Can you learn advanced piano techniques without a teacher?

[musicalpenguin]

Hello everyone, I've recently picked up piano playing after a 20 year hiatus, and I'm loving it so much that I'm practicing 2-3 hours a day. I was wondering if I can learn to play the advanced pieces that require various techniques by practicing them myself, or if I should try to look for a piano teacher. My history with piano:
- took piano lessons from age 5-8 in South Korea
- performed Mozart's Rondo Alla Turca during this time
- immigrated to US, had very little piano lessons
- auditioned and got into a music program in college where I learned a few of Mozart sonatas and performed them including Sonata 13 and 14a.
- stopped for 20 years because I had no access to a piano.

I have no idea what my current level is, but I enjoyed learning Beethoven's Pathetique 1st movement which took about 3 days but needs a ton of polishing. I also finished learning Tempest 3rd movement (technically more difficult than Pathetique 1st I feel). There are so many music pieces I have on my goal list, including Waldstein sonata, Appasionata sonata, Chopin's Etudes and Ballades, Chopin's fantasie impromptu, and many others.

The technique issue came to mind because I'm tacking Moonlight sonata 3rd movement, and it's been very difficult. I'm not used to playing music in C sharp minor, and it takes time to read the notes and also to be able to play each passage. For this piece for example, if I keep at it and do exercises from czerney, clementi, hanon, etc - would I be able to play decently with the required techniques? How do you get to that level?

[dizzyfingers]

That's a good question.

It should be obvious that things will go better with a skilled teacher, preferably one with a proven track record (students successfully auditioning for music schools).
If for some reason an in-person teacher is not available, I would consider online instruction, even subscribing to the pre-packaged courses, like this one: 

https://pianoskillsandmagic.teachable.com

.. so that you learn the fundamentals correctly and avoid bad habits. 

Another, more interactive piano learning community:

https://www.aaronpetitpiano.com/keylearnerspianoclub

You can go ahead on your own, sounds like you will have success in learning music.  How well you play these pieces is another matter.  We can't tell without recordings.

[lostinidlewonder]

The simple answer is yes, but curiously those who ask generally require a teacher. If you are an autodidact you generally feel quite confident in being able to internalize and improve upon technique yourself perhaps with a few guiding pointers found in words or in video/audio. Generally a piano autodidact would want to insulate themselves completely or at least curate exactly what info they expose themselves to. They solve as much as they can before asking questions, and in fact many traditional ideologies might be something very difficult for them to accept if it doesn't fall in line with their successful experimentation experiences.

So the fact you are asking questions tends towards you needing a teacher to bounce ideas off. Asking random info from a forum isn't generally what autodidacts look for.

[ranjit]

The simple answer is yes, but curiously those who ask generally require a teacher. If you are an autodidact you generally feel quite confident in being able to internalize and improve upon technique yourself perhaps with a few guiding pointers found in words or in video/audio. Generally a piano autodidact would want to insulate themselves completely or at least curate exactly what info they expose themselves to. They solve as much as they can before asking questions, and in fact many traditional ideologies might be something very difficult for them to accept if it doesn't fall in line with their successful experimentation experiences.

This is a very interesting observation. I've also followed this pattern without realizing it -- it feels like those who trust themselves to learn new things quickly and accurately just do so, curate the information they get, and then ask specific questions right off the bat.

I believe my questions at the starting were more along the lines of: Why can't you play scales at 200bpm within a year? You can isolate scale movements into groups of 3s and 4s generally, and it's not that difficult to wiggle your fingers at a very fast speed. There seem to be a very small number of possible motions in a very constrained problem space, which you should be able to train yourself to do, etc.

I think autodidacts tend not to ask and just do to begin with -- with a caveat. The caveat is that it seems like imposter syndrome is prevalent among them as well. So it isn't true that an autodidact wouldn't generally ask if it's possible to learn technique on their own because they are unsure whether their line of approach will bear fruit. But I have to agree with liw here overall -- that has been my observation as well.

Furthermore, it's interesting how many of them end up being drawn to the same resources. I've met several people who attempted to teach themselves from C Chang's book.

[musicalpenguin]

Furthermore, it's interesting how many of them end up being drawn to the same resources. I've met several people who attempted to teach themselves from C Chang's book.

Thank you to all who have left insightful comments on this question, I really appreciate it. I just chuckled at this comment as another person who bought C Chang's book for this purpose. 

[lostinidlewonder]

So it isn't true that an autodidact wouldn't generally ask if it's possible to learn technique on their own because they are unsure whether their line of approach will bear fruit.

I guess if they get to a point where there isn't anything else to progress on or they don't know how to solve something then they will naturally seek more direct external information. Autodidacts tend to treat external input as a tool not a starting point

From what I have experienced, unwanted outside information can often be interrupting and irritating to the autodidact who is more confident solving something on their own. This doesn't mean they're arrogant it means their cognitive process is self-motivated and they value internal understanding over external authority. The autodidact can actually see you as an adversary if you don’t respect the way they’re processing and learning on their own. You don’t do them any service by trying to redirect their approach, in fact, you risk alienating them and yourself in the teaching process if you do that. They much prefer if you walk beside them and scrutinize their approach, but only when they feel their progress has stalled. Getting in the way before that does no good for the teaching situation.

When an autodidact feels like they’ve solved something or are well on the way to doing so, they often can share their approach with others since it is a topic of great interest for them. This isn’t usually because they want advice, but more because they’re interested in what others think, kind of a celebration of their success and the path they’ve taken. It’s a way to reaffirm that their learning approach works. Sharing like this also helps them feel less like an imposter. If others resonate with their ideas, it provides some social validation that their way of learning is valid.

I have taught a few who preferred if I commented on their experimentations rather than suggest alternative approaches and it has been quite interesting that through critiquing their approach and highlighting its limitations, they often find better alternative pathways themselves. So the distinction between critique and redirection is important, autodidacts dislike unsolicited redirection and prefer critique focused on their own approach.

I'd say the vast majority of excellent pianists (and I could really argue that ALL) are autodidacts to some extent. I think everyone who learns the piano must experiment and iterate ideas given to them through the lens of their own understanding, we even find situations where we must actually come up with a personal solution that might be a tangent from the solution suggested to us. That’s a normal part of piano learning and learning in general I believe. Complete autodidacts however take this to an extreme.

[dizzyfingers]

Can you learn advanced piano techniques without a teacher?

In a word, "Yes", but it requires a good deal of talent, intelligence and organized focus.

[brogers70]

I guess if they get to a point where there isn't anything else to progress on or they don't know how to solve something then they will naturally seek more direct external information. Autodidacts tend to treat external input as a tool not a starting point

From what I have experienced, unwanted outside information can often be interrupting and irritating to the autodidact who is more confident solving something on their own. This doesn't mean they're arrogant it means their cognitive process is self-motivated and they value internal understanding over external authority. The autodidact can actually see you as an adversary if you don’t respect the way they’re processing and learning on their own. You don’t do them any service by trying to redirect their approach, in fact, you risk alienating them and yourself in the teaching process if you do that. They much prefer if you walk beside them and scrutinize their approach, but only when they feel their progress has stalled. Getting in the way before that does no good for the teaching situation.

When an autodidact feels like they’ve solved something or are well on the way to doing so, they often can share their approach with others since it is a topic of great interest for them. This isn’t usually because they want advice, but more because they’re interested in what others think, kind of a celebration of their success and the path they’ve taken. It’s a way to reaffirm that their learning approach works. Sharing like this also helps them feel less like an imposter. If others resonate with their ideas, it provides some social validation that their way of learning is valid.

I have taught a few who preferred if I commented on their experimentations rather than suggest alternative approaches and it has been quite interesting that through critiquing their approach and highlighting its limitations, they often find better alternative pathways themselves. So the distinction between critique and redirection is important, autodidacts dislike unsolicited redirection and prefer critique focused on their own approach.

I'd say the vast majority of excellent pianists (and I could really argue that ALL) are autodidacts to some extent. I think everyone who learns the piano must experiment and iterate ideas given to them through the lens of their own understanding, we even find situations where we must actually come up with a personal solution that might be a tangent from the solution suggested to us. That’s a normal part of piano learning and learning in general I believe. Complete autodidacts however take this to an extreme.

I love this post. Once upon a time my teacher complained to me, saying something like this "Whenever I tell you to do something, you ask a bunch of questions as though I'm not making sense, then you go home, and at the next lesson you come back and say you're doing something that sounds a lot like what I suggested but expressed completely differently." To her that was a problem, to me it is just how I learn, take input, question it, chew on it for a while, translate it into language that makes sense to me, and then work with it. She knew a lot about the piano, but I'd spent years teaching myself all sorts of things, a bunch of foreign languages, mathematics, epidemiology, and I was an expert on how I learn. She was very helpful for some years, but after a while the difference in how she wanted to teach and how I wanted to learn ended up being too big, and we split up. I really think the things you learn solidly are the things you've worked to figure out for yourself; hints and tips from a good teacher are great, but you have to do the work yourself.

[lostinidlewonder]

I love this post.

I'm glad it resonated with you, I think many autodidacts can feel very misunderstood which is a shame and doesn't help with that feeling of isolation that they really shouldn't feel but is quite the nature of how they work.

Once upon a time my teacher complained to me, saying something like this "Whenever I tell you to do something, you ask a bunch of questions as though I'm not making sense, then you go home, and at the next lesson you come back and say you're doing something that sounds a lot like what I suggested but expressed completely differently." To her that was a problem, to me it is just how I learn, take input, question it, chew on it for a while, translate it into language that makes sense to me, and then work with it.

When I was a younger teacher that's exactly how I felt too. Why is this student questioning what is to me an obvious improvement to their approach! It felt like they didn't believe just like you said what your teacher felt. I never verbalized that to my first student who was like that because I always avoided negative feedback in lessons that wouldn't help a situation. I meditated upon it and it really didn't take long to realize it wasn't dissidence but rather an essential part of how they learned and processed.

Sometimes their questioning pushed against my ideas, but instead of forcing the issue, I let them demonstrate their approach which often turned out to be elegant and well suited to their level. I have never been a teacher who demands things be "correct" all the time and really do encourage those iterations toward "perfection", I really believe there is so much to learn from what process and is a key part of my teaching philosophy.

She knew a lot about the piano, but I'd spent years teaching myself all sorts of things, a bunch of foreign languages, mathematics, epidemiology, and I was an expert on how I learn. She was very helpful for some years, but after a while the difference in how she wanted to teach and how I wanted to learn ended up being too big, and we split up. I really think the things you learn solidly are the things you've worked to figure out for yourself; hints and tips from a good teacher are great, but you have to do the work yourself.

Yeah it's unfortunately a common situation that teachers do not have that more understanding teaching philosophy that accepts the various ways in which people process information and actively make changes to their approach depending upon what kind of student they are dealing for a given topic. It's something I touched on in the past here: https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=41550.

It is really important that a student express things to their teacher like you did in your post, that you self learned many other topics, it really gives valuable insight into how the student learns. I always make it a point to get to know about a student’s interests and activities outside of piano. That can reveal useful insights into how they think and stay motivated and shapes how I interact with them in lessons, often opening up more effective teaching strategies.

I personally believe that any failure in lessons is ultimately the teacher’s responsibility. If we were perfect teachers then every student would reach their highest potential with us. Of course perfection is impossible but if a teacher doesn’t hold themselves accountable for everything that happens in a lesson they’ll never become the best teacher they can be.

I’ve improved far more by examining my failures than by celebrating my successes. That’s why I believe students should never feel guilty when a learning situation falls short of their hopes. Yes students can be lazy or unmotivated but then the question becomes "Why didn’t the teacher find a way to help them engage?" It might sound harsh toward the teacher but I believe that’s the duty of any teacher who truly wants to be the best they can be.

We do have to be wary though that practically all autodidacts really do need help to maintain "honesty" about their limitations, gaps in knowledge or that sense of stubborness. So it is not always that the student is perfect and teachers can take a chisel out on that one!

I guess my main point in all of this is that autodidacts can paradoxically do extremely well with a teacher, I've seen it happen in lessons of my own and through my own experiences as a student being autodidactic myself. But it requires a teacher who’s sensitive to the different ways people process information and unfortunately that kind of awareness is still too rare.

I realize this has turned into quite a wall of text but I hope it reflects how deeply I care about this topic and more importantly that it offers something of interest or value to those reading.

[lelle]

The technique issue came to mind because I'm tacking Moonlight sonata 3rd movement, and it's been very difficult. I'm not used to playing music in C sharp minor, and it takes time to read the notes and also to be able to play each passage. For this piece for example, if I keep at it and do exercises from czerney, clementi, hanon, etc - would I be able to play decently with the required techniques? How do you get to that level?

Doing exercises does in no way guarantee that you'll develop the necessary technique. Playing the notes in an exercise does not in itself teach you how to play. You might, through intuition, figure out how to improve, if you are lucky. But you might also develop and ingrain bad habits because you just don't know what you don't know, especially in something as complex as playing the piano. To develop, you need to both practice a certain quantity of material and know what you are trying to develop - or be intuitively very gifted and talented for the specfic physical skills needed, which is rare.

The easiest way to go about this is finding a competent teacher.

[ted]

I have too little experience to answer the general question but in regard to myself, and being scrupulously honest, I am certain I wouldn't be playing and creating as I am now had I not met and studied in my youth with Llewelyn Jones (no relation), the New Zealand pianist and composer. I assume that "advanced piano technique" extends beyond the physical aspect and also covers the mental and creative techniques. He actually never taught me any physical technique at all that I can remember, not a scrap, but his ability to nurture my creative drive while never attempting to harness it or mould me after his own fashion still strikes me as remarkable to this day. So despite a certain wish that I might have done it all myself I really doubt I could have. 

[essence]

Good teachers teach you how to listen?

[pseudonym]

There's also a significant difference between a pianist or teacher whom you might approach for some lessons, and the notion that you are a long-term pupil of that person. I am an amateur pianist, so I really shouldn't offer advice about that instrument. But as a professional cellist, I have been approached by advanced players for lessons (judging by the repertoire you mention, I would say that you sound like a fairly advanced player yourself). I usually reply "I'll be happy to teach you what works for me, but we don't have to plan for long-term instruction". As a teacher, I should be able to impart pretty quickly the various techniques I use and how to approach common problems. I was always happy if they took a couple of lessons and learned something that was valuable to them.
For myself, the instruction from which I gained the most benefit was having to play solos in opera and symphony orchestras, where a somewhat different physical technique was required in order to be heard. I would sometimes get some tips from one or more of my colleagues. In a sense it's the ability to learn from experience and from others; combine those two sources of information and synthesize something that works for you.
That's my opinion, anyway.

[dizzyfingers]

... As a teacher, I should be able to impart pretty quickly the various techniques I use and how to approach common problems. I was always happy if they took a couple of lessons and learned something that was valuable to them.

Good points. 
Professional career teachers are okay for kids and adult beginners-->intermediate, but if you're an intelligent adult you should be able to guide yourself through the learning process, there's a lot of resources available now.  The 5 session teacher is ideal : review your playing and give you some tips, impart what they know.

I think career teachers actually hold their students back because they unconsciously foster a dependent relationship.  To really grow in music you have to venture out on your own and explore various options and resources.  If you need someone to keep you focused, well that's just you I guess.

[lostinidlewonder]

It’s simply not possible to impart complete knowledge of piano education in a short space of time, even with advanced pianists. Achieving true mastery is a long term process, it’s not like you can just upload all the information into a brain like a robot. People process information differently and the transfer is never perfect due to both the student’s limitations and the teacher’s effectiveness. Also advanced pianists DO benefit from teachers just as professional sportsmen/women benefit from a coach.

You can get a great tip that clicks immediately, sure that happens. But then what? You still have to actually integrate it into your playing, work through how it applies to different pieces, figure out what goes wrong when you try to use it. The real learning happens in all that messy work afterward not in the moment someone shows you something new. And that's where ongoing guidance really helps, not just for the initial insight but for all the variety of different problems that come up for the individual when they are actually trying to make it part of their playing. Most people need that kind of support over time not just the occasional lightbulb moment.

Having a teacher guide you in practice methods is generally quite necessary. It is not always something someone can do completely on their own. (Even some teachers might benefit from learning more efficient or varied practice methods!) The same applies to improving sight-reading.

All of this, practice methods, sight-reading, technical development and repertoire represents decades of study for practically everyone who wants to reach the highest levels. Even then not everyone may achieve or desire those levels as people have different limitations/goals. Of course most pianists are quite happy at various lower levels. A teacher can help guide you through this journey making it more efficient and enjoyable and responding to a teacher provides a huge boost to motivation, persistence, and consistency.

I think career teachers actually hold their students back because they unconsciously foster a dependent relationship.  To really grow in music you have to venture out on your own and explore various options and resources.  If you need someone to keep you focused, well that's just you I guess.

This to me is a marginalized perspective so much so it's fair to call it misleading. If you are talking about terrible teachers sure, but I don't think constitutes the majority and certainly the vast majority of teachers aim to improve their students as best they can not create an environment of dependence.
 
In a perfect world where all students are programable and perfectly understand everything taught to them in a perfect way, sure, like a robot you can just copy paste ideas of mastery and its done and dusted. If one has any practical teaching experience however you will find this is 100% not the case and students develop over time. Sure there is an amount of experimentation that everyone goes through but many do appreciate guidance to save time and that is exactly what teachers do, they save you time. We as humans generally don't live very long so saving time helps a lot to reach your potential. Of course if you are an autodidact things change but most people are not, and even autodidacts benefit from some guidance too.

[dizzyfingers]

I think career teachers actually hold their students back because they unconsciously foster a dependent relationship.  To really grow in music you have to venture out on your own and explore various options and resources.  If you need someone to keep you focused, well that's just you I guess.

Watchout!  You'll ruffle some feathers with that comment!
Without doubt there are a few career-piano-teachers here. 

Oh, looks like you already did.

[lostinidlewonder]

Watchout!  You'll ruffle some feathers with that comment!
Without doubt there are a few career-piano-teachers here. 

Oh, looks like you already did.

Lol why are you talking to yourself like that haha  Split personality?

It's not ruffling my feathers since I am neither upset nor irritated by the comment, nor do I foster dependence in my students. Throughout my teaching career, I’ve felt far more accomplishment seeing a student leave because they have all the skills they need, rather than teaching the same student repeatedly because they can’t “fish for themselves.”

I do have some very long-term students, one in particular I’ve taught for over 25 years. That isn’t dependence, that’s friendship and collaboration. Understanding the nature of healthy student-teacher relationships is key. Certain relationships can last many years without being based on dependence.

Logically if we accept the perspective that teachers create dependence, it would imply all teachers in all subjects behave this way which is simply not true. And if we claim it’s specific to piano or music, there is no evidence showing why music teaching should be different from learning any other skill.

[dizzyfingers]

Logically if we accept the perspective that teachers create dependence, it would imply all teachers in all subjects behave this way which is simply not true. And if we claim it’s specific to piano or music, there is no evidence showing why music teaching should be different from learning any other skill.

Just in the interest of sameness and difference, i.e., philosophy, as Plato once defined it :

Scenario 1:  a younger person meets an older person in a room 1-on-1 for 30+ weeks per year for 4 years , standing or sitting within 4 feet most of the time, to discuss the art of piano - how to move the body, how to create sound, how to think about and express music, personal topics are encouraged

Scenario 2:  a younger person joins 12+ similarly aged peers in a class room with an older person to learn about a subject for about 13 weeks a year (a term), he may meet this same teacher again in the same scenario a couple more times within the next 4 years

The first is private piano lessons with a single teacher throughout four years of college.
The second is this students theory or history of music classes.

Those are the same?

If you look at high school students, the differences are even greater.

[lostinidlewonder]

That's a very thoughtful way to lay out the environmental differences and you're right that the two scenarios are not the same at all. However I believe you're highlighting a difference in format, but then drawing a conclusion about intent and outcome that doesn't necessarily follow.

The intimate long-term 1 on 1 setting you describe in Scenario 1 isn't  something that inherently fosters dependence, it's a feature that's essential for teaching a complex psychomotor skill like the art of piano. You can't effectively teach a student how to move their body, shape a phrase or express their unique musical voice from the front of a classroom of twelve. That requires the very proximity and focused attention you've described. The goal of using that format isn't to create reliance but to provide highly tailored and individualized feedback that accelerates the path to independence.

More to the point, the model in Scenario 1 isn't unique to piano at all. It's the gold standard for mastering any advanced complex skill such as a Ph.D. candidate and their thesis advisor, an Olympic athlete and their personal coach or a master craftsman and their apprentice. In every one of those cases the intense long term one on one relationship is considered the most effective way to produce an independent expert who can "fish for themselves." The entire purpose of the relationship is to eventually make the teacher obsolete for that student.

So while the scenarios are indeed very different in their structure, I'd argue their ideal outcomes are the same, that is to create an independent learner. The length and intimacy of a private teaching relationship isn't a sign of fostered dependence, but rather a reflection of the depth of the subject and the potential for a journey that can evolve from teaching into true collaboration.

[dizzyfingers]

Not sure why I'm replying to this - obsessed with clarification, maybe...

I believe you're highlighting a difference in format, but then drawing a conclusion about intent and outcome that doesn't necessarily follow.

When I mentioned dependence I wasn't talking about INTENT.  Of course no one intends this consciously, it's more of a unconscious POTENTIAL outcome due to the nature of the relationship.

The intimate long-term 1 on 1 setting you describe in Scenario 1 isn't something that inherently fosters dependence ..

The scenario doesn't foster this by itself, but given the right personalities, it works like an incubator.

So while the scenarios are indeed very different in their structure, I'd argue their ideal outcomes are the same

I'm not talking ideal outcomes, I'm talking about unconscious psychological mechanisms.


Anyway, we've beat this subjective and ill-informed topic to death, I'm only replying to make some clarifications.  You're not going to convince me of anything and vice versa, so let's close this chapter!

[lostinidlewonder]

When I mentioned dependence I wasn't talking about INTENT.  Of course no one intends this consciously, it's more of a unconscious POTENTIAL outcome due to the nature of the relationship.

But this all seems far too flimsy. Your initial suggestion of dependence that holds the student back just occurs without any intent? I think that's a little short sighted and considers the learning process with teachers far too chaotically. As a teacher I have strong intent from what I want from a student and expectations as to how they develop and improve. There is no unconscious or lack of awareness of the actual teacher/student dynamic which would make things like developing restrictive dependency quite obvious. And I certainly do not aim in any manner or form to hold them back, in fact it is utterly the opposite.

The scenario doesn't foster this by itself, but given the right personalities, it works like an incubator.

This just doesn't hold up to the many examples I described. You really haven't made your position any clearer, and "incubation" you suggest has no reasoning about the how or why. Saying it's unconsciously done really is a weak argument since from a teacher perspective since we consciously are quite aware of how a student uses us and the students development. Without it would be like a teacher who teaches without considering their student personally which strongly is avoided through one on one interactions. No ethical teacher wants to hold their student back and create dependency, its quite ludicrous if any teacher attempts that.

I'm not talking ideal outcomes, I'm talking about unconscious psychological mechanisms.

What mechanism is that precisely? A teacher is always striving to be consciously aware of the transfer of knowledge in the student/teacher relationship.  Teachers indeed understand the psychology of our students and what motivates and drive them, we also are very aware of how they use us and benefit from our interactions as a teacher. It is a basic teacher observation otherwise you're just teaching into the darkness, to a faceless student. Ideal outcomes is not the perfect outcome it is what we aim for constantly which directly contradicts your ideology of creating a type of student dependence on the teacher that holds the student back.

Anyway, we've beat this subjective and ill-informed topic to death, I'm only replying to make some clarifications.  You're not going to convince me of anything and vice versa, so let's close this chapter!

Unsure of your defensiveness here, I'm not trying to convince anything just saying it how it is being a teacher for over 30 years now. You saying teachers create students who are dependant on them and hold these students back, is just a highly marginalised perspective and your elaboration on the "how" and "why" that might occur hasn't been very convincing at all and are outright not explained. Try to use AI or something to support your answer might help, but i think it would be a losing position i could easily disect.

You should reframe your ideology to something like: There is a risk that some students develop emotional or psychological reliance on the relationship even while their skills progress. Teachers need awareness of this risk just as therapists and coaches do.

That makes sense and is an interesting discussion about building students confidence.  But saying teachers actually hold back the students, that's the point where you've gone wrong and of which has very little substance to defend.