Method - boring

[pianobr]

Hello everyone!

I play guitar... for more than 20 years. Recently, I started studying classical piano and learning how to read sheet music. However, something about my teacher's approach doesn't sit well with me. He wants me to go through all the lessons in a specific book (they're very simple lessons for children). I find that boring and tedious. I understand that reading music is important, but I feel like I could learn that by reading through simple repertoire instead. I feel stuck with this method — it seems too rigid. What do you think?

[quantum]

While method books can teach you  how to read, they are not the only source for learning that skill.  Learning the actual skill and being able to apply it is far more important than a regimented following of a method. 

Does this teacher instruct all their students in this way?  Have you brought this concern up with your teacher?

If this teacher is unwilling to adapt, it is possible that this teacher may not be a good fit for your learning style. 

[pianobr]

Yes. He teaches everyone that way and said that this is the way to learn.

[quantum]

If that is the case, I would start looking for another teacher.   

You might want to give your current teacher a few more lessons to evaluate if you are making progress, especially if you have only been with this teacher for a short time.   Some students respond well to this kind of teaching.  However, if the student's needs aren't being met due to a teacher's stubbornness, it can really be devastating to the student.  If this is truly the case, it is best to move on to another teacher. 


Are you able to have engaging discussions with this teacher during lessons?  Or is it more of a one-way discussion - do things my way or the highway type attitude?

[jonslaughter]

Hello everyone!

I play guitar... for more than 20 years. Recently, I started studying classical piano and learning how to read sheet music. However, something about my teacher's approach doesn't sit well with me. He wants me to go through all the lessons in a specific book (they're very simple lessons for children). I find that boring and tedious. I understand that reading music is important, but I feel like I could learn that by reading through simple repertoire instead. I feel stuck with this method — it seems too rigid. What do you think?

If you can do it then do it. Don't just say you can do it when you can't.

It's not complicated. Maybe you think it is simple but you actually don't know. Maybe you are the problem? Ultimately you do what you think is best. If you are wrong then you will suffer the consequences. If you are right then you will benefit from taking action.

It's not complicated. You are an adult.  If you feel that you are "being treated like a child" because you are made to use a "child's book" and you are right then he is the problem. If you are just arrogant and think you deserve "more respect" for your abilities then you are the problem.

There is only one way to find out. Either you listen to him and do what he says or you find someone else.

The other option is that you could address your issues with him and ask him why he is teaching that way to you.

My suggestion is that if you feel like you can teach yourself then you do that. This way you only have yourself to blame if it does not work out. If it does then you have yourself to thank.

What I can say is that if you find playing through child's books boring and tedious and actually can't do it then you are going to have major issues. Anyone that that can play "adult" music can play through child's music without issues. It's like how any adult that can read "adult books" can read "children's books".

I can understand the boring part because if you are used to playing more complex music on guitar then you will find the children's "tunes" very simplistic. But if you can't play them then how do you expect to play more complex pieces?

My suggestion is that you do what he says but also integrate your own ideas. This way you get the best of both worlds. This way no matter what you win. If he's right then you'll learn and if he's wrong then you'll learn. This will rewrite more time.

But the keyboard is the most tedious and boring instrument of all to learn on. But it is also the most rewarding once one masters it.

I played guitar for almost 20 years before I started taking piano seriously. I rarely play guitar now. Piano is about 10-100x harder to learn than guitar depending on the specifics and personal abilities and time.

You are going to have to "unlearn" a lot because while much of music theory translates to guitar you will have locked in a perspective of thinking that likely will cause you great difficulty. In many ways it is much easier to learn piano from scratch(no preconceived notions).

[essence]

i woudl have thought you could progress through this boring stage very rapidly? But there are some very basic skills which need to be learnt, such as playing with both hands.

If your teacher had a sense of humour, and said 'I agree these books are boring, but they allow you to rapidly gain some basic skills in a structured way, and we will soon be doing more interesting pieces soon'.

If on the other hand the teacher treats you like a child, run, don;t walk. You are the one paying the teacher.

[lostinidlewonder]

If any teacher tells you studying piano needs to be boring in parts then they just are really highlighting their inability to engage their students. Making you go through a lesson book without personally assessing your needs and interests is a sign of a lesser teacher imho. It makes me a little annoyed that there are teachers like this who indeed can turn people away from ever learning the piano, or hindering that journey, its an antithesis of what a teacher should be!

[lostinidlewonder]

If you can do it then do it. Don't just say you can do it when you can't.

He obviously is asking isn't there a way to do it like that, why doesn't this teacher he is employing understand how to make it more interesting like that. It is a totally fair ask. An experienced teacher would gladly then determine the type of music the student enjoys and create a course for them to study effectively.

It's not complicated. Maybe you think it is simple but you actually don't know. Maybe you are the problem? Ultimately you do what you think is best. If you are wrong then you will suffer the consequences. If you are right then you will benefit from taking action.

The question you are asking here actually should be directed squarely at the teacher not the student! I think you have it the wrong way around. In fact the OP's questions are perfectly normal and fair to ask and an experienced teacher should want to hear that and work with it.

It's not complicated. You are an adult.  If you feel that you are "being treated like a child" because you are made to use a "child's book" and you are right then he is the problem. If you are just arrogant and think you deserve "more respect" for your abilities then you are the problem.

Learning repertoire which feels "child like" is certainly something we need to make the student feel comfortable with. It's fine to ask them to do a few of these but an entire course of it? A modern day piano teacher needs to be able to understand the vast library of repertoire out there and know how to engage the student. A simplified version of a song they really like will have them working 10x harder than making them play Mary had a Little Lamb.

There is only one way to find out. Either you listen to him and do what he says or you find someone else.

This is imho a terrible way to work with a teacher and any teacher who expects their student to do 100% everything that is asked of them without any input from the student is a terrible teacher. A teacher is not an unquestionable source of enlightenment, the student should ask questions ask for material that aligns with their interests, in fact a good teacher would desire very much so to hear this from a student!

The other option is that you could address your issues with him and ask him why he is teaching that way to you.

I don't think the student needs to understand it more so than the teacher needs to understand the student. Sure ask why, but then express that its not working well and it is demotivating, the teacher then should change the approach, give music that excites and encourages the student, not just say, "oh here is a generic set of works that students study, I couldn't be bothered creating a course for your own interests." That just shows a teacher who cant create lessons customized for their individual students, a lazy teacher, an ineffective one too imho.

My suggestion is that if you feel like you can teach yourself then you do that. This way you only have yourself to blame if it does not work out. If it does then you have yourself to thank.

He obviously has 20 years of music education with another instrument and understand the benefits of a good teacher. Why would he self learn if he wants good synergy with a teacher which can save a lot of time.

What I can say is that if you find playing through child's books boring and tedious and actually can't do it then you are going to have major issues. Anyone that that can play "adult" music can play through child's music without issues. It's like how any adult that can read "adult books" can read "children's books".

That's fair enough. I think however motivation plays a critical role to ones progress. Why should an adult study a childs book when there is a plethora of repertoire choice and teaching avenues to use them!

I can understand the boring part because if you are used to playing more complex music on guitar then you will find the children's "tunes" very simplistic. But if you can't play them then how do you expect to play more complex pieces?

Again I think this comment is misunderstanding that there is so much repertoire out there that can engage students of all tastes of music.

My suggestion is that you do what he says but also integrate your own ideas. This way you get the best of both worlds. This way no matter what you win. If he's right then you'll learn and if he's wrong then you'll learn. This will rewrite more time.

To study with a teacher and to also do totally your own thing is not utilizing a teacher effectively. There shouldn't be this secretive disjoint between the two. The teacher should engage with the student and understand what motivates them to learn, that only benefits their lessons together greatly. I am pretty annoyed at teachers who don't do this and just "cookie cutter" teach their students.

But the keyboard is the most tedious and boring instrument of all to learn on. But it is also the most rewarding once one masters it.

No pianist has the right to put barriers around the entire musical world and say piano is the most rewarding if you master it, and no one who hates musical education could say its the most boring instrument to learn on. So your comment here is bewildering and potentially harmful if anyone accepts any part of it.

I played guitar for almost 20 years before I started taking piano seriously. I rarely play guitar now. Piano is about 10-100x harder to learn than guitar depending on the specifics and personal abilities and time.

If this is your personal experience fine, but I don't think its useful to say such things because the experience is subjective.

You are going to have to "unlearn" a lot because while much of music theory translates to guitar you will have locked in a perspective of thinking that likely will cause you great difficulty. In many ways it is much easier to learn piano from scratch(no preconceived notions).

I have taught many guitarists piano and their knowledge of guitar enhances their ability to learn the piano. Your comment is like saying, a physics expert should never dabble with abstract mathematics.

[essence]

One suggestion - try learning some simpel Scubert piano accompniments? They are musically very satisfactory, and on the surface not difficult.

One or two from Winteriesse or Die schone mulleren. . Of course early works like Gretchen am Spinnrade. the srenade (I see there is a guitar version of this - maybe he knows it or can learn the guitar version too).

[essence]

i=Ou3WC_W-AHV_xzjW

[essence]

i remember when growing up the household had a copy of the more famous Schubert songs, plus Mendlesohn SWW, and some opera transcriptions (not Liszt!) and I enjpyed going through them all Much more fun than the graded ABRSM music books..

[satiefanatic]

I saw this thread as I was looking through this forum to see if it was a good place to ask questions, and here are my thoughts as someone who has been playing guitar for over 20 years:

I personally don't like music teachers overall, they don't explain things that are very suitable for their students, they're teaching method is normally just a guided tour of their methods.

HOWEVER, as a guitarist, you probably do not know how to read music. I am skipping this part as a novice pianist as classical guitar taught me how to read music on the treble cleft, but if you REALLY want to play piano, you absolutely will be better off with sheet music literacy unless you are blind. It sounds this current teacher can help you do that, even if you have to play mary little lamb and similar songs. If you still disagree, try to either find a more compromising/flexible teacher, or buy one of hose beginner piano books and teach yourself to read music.

[jonslaughter]

He obviously is asking isn't there a way to do it like that, why doesn't this teacher he is employing understand how to make it more interesting like that. It is a totally fair ask. An experienced teacher would gladly then determine the type of music the student enjoys and create a course for them to study effectively.
The question you are asking here actually should be directed squarely at the teacher not the student! I think you have it the wrong way around. In fact the OP's questions are perfectly normal and fair to ask and an experienced teacher should want to hear that and work with it.
Learning repertoire which feels "child like" is certainly something we need to make the student feel comfortable with. It's fine to ask them to do a few of these but an entire course of it? A modern day piano teacher needs to be able to understand the vast library of repertoire out there and know how to engage the student. A simplified version of a song they really like will have them working 10x harder than making them play Mary had a Little Lamb.
This is imho a terrible way to work with a teacher and any teacher who expects their student to do 100% everything that is asked of them without any input from the student is a terrible teacher. A teacher is not an unquestionable source of enlightenment, the student should ask questions ask for material that aligns with their interests, in fact a good teacher would desire very much so to hear this from a student!
I don't think the student needs to understand it more so than the teacher needs to understand the student. Sure ask why, but then express that its not working well and it is demotivating, the teacher then should change the approach, give music that excites and encourages the student, not just say, "oh here is a generic set of works that students study, I couldn't be bothered creating a course for your own interests." That just shows a teacher who cant create lessons customized for their individual students, a lazy teacher, an ineffective one too imho.
He obviously has 20 years of music education with another instrument and understand the benefits of a good teacher. Why would he self learn if he wants good synergy with a teacher which can save a lot of time.
That's fair enough. I think however motivation plays a critical role to ones progress. Why should an adult study a childs book when there is a plethora of repertoire choice and teaching avenues to use them!
Again I think this comment is misunderstanding that there is so much repertoire out there that can engage students of all tastes of music.
To study with a teacher and to also do totally your own thing is not utilizing a teacher effectively. There shouldn't be this secretive disjoint between the two. The teacher should engage with the student and understand what motivates them to learn, that only benefits their lessons together greatly. I am pretty annoyed at teachers who don't do this and just "cookie cutter" teach their students.
No pianist has the right to put barriers around the entire musical world and say piano is the most rewarding if you master it, and no one who hates musical education could say its the most boring instrument to learn on. So your comment here is bewildering and potentially harmful if anyone accepts any part of it.
If this is your personal experience fine, but I don't think its useful to say such things because the experience is subjective.
I have taught many guitarists piano and their knowledge of guitar enhances their ability to learn the piano. Your comment is like saying, a physics expert should never dabble with abstract mathematics.

I have learned or partially learned around 12 musical instruments from violin, cello, drums, piano, bass guitar, classical guitar, electric guitar, sax, flute, trumpet, mandolin, banjo, and a little uke.

Piano is by far the most complicated of all them. It should be obvious why.

I've also spend 30 year studying mathematics and my major was dual in math and physics. My first instrument was guitar and while it was very difficult in many ways and I did learn piano afterwards, there really is no comparison on difficulty. Everyone is different, but just from the sheer mechanics, kinematics, and mathematics the piano is more difficult. This obviously does not mean that it is impossible. Also, it is not really fair to compare instruments in an arbitrary way because anyone can learn how to play a song on an instrument. To master an instrument is very a very different problem. The sheer combinatorics of piano as compared to any other instrument is staggering. (do you know exponentiation works? Factorial. If we take a very simplistic approach such as 6 fingers vs 10 in then 6! vs 10! is the difference of about 10!)

1. In no way am I saying the student doesn't have a right to ask questions the teacher. Specially and adult. The entire point of a teacher is to explain and motivate the student.

2. The OP claims that the lessons are for children. I doubt it but even if so. If they are so easy then the OP should have no problem going through them to get to more challenging things. Most likely the reason the material is easy is that the


3. Many adults feel like they can accomplish more than they can and feel like they are being belittled and treated like a child. I was one of those people. This was with a very large amount of theoretical, composition, and improvisatory knowledge. Until I actually went back from square one using adult "first course books" books and working through everything slowly and mastering everything no matter how easy, hard, or boring, did I actually get to the point of developing a feeling for piano.

Guitar is a very different instrument. It's mainly strumming chords or playing arpeggios, scales, and memorized licks with possibly improvising on blues scales. While the same thing happens on piano, it is very different because the guitar is much easier to learn since every scale can be shifted/transposed simply by moving up or down. The only challenge is that the spacing of notes change(but not like a piano where it can completely change ones technique).

What the OP is doing almost sure is believing he is much better than the teacher is accepting and that he's not being challenged enough. What the OP doesn't understand if that if he tries to leap through the "boring stuff" he's setting himself up for failure... exactly like I did because I believed the same things. Is the OP special and different? Maybe, likely not.

If the OP just wants to play a few tuns and pound out some chords then sure, he can have major holes in his learning. If he's ok with that then why does he need a teacher in the first place?

If he wants to develop a solid understanding and technique, not having a proper foundation is going to make it impossible.

The very act of going through very simplistic material is *REQUIRED* because it is necessary for the brain to have to build off from. It is conditioning the mind to think through material rigorously and sequentially. The simplistic "boring" material, which children don't find because "they don't know any better" and that is usually why they get somewhere, is how one trains the mind.

Complex music is complex for a reason. Music, like math, physics, or any other complex subject is progressive. Can you jump into understand category theory or Quantum Electrodynamics without first understanding calculus? Maybe you can, but you will forever be lacking in very basic and fundamental concepts that help you conceptualize those more complex subjects better.

There is an very old saying that is quite complex "One must learn to crawl before they can run". Everyone that can run can crawl but not everyone that can crawl can run. There is a direction to learning.

Again, things are not so simple because it all depends on the desires of the individual. If one wants to truly understand music then there are right and wrong ways to do that. I have no idea about the OP situation because him saying a few lines in no way can shed and truth on the exact situation. Are there bad teachers out there? Sure, most are, maybe all. Are there bad students out there? Sure, most are, maybe all.

But I have seen it all throughout my life that when someone is trying to learn something they find difficult and the teacher offers a way to get better than the student revolts. I've done it, I've seen thousands of people do it. People have expectations and the older they are the more those expectations grow.

In no way am I saying that a person has to play through "boring" child material(which is what exactly? He did not mention it?) but what I'm saying is that if a person claims something is boring and tedious and that it is children's material then that person likely exactly needs to work through such material because they do not have the skills they think they had.

 Again, I had the EXACT same feeling and one day I said "Ok, enough is enough, there is something that am not getting. I can't figure it out after 10 years of studying. I'm going to figure out out from this day forward. I will work from the beginning like I was a child and make sure I can do all the basics and all the things I resented doing because they felt too simplistic. I'm clearly not as good as I think or I would be much further down the line".

My biggest problem was that even though I knew all the theoretical concepts I did not have them mastered subconsciously. I knew all my clefs, I could read all the notes, I knew all the time signatures and key signatures. I knew how to read music. I've bought and read Stone - Music Notation in the Twentieth Century and Read - Music Notation. I've used programs like Sibelius for many years before this and wrote some notation software.

But what I didn't get is there is a big difference between knowing something and having something internalized. In math, they are effectively the same. If you know how to prove trigonometric relations or understand modular forms then you know how to do them. It is true that there is some sense of internalization but it is generally not an issue because it is not real time like music is. With music one's mind has to be very sharp and the materials of music has to be extremely engrained.

So how with the OP ever know if he can actually do the simple stuff or is screwing himself? If he can do them then he should have no problem. I can work through those "adult course piano books" by sight reading them in one go now. I couldn't do that before. The only way I was able to do it was by doing it. I even had a few "childrens books" lying around when I started and made sure I could play there simple tunes(they were of pop music but simplified greatly).

What all this did was get me to focused on the actual music rather than constantly questioning the quality of it. It become just another exercise where my goal was to make it interesting and to play it rather than questioning it's authenticity.

And to be  clear. When I first got those books I would open up level 1 and try to work through it and say "This stuff is boring and too easy" then I'd open up level 3 and try to play stuff and couldn't get through it because it was too hard. I then go to level 2  and try to find the "sweet spot" and there never was one because I'd always end up stumbling a few pages later. It never felt easy or right.

ONLY when I worked through from start to finish slowly with the right mindset did it all work out and it was both easy and interesting. I approached it from the point of view of a child. I tried to forget "everything I knew" at least in the sense of overthinking it. When I did this I actually completed those books in about 3 weeks and could play everything in it without issue by the end. I then could play the next books and all the other books I had of what I would call simple music but what I couldn't easily play before were not accessible. More so, It taught me how to properly teach myself.

Mind you, I wasn't just using those books. I had many books I collected over time so I was doing things like starting to work on Henon, Czerny, afreds complete book of scales, chords, and arpeggios. I also started watching "scrolling score" every night for about an hour.

Now, again, maybe everything just came together for me for some particular reason but I feel it was simply because I actually decided that I was going to learn the piano or die trying. I never actually thought of myself as a piano player(even though I brutally worked out how to play a few tunes such as Fur Elise, WTF1 prelude, and maybe another or two) but as a guitar player.

It may or may not have been mental. But what I know is that once I worked through those books and made sure comprehend everything and mastered all the songs and worked diligently on actually slight reading them rather memorizing them through repetition it made it made all the difference.

Now, is something like that going to happen for the OP? Is the teacher good or bad? Who knows. But what we can say absolute is that if he cannot play through children's tunes then he cannot play complex music. Sure he can hack away over months on a tune to memorize it and eventually get it. Maybe that has some benefit. But the next song will take months too.. Maybe after 10 songs he'll start to get somewhere. But he'll likely always be a poor sight reader. Maybe the issue is that both him and the teacher are at fault. Either way, it's his life and he will have to make decisions about what he thinks. If he is honest with himself and the teacher really is too simplistic then he has to sever that connection. If he's just being arrogant then he's going to set himself up for a lot of wasted time and likely quit before he passes the threshold.

But given what he has said and making some assumptions I have to side with the teacher. Now, maybe the teacher is just very bad and is trying to slow down the process. But he should be able to judge that. Is the teacher impressive? If the teacher can't play well and can't sight read then maybe so. I would imagine he was able to determine that the teacher was decent by his own experience in music for 20+ years.

Hence it is very likely that he simply thinks "children's music" is beneath him and what I'm saying is that he's wrong. Because if he can't play that music how does he expect to play more complicated things? This is not rocket science. Everyone wants to run that is what motivates us to crawl first. But infants start to crawl because they simply can run. But they figure it out because of their persistence and because they actually crawl rather than trying to run(in their minds it's the same but it clearly isn't the same, they literally can't run until they build up to it).

I'll say it again just to be clear: If he can't easily play through "children's books" then the problem is not the teacher. The teacher gave him material that was simplistic. If it was easy for him then he would just show the teacher "Hey, I can do this, see" and the teacher either would say "Great, here is something harder" or "no you can't".

In some sense, he has to prove to the teacher what he is capable of. It is very likely that he can't even play a C major scale(or barely) much less a C maj arpeggio or their inversions. he likely cant read a C major scale or understand the difference between a Gmaj key signature and an Em key signature. But he wants to start on harder stuff because it feels more challenging or more deserving?

He has every right to ask questions and to even teach himself or find other teachers. Ultimately, no matter what we think or say he will do whatever he does and it will lead to some result.  We can only analyze the post in the context of our own experiences and beliefs.

I think you are giving him too much credit. I may not be giving him enough. Either way, it's ultimately going to have to be decisions he makes about his future. I've offered a rather optimal solution in that he can both teach himself and follow the teachers tutelage. He could also find another teacher simultaneously.  IMO though he's making short sighted judgements based on his misunderstanding of music and/or piano. I don't know how much he knows about music. I've known guitar players that have "played guitar" for 50 years and all they can do is strum out basic open chord and play simple "3 chord" tunes. So saying "I've played for 20 years" doesn't allow one to know exactly what that entails to make a proper judgement call.

Personally, I find self-learning to be the most rewarding. But it is also the most difficult. It's much easier to day than it was 20 years ago so maybe it isn't so bad and it isn't quite "self learning". But he has to live with the decisions he makes. I'm trying to encourage him to give the teacher a chance because his ideas about "children's music" is wrong. I do agree with you that there are all kinds of books out there. But the more complex something is the worse it will be when learning. You always want to start simple. Simple is good. It is a lesson I learned the hard way.

[lostinidlewonder]

Writing a lot is fine but what your are writing is just personal opinion, certainly nothing that comes from the perspective of teaching many people which is very important when you critique someone's approach. Your overall opinion is that all must study children's books, I have dismantled why this is not correct below.

I have learned or partially learned around 12 musical instruments from violin, cello, drums, piano, bass guitar, classical guitar, electric guitar, sax, flute, trumpet, mandolin, banjo, and a little uke.

Piano is by far the most complicated of all them. It should be obvious why.

That's inconsequential though, it's just your experience it is not everyone's.

To you yes but that's not an all encompassing truth for everyone. I could argue that pipe organ is even harder than piano. And many would think oboe is supremely difficult.

I've also spend 30 year studying mathematics and my major was dual in math and physics. My first instrument was guitar and while it was very difficult in many ways and I did learn piano afterwards, there really is no comparison on difficulty. Everyone is different, but just from the sheer mechanics, kinematics, and mathematics the piano is more difficult. This obviously does not mean that it is impossible. Also, it is not really fair to compare instruments in an arbitrary way because anyone can learn how to play a song on an instrument. To master an instrument is very a very different problem. The sheer combinatorics of piano as compared to any other instrument is staggering. (do you know exponentiation works? Factorial. If we take a very simplistic approach such as 6 fingers vs 10 in then 6! vs 10! is the difference of about 10!)

The thread isn't about what YOU personally measure as most difficult and why though.

1. In no way am I saying the student doesn't have a right to ask questions the teacher. Specially and adult. The entire point of a teacher is to explain and motivate the student.

Your initial reply however was devoid of such comments. And furthermore your response very very marginally addresses this and instead puts emphasis of doing exactly as the teacher asks for rather than having a collaborative effort.

2. The OP claims that the lessons are for children. I doubt it but even if so.

How would you know? They said it feels childish so we should take that as true. I am a piano teacher for 30 years and understand this dynamic is common, so teachers MUST adjust. The OPs teacher however seemed inflexible.

If they are so easy then the OP should have no problem going through them to get to more challenging things. Most likely the reason the material is easy is that the

This is inefficient piano pedagogy, instead teaching on terms of the students interests is much more powerful.

3. Many adults feel like they can accomplish more than they can and feel like they are being belittled and treated like a child. I was one of those people. This was with a very large amount of theoretical, composition, and improvisatory knowledge. Until I actually went back from square one using adult "first course books" books and working through everything slowly and mastering everything no matter how easy, hard, or boring, did I actually get to the point of developing a feeling for piano.

Again it's your own single experience. I've taught a huge number of students and teaching through their interests is much better. Forcing beginner books is a lazy teaching method.

Guitar is a very different instrument. It's mainly strumming chords or playing arpeggios, scales, and memorized licks with possibly improvising on blues scales. While the same thing happens on piano, it is very different because the guitar is much easier to learn since every scale can be shifted/transposed simply by moving up or down. The only challenge is that the spacing of notes change(but not like a piano where it can completely change ones technique).

Again this is your own experience it however doesn't mean much in terms of the other individual experience.

What the OP is doing almost sure is believing he is much better than the teacher is accepting and that he's not being challenged enough.

This is an illogical conclusion, it is the content and subject matter, when paying a teacher it's totally fine to ask for material that is in line with one's interests rather than cookie cutters methods.

What the OP doesn't understand if that if he tries to leap through the "boring stuff" he's setting himself up for failure... exactly like I did because I believed the same things. Is the OP special and different? Maybe, likely not.

Boring stuff is not necessary, you can learn beginner skills with music you love.

If the OP just wants to play a few tuns and pound out some chords then sure, he can have major holes in his learning. If he's ok with that then why does he need a teacher in the first place?

You're guessing what they want though. All they said is they didn't want to do childish books with songs that don't interest them, that's a perfectly fine request.

If he wants to develop a solid understanding and technique, not having a proper foundation is going to make it impossible.

Sure but that doesnt mean one must do method books with music you are not engaged with.

The very act of going through very simplistic material is *REQUIRED* because it is necessary for the brain to have to build off from.

Yes but that doesn't need be through the windows of music you are not engaged with.

It is conditioning the mind to think through material rigorously and sequentially. The simplistic "boring" material, which children don't find because "they don't know any better" and that is usually why they get somewhere, is how one trains the mind.

There are plenty of pieces out there to choose from to develop skills with, you don't need to do children's books at all.

Complex music is complex for a reason. Music, like math, physics, or any other complex subject is progressive. Can you jump into understand category theory or Quantum Electrodynamics without first understanding calculus? Maybe you can, but you will forever be lacking in very basic and fundamental concepts that help you conceptualize those more complex subjects better.

It seems you think children's method books are the only material to develop early skills with, this is a severely short-sighted take on the repertoire out there.

Again, things are not so simple because it all depends on the desires of the individual. If one wants to truly understand music then there are right and wrong ways to do that.

To "truly" understand the piano however has a huge number of pathways, I think you are looking through a narrow path.

I have no idea about the OP situation because him saying a few lines in no way can shed and truth on the exact situation.

However from that stance you claim you have, you have postulated a huge array of assumptions which are not quite useful especially of they are off the mark which is highly possible based on the numerous ones you've made.

Are there bad teachers out there? Sure, most are, maybe all. Are there bad students out there? Sure, most are, maybe all.

Place the blame on the teacher. A good teacher can transform the worst student. Not always but a high % of the time. Unless the student hates piano but that's a different matter.

But I have seen it all throughout my life that when someone is trying to learn something they find difficult and the teacher offers a way to get better than the student revolts. I've done it, I've seen thousands of people do it. People have expectations and the older they are the more those expectations grow.

But the OP here revolts against the repertoire choice which is totally normal and fine. Teach the basics through the prism of their interests

In no way am I saying that a person has to play through "boring" child material(which is what exactly? He did not mention it?)

Except your very comments said that they need to do boring things to develop and that they should do the child's method book and be able to do the material.

but what I'm saying is that if a person claims something is boring and tedious and that it is children's material then that person likely exactly needs to work through such material because they do not have the skills they think they had.

Absolutely not, they can learn the same skills with music they are engaged with.

Again, I had the EXACT same feeling and one day I said "Ok, enough is enough, there is something that am not getting. I can't figure it out after 10 years of studying. I'm going to figure out out from this day forward. I will work from the beginning like I was a child and make sure I can do all the basics and all the things I resented doing because they felt too simplistic. I'm clearly not as good as I think or I would be much further down the line".

This however doesn't mean you must do music you don't enjoy. It seems you believe you must do children's music to develop the foundation, you CAN do that but you don't have to, there's plenty of music out there to develop with.

My biggest problem was that even though I knew all the theoretical concepts I did not have them mastered subconsciously. I knew all my clefs, I could read all the notes, I knew all the time signatures and key signatures. I knew how to read music. I've bought and read Stone - Music Notation in the Twentieth Century and Read - Music Notation. I've used programs like Sibelius for many years before this and wrote some notation software.

But what I didn't get is there is a big difference between knowing something and having something internalized. In math, they are effectively the same. If you know how to prove trigonometric relations or understand modular forms then you know how to do them. It is true that there is some sense of internalization but it is generally not an issue because it is not real time like music is. With music one's mind has to be very sharp and the materials of music has to be extremely engrained.

So how with the OP ever know if he can actually do the simple stuff or is screwing himself? If he can do them then he should have no problem. I can work through those "adult course piano books" by sight reading them in one go now. I couldn't do that before. The only way I was able to do it was by doing it. I even had a few "childrens books" lying around when I started and made sure I could play there simple tunes(they were of pop music but simplified greatly).

What all this did was get me to focused on the actual music rather than constantly questioning the quality of it. It become just another exercise where my goal was to make it interesting and to play it rather than questioning it's authenticity.

And to be  clear. When I first got those books I would open up level 1 and try to work through it and say "This stuff is boring and too easy" then I'd open up level 3 and try to play stuff and couldn't get through it because it was too hard. I then go to level 2  and try to find the "sweet spot" and there never was one because I'd always end up stumbling a few pages later. It never felt easy or right.

ONLY when I worked through from start to finish slowly with the right mindset did it all work out and it was both easy and interesting. I approached it from the point of view of a child. I tried to forget "everything I knew" at least in the sense of overthinking it. When I did this I actually completed those books in about 3 weeks and could play everything in it without issue by the end. I then could play the next books and all the other books I had of what I would call simple music but what I couldn't easily play before were not accessible. More so, It taught me how to properly teach myself.

Mind you, I wasn't just using those books. I had many books I collected over time so I was doing things like starting to work on Henon, Czerny, afreds complete book of scales, chords, and arpeggios. I also started watching "scrolling score" every night for about an hour.

Now, again, maybe everything just came together for me for some particular reason but I feel it was simply because I actually decided that I was going to learn the piano or die trying. I never actually thought of myself as a piano player(even though I brutally worked out how to play a few tunes such as Fur Elise, WTF1 prelude, and maybe another or two) but as a guitar player.

It may or may not have been mental. But what I know is that once I worked through those books and made sure comprehend everything and mastered all the songs and worked diligently on actually slight reading them rather memorizing them through repetition it made it made all the difference.

Now, is something like that going to happen for the OP? Is the teacher good or bad? Who knows. But what we can say absolute is that if he cannot play through children's tunes then he cannot play complex music. Sure he can hack away over months on a tune to memorize it and eventually get it. Maybe that has some benefit. But the next song will take months too.. Maybe after 10 songs he'll start to get somewhere. But he'll likely always be a poor sight reader. Maybe the issue is that both him and the teacher are at fault. Either way, it's his life and he will have to make decisions about what he thinks. If he is honest with himself and the teacher really is too simplistic then he has to sever that connection. If he's just being arrogant then he's going to set himself up for a lot of wasted time and likely quit before he passes the threshold.

But given what he has said and making some assumptions I have to side with the teacher. Now, maybe the teacher is just very bad and is trying to slow down the process. But he should be able to judge that. Is the teacher impressive? If the teacher can't play well and can't sight read then maybe so. I would imagine he was able to determine that the teacher was decent by his own experience in music for 20+ years.

None of this supports the need to study children's music though, it's just your own single experience, why are you applying this as if it's the way for everyone?

Hence it is very likely that he simply thinks "children's music" is beneath him and what I'm saying is that he's wrong.

No this is not the correct conclusion. He just wants to do music he feels engaged with, quite simple.

Because if he can't play that music how does he expect to play more complicated things? This is not rocket science. Everyone wants to run that is what motivates us to crawl first. But infants start to crawl because they simply can run. But they figure it out because of their persistence and because they actually crawl rather than trying to run(in their minds it's the same but it clearly isn't the same, they literally can't run until they build up to it).

Again you're thinking there's only one pathway i.e. through children's method books, it's just not necessary, it's the opinion of someone who doesn't understand the vast modern repertoire out there.

I'll say it again just to be clear: If he can't easily play through "children's books" then the problem is not the teacher.

It's not that he can't it's that he's not engaged with it. He can learn appropriate repertoire that he enjoys and then gain the skills to play any childs books. But to enforce the child's book as a litmus paper for ability is severely short sighted.

The teacher gave him material that was simplistic. If it was easy for him then he would just show the teacher "Hey, I can do this, see" and the teacher either would say "Great, here is something harder" or "no you can't".

Same response as above.

In some sense, he has to prove to the teacher what he is capable of.

Same response.

It is very likely that he can't even play a C major scale(or barely) much less a C maj arpeggio or their inversions. he likely cant read a C major scale or understand the difference between a Gmaj key signature and an Em key signature. But he wants to start on harder stuff because it feels more challenging or more deserving?

You're guessing his ability which is irrelevant, he merely focused on repertoire choice, you're going all over the place but that.

He has every right to ask questions and to even teach himself or find other teachers.

Why are you dodging that the request to learn the basics through the medium of music that engages him is a perfectly fine request?

Ultimately, no matter what we think or say he will do whatever he does and it will lead to some result.  We can only analyze the post in the context of our own experiences and beliefs.

Speak for yourself I've taught piano to countless individuals for 30+ years.

I think you are giving him too much credit. I may not be giving him enough.

Am I? Your guesses about him eclipses all other assumptions here.

I've offered a rather optimal solution in that he can both teach himself and follow the teachers tutelage.

You're talking from your own single experience, certainly not from a teachers perspective. So it's no whwre near the optimal pathway  that's quite hilarious.

He could also find another teacher simultaneously.  IMO though he's making short sighted judgements based on his misunderstanding of music and/or piano.

Your entire thesis rests on that children's boring music books must be a pathway for all beginners, that's ridiculous and does not stand up to modern piano pedagogy.

I don't know how much he knows about music.

Yet you've made countless guesses and suggestions based off the fact you think you know the situation.

I've known guitar players that have "played guitar" for 50 years and all they can do is strum out basic open chord and play simple "3 chord" tunes. So saying "I've played for 20 years" doesn't allow one to know exactly what that entails to make a proper judgement call.

You've said you've learned all sorts of instruments over the years, so does this apply to you too? If you're a teacher then you have a more flexible understanding based on the experience of many

Personally, I find self-learning to be the most rewarding.

Personal opinion is fine but realise it's not a truth for everyone.

. I'm trying to encourage him to give the teacher a chance because his ideas about "children's music" is wrong.

You are wrong to say it's wrong. It's fine to learn through the medium of your interests and a good teacher can easily satisfy that. Your entire thesis is about the must to learn child's music, that's shirt sighted pedagogy.

I do agree with you that there are all kinds of books out there. But the more complex something is the worse it will be when learning. You always want to start simple. Simple is good. It is a lesson I learned the hard way.

I didn't specify books, the teacher can arrange all sorts of music to satisfy the students needs. Teaching solely from a book is the lowest form of teaching skill.

[dizzyfingers]

I suspect the OP got bored with this post.   

[lostinidlewonder]

Maybe, but threads are not always useful just for the OP at least!