narrow-minded.

What is your definition of "most modern pianists"? If you have a pianist that has no other audience than his family, it's safe to say that that individual is not an established pianist, not yet anyway. Even if you have attended many concerts like that it still does not give you enough credibility to state that they all sound the same. Again, that's just oversimplification.

Of course being lucky plays it's role in the formation of a musical career, but that, marketing and being able to play well under pressure is not the only factor. Anyone who has seen a list of chopin competition winners will know that not everyone who was lucky enough to win it are able to sustain a career in the long term.
 
As opposed to what, going to your cousin's piano recital and deciding that most modern pianists sound the same? You can play with the definition of "most modern pianists" all you want, doesn't mean you have made a point.
I think this sentences adds up a lot of the things Rachmaninoff_forever has said in previous comments. If he is incapable of having a debate without resorting to purposeful misinterpretation, I truly feel sorry for him. Best of luck to you pal.
 


 

1.  You said find three you like then listen to one lol.  At least go back and edit it.  I shared my opinion without mentioning you and you immediately felt attacked so obviously I struck a nerve.  You’ll be okay it’s not the end of the world and I’m not here to hurt you baby😘

2.  All doesn’t mean most.  Talk about misrepresentation

3.  Yeah they can’t sustain the career cause preparing like 1-2 years for one piano comp isn’t the same as having to perform at the same level with an intense tour schedule.  Comp pianists and working pianists are two different things. Also there’s a lot of politics and corruption that go into who wins piano comps.

4.  Most modern pianists = most people who go to music school/comp heads in pursuit of a performance career. 

[lostinidlewonder]

I think we easily take for granted recordings and videos of performances. You hear how transformative witnessing great pianists was before the recording technology began. Some people would travel days to attend a concert! Today we have access to all this music. I remember before the internet and even during slow dail up internet speeds, you could hardly ever see videos of pianists play. I had one single VHS video of Horowitz playing piano but I was a teen when I got that! Seeing piano on TV was also an extremely rare occurrence.

So education wise listening to recordings and watching videos of accomplished pianists is very valuable. Copying mindlessly is bad, copying but undereranding it is fine, eventually you find your own voice.


BTW OP yet to respond to anything at all, pretty rude.

[essence]

Back in the day, I had a single recording of Moisevitch playing scherzos 3/4 and ballades 3/4. They became my ground zero. Nobody could ever say they could copy him! But at least I had in my mind what I wanted to achieve, as a starting point.

Going back to the original issue. Pascal Roge can use a lot of rubato in the recordings I posted. He can do it, it seems at first strange but he is an established master pianist.

Learners often use too much rubato and the beat gets lost. So if a learner used Pascal Roge as a model, they could get unstuck - they would not have his ability to keep a beat whilst using lots of rubato. They think they are putting emotion into the music, but in reality it is a mess.

I also note that Pacal Roge does not always keep hands together - fine for him, maybe not for learners.

Hence my comment that more 'conventional' recordings may be a better starting point.

I don;t know what RF is on. My advice is 'stop digging'.