Repertoire-based learning vs Technique-first learning

[smsee72]

Hallo Everyone!

My question in a nutshell:  can a learning approach based exclusively on learning repertoire (“real” music) be as effective as one who places a bigger emphasis on technical exercises (Czerny, Hanon, etc…), or will there be a gap at some point, that only a focus on exercises can overcome?

Some context first: I am an adult beginner who has been playing for about a year now. I have a teacher whom I see sometime every week, sometime every second week (life is busy) and make time for practicing for 1-2 hours every day.
My goal is to be able to play halfway decently for my own personal enjoyment: I have a deep love of music, spanning from Bach to Strawinsky and everything in between, and I would love to one day be able to play my favorite pieces (one big goal, for example, is to be able to play a big chunk of the Well Tempered Clavier). I do not plan to perform or take exams or do anything of the kind.

My teacher gives gentle and effective guidance, but the dynamic of the interaction is that I lead and she follows. I pick what I want to play, prepare it and bring it to the lessons. She spots any mistakes (in technique, rhythm, fingering, etc…), suggests how to work on problematic sections, sometimes extracts small drills out of the pieces to help with a specific section. Basically I only work on repertoire — the only “technical” exercise we focus on every week is scales and arpeggios. I focus on a different key every 1-2 weeks, learning the scale, arpeggios and broken chords. We agreed that once all 24 keys are covered, we will go back and restart from the beginning, increasing the difficulty of the scale practice at every cycle.

So basically my learning journey has settled into a repertoire-based type of learning, where we focus on whichever challenges the pieces I am learning present. Once I can play them acceptably, I move to a different set of pieces (normally mixing different styles and epochs, to keep things varied and interesting).
I have a decent library of scores and I pick music I like which I believe I am able to play, as well as maybe one piece that is a bit of a stretch. So, for example, the last set I have learned included BWV 999 (one of Bach’s Little Preludes in c minor), Couperin’s “Le Coucou”, Elgar’s “Salut d’Amour”, and Kachaturian’s “Oriental Dance” (from the Children Album). In the previous weeks we had concentrated on the three movements of Clementi’s Sonatina in C Major and Chopin’s prelude no 4 (which was a big challenge, but I learnt a lot from it, even if I cannot play it perfectly).

So, the question is, am I missing something for not making any time in my practice for all the common exercise sets?

I have tried to include Hanon and Czerny in my practice sessions, but I find them mind-numbingly boring and intensely demotivating. Even the simplest Czerny 599 exercise needs an hour or two to be played properly, and when the alternative is to spend that hour learning two or three bars of a Bach prelude, there’s no competition: I will always pick Bach. Same goes for the Hanon exercises or for really any exercise. I cannot see how doing them would be more useful than the challenges presented by actual music, but maybe I have a blind spot? Is this something I am going to regret ignoring?

[dizzyfingers]

Hallo Everyone!
My question in a nutshell:  can a learning approach based exclusively on learning repertoire (“real” music) be as effective as one who places a bigger emphasis on technical exercises (Czerny, Hanon, etc…), or will there be a gap at some point, that only a focus on exercises can overcome?

Yes, it can be successfully done exclusively on repertoire, which includes Chopin, Moskowski, Liszt, Scriabin, etc. etudes, certainly.

But you should learn to play scales, arpeggios and octaves well at some point in your training.

I wouldn't put Hanon and Czerny in the same class.  Some professional pianists perform Czerny etudes with the same seriousness they play the above composers.  Op 599 is for beginner-intermediate, not so interesting, but studies from op 740 and 299 are performed, especially in recitals by developing pianists.

[brogers70]

I agree with dizzyfingers. You don't need Hanon or Czerny. It is helpful, though to make sure you are comfortable with scales and arpeggios in all the keys. Working on scales and arps, apart from just making these figures that show up in lots of music automatic for you, also gives you a chance to focus on speed, clarity, evenness, etc in a situation in which you already know all the notes. It can be fun to work on them in that sense. I hated Czerny, until I found his book of eight measure miniature etudes. They all focus on a specific technique, and since they are so short they are quick to learn and you can spend your time working on the technique they target rather than learning four pages of notes.

[lostinidlewonder]

I have tried to include Hanon and Czerny in my practice sessions, but I find them mind-numbingly boring and intensely demotivating. Even the simplest Czerny 599 exercise needs an hour or two to be played properly, and when the alternative is to spend that hour learning two or three bars of a Bach prelude, there’s no competition: I will always pick Bach. Same goes for the Hanon exercises or for really any exercise. I cannot see how doing them would be more useful than the challenges presented by actual music, but maybe I have a blind spot? Is this something I am going to regret ignoring?

An hour learning two to three bars of Bach is somewhat an inefficient use of time. Dont underestimate the usefulness of exercises not only as a litmus to test and practice technique but as sight reading training. Im Hanon for instance noticing how a repeated pattern looks moving across the keyboard trains good visual association with repeated patterns. Also hanon and other exercises can be played in various ways such as dotted rhythms, in different grouping, with articulations and etc. The point is that limiting experience with anything comes with disadvantage, unless your extremely time poor there's no good reason to completely ignore them.

Learning lots of repertoire will naturally improve technique too, but it requires time to play it. I had a period in my early years where I only did technical work like scales and arpeggios and pieces, as these were requirements in examinations. I did quite fine with just that. But when teaching ive found using particular exercises good to train weaknesses in technique for my students rather than trying to apply a piece which may only sporadically train the technical issue.

[smsee72]

I hated Czerny, until I found his book of eight measure miniature etudes. They all focus on a specific technique, and since they are so short they are quick to learn and you can spend your time working on the technique they target rather than learning four pages of notes.

I did find that book and it is indeed a lot more interesting than Czerny 599. And yes, I do practice scales and arpeggios as well as broken chords: it’s actually atm my only technical practice, but done every day. The impact is pretty undeniable, even in early repertoire. Thank you for your insight!

[pianistavt]

I hated Czerny, until I found his book of eight measure miniature etudes. They all focus on a specific technique, and since they are so short they are quick to learn and you can spend your time working on the technique they target rather than learning four pages of notes.

The book is titled "160 Eight- Measure Exercises" opus 821.
I have the book, but I haven't worked on any of them.
Do you go in sequential order?
Or perhaps you have a teacher that assigns specific ones to you?

Two publications appear in many a student's technique catalogue:
- School of Velocity, op 299
- Art of Finger Dexterity, op 740
Including mine, due to my teacher from college.  I have record about 8 of them, here's one:

It works well enough in a recital.

We also have the following Czerny publications.  You don't hear much about them; it would take a pianist that likes more fringe repertoire to explore them.

School of the Virtuoso, Op. 365:
Published in 1837, this is one of Czerny's most demanding etude collections, containing 60 studies for the advanced pianist. It was intended to help students achieve the highest levels of technical and musical command. Notably, Étude No. 19 is considered a homage to Frédéric Chopin and is structurally similar to his Op. 10, No. 2, but with its own distinct challenges.

24 Grand Concert Études, Op. 692:
This collection was written around the same time as Chopin's etudes and is modeled after them. These etudes are technically formidable and meant for concert use. An example is Étude No. 21, titled "Heroism," which has been noted for its difficulty and dramatic character.

25 Grand Études de Salon, Op. 756:
Published in 1845, this set further showcases Czerny's interest in composing virtuosic pieces suitable for concert performance.

The Higher Stage of Virtuosity, Op. 834:
A very late collection of advanced etudes published around 1855–1856, demonstrating his continued commitment to composing for top-level pianists