The piano's difficulty in comparison to other instruments?

[mattm]

I recently have been debating on another forum that it is easier to go from learning piano to learning another instrument than to go from learning another instrument and going to piano.  I've largely been talking out my rear as my only experience is with piano, but I had a teacher tell me that the piano was the most difficult to learn.  Am I way off?  What do you guys think?

[Axtremus]

Piano is very easy.

Take two complete newbies who have never been exposed to any musical instrument. Give one a piano and the other some other instruemnt of your choice (e.g., flute, oboe, violin, guitar, French horn, etc.), teach both how to play "Mary Had a Little Lamb" on their respective instruments. Chances are, 99 out of 100, the one given the piano will learn "Mary Had a Little Lamb" before the other, hench very obviuosly demonstrates that piano is easier to learn.

On anything other than a keyboard instrument, you have to learn tone production. Most people have to spend substantial time and effort to learn to produce ONE tone on, say, a violin, flute, french horn. On a piano, most any moron can, without any prior training, press a key and produce a sound that is already a tone, and quickly move on to learning to play a tune. The only thing easier to learn than a piano would be a digital piano -- you need only to find and press the "Demo" button to instantly "make music."

[sonatainfsharp]

The piano is the most difficult intrument to play WELL. Hands down.

[TheHammer]

I agree that "playing the piano" is probably easier than any other instrument. But that is only true for one-voice pieces with a cantabile melody. Even a piece with an accompaniment can be a great challenge to a newbie. At least, what can you reach at best with a flute, what can you reach with the piano? I don't think that there is a piece in the flute repertory that would be as challenging as a Brahms concerto or a some Liszt TE. On the other hand, there are other problems, not only tone production. Take the violin, playing it, you have to figure out were your "keys" are, you have no indication. You have to completely play by ear, and I think that is very difficult. Then again, with the piano you have to coordinate two hands and fingers, and, to play very well, also your feet (btw, organs would be the most difficult, because there you can actually play with your feet, so you have 4 extremeties playing!).

To the original question, I think that piano playing can lay down some very important foundations: concerning the understanding of scale, developping hand coordination and of course the flexibility, agility and control of the fingers. These are points you need for nearly all instruments, so coming from the piano is a lot easier than coming to it (because then, assume you played the violin before, you probably have no clue what to do with your right hand...)
On the other hand, I only play the piano, so you would have to ask some people who have actually started two instruments simultaneously.

[jbmajor]

Piano is very easy.

Take two complete newbies who have never been exposed to any musical instrument. Give one a piano and the other some other instruemnt of your choice (e.g., flute, oboe, violin, guitar, French horn, etc.), teach both how to play "Mary Had a Little Lamb" on their respective instruments. Chances are, 99 out of 100, the one given the piano will learn "Mary Had a Little Lamb" before the other, hench very obviuosly demonstrates that piano is easier to learn.

On anything other than a keyboard instrument, you have to learn tone production. Most people have to spend substantial time and effort to learn to produce ONE tone on, say, a violin, flute, french horn. On a piano, most any moron can, without any prior training, press a key and produce a sound that is already a tone, and quickly move on to learning to play a tune. The only thing easier to learn than a piano would be a digital piano -- you need only to find and press the "Demo" button to instantly "make music."

You are missing a lot of the point in regards to difficulty.  Sure, getting a good tone out of another instrument is going to be tougher than on piano, but after that, you've won more than half the battle. 

On piano, the learning curve is the exact opposite.  No other instrument besides perhaps the organ requires a mental aptitude as far as learning counterpoint of rhythms between hands as well as combining this with musicality and the texture of sound. 

Ask anyone how many years of practice before you can tackle a Chopin ballad or a Rach concerto, and then how many months after that to be able to play the piece well.   
It's actually an advantage that the piano is easier to start out learning, as it lends its accessibility to younger people.  This extra time many people usually spend with the instrument in order to get to a level of skill comparable to another instrument which is learned at a later age should by itself attest to the piano's level of difficulty. 

I will agree that the piano has the most logical layout of notes for any instrument, hence, "key" signature is easiest to find on the piano.  So it can be a great instrument to refer to and have a general understanding of before applying your musical knowledge to another instrument. 

[ranakor]

i don't think you can really answer this since an instrument difficulty is based on the instrument itself & a piece that is considered easy on an instrument can be much harder on another instrument so pieces can't be used to compare difficulty.

one of the things you can really compare is "how long it takes until you can play a beginner tune" & the piano has it easy since , as was said in previous posts , the piano does the sound for you & not the other way around so you don't have to cope with buzz (string instrument) , buzz AND making the right sound (fretless strings) , or even making a sound at all (flute anyone? be glad if you can make a sound that has a pitch at all after the 1st lesson) , this does give a rough idea of how hard the very start will be or risky it is for the student to become bored & quit but that's about it

another thing you can check which may be more valid for this discussion is "how long till one sounds advanced" but once again this is tricky since an instrument with real polyphony like piano may sound more "badass" than say classical guitar at the same level .

my personal answer is that all instruments are equally hard since no one has mastered any of them yet even those who dedicated their whole life to it , once again hard isn't defined by how an instrumentalist may sound but how hard it takes to sound that way , no one has ever been perfect at an instrument thus imoh they all are equally rated at "impossible to master"

now while I'm on personal answers I'll tackle the switching instruments part :

1) i played a tidbit of flute (i was real bad at it & didn't practice only did a year but i couldn't play my way through trivial stuff but while my experience was very limited I'd say the very start is rather hard) flute's difficulty is in learning to make the sound & also in that different notes of the same name one octave apart are often played with the same fingering the only difference being in the form of your mouth & the speed of the air when you blow

2) i also play classical guitar , started Jan 2004 & it was not that hard but not easy either , fingers hurt a bit the 1st few weeks & the position hurts even more but the hard part is that you produce the tone & control it so it's not just a matter of learning not to miss strings & such but also to decide how you want it to sound like , that's also a plus for musicality since you can greatly effect the timbre of the instrument

3) lastly i also started piano this year in January , hence why I'm here hehe, & in all honesty i found the start to be trivial compared to other instruments i played , I've been doing guitar for 1 year and a half & piano for about 5 month & i get 1 hour lesson per week of guitar every week & only 30 min of piano per week & no piano lesson during vacation & i sound MUCH more advanced on piano speed is much easier to acquire as well , also while full polyphony may be a bit hard to beginners it is what makes piano sound so impressive as well as it's large register. note that i want to be clear that I'm not categorizing piano as being easy OR EVEN EASIER than other instrument since ,as i said , i don't feel you can compare difficulty between instrument but only how long it will take to sound decent to people but i can't go without saying that i have a level of about 4 conservatory year* in guitar & probably a whoooollleeee lot less in piano & trust me i sound a whole lot more advanced at piano than when i play classical guitar in front of people

*(before i get bashed for bragging being at 4 year level after 1 year and a half please note that don't do anything in life  & thus have nothing else to do with my time so while i won't go on about why or what there is nothing particularly impressive with that & my intent was not to brag just to show that a part of the difficulty of less known instruments that don't >sound< as advanced after as many years maybe the lack of reward both in term of sound and in term of being recognized)

if you took the time to read through this very long post up to here (i really need to learn not to write so much crap) then thanks for your masochism i guess hehe

edit: edited lots & lots of typos after somehow becoming good at English (well ok i used a spell checker)

[LVB op.57]

I've always felt that any instrument can be extremely difficult if you really want to master it.

[pianoforce]

From what I've heard, the piano, harp, and french horn are the three most common instruments.

[mandragora]

Some years ago, I listened to a discussion on this topic on radio.

The main points were that piano is easier in the beginning than most other instrumnets, say violin. But, the implications were that there were much more good violin players (higher level) than piano players. Since the violin players had to get used to technical difficulties from the beginning, there was no dramatic encounter later on. On the piano, on the other hand, there are a lot of beginners because of the easiness of this stage, but on a higher level, you suddenly encounter a mass of difficulties, which scares many people away.

My 2 cents (or rather, the people's on the radio)

[Axtremus]

The piano can handle extremely complex music -- complex as in "sounding many tones, carrying many melodic lines, allow very fast run of notes, all at the same time." The piano is "more difficult" than other instruments ONLY when you play music much more complex than what you can with most other instruments.

Without giving a rigorous definition of "complexity," (let's just vaguely define "complexity" as some combination of {how many notes sound at the same time, how many "lines" are carried at the same time, how fast you have to go from note to note}), I'll venture to say that piano is easier to play than most other instruments at any complexity level.

Low complexity: make a tone -- piano is easiest.

Low-Medium complexity #1: carry a tune -- piano is easiest.

Low-Medium complexity #2: fast run of notes in a single line -- piano is still the easiest on which to play fast running notes in most cases.

Medium complexity: carry a tune with simple accompaniment -- piano is easiest (much harder on harp or accordion or lute-like instruments, practically impossible on bowed-string and woodwind and brass instruments).

Medium-High complexity: carry multiple tunes simultaneously (polyphony, counterpoint) -- somewhat difficult on piano, practically impossible on everything else.

High complexity #1: multiple tunes plus busy accompaniment plus fast running notes  -- difficult to extremely difficult on piano, but impossible on other instruments.

High complexity #2: all the above plus multiple distinct timbres -- not possible on piano, have to move to organ or electronic/digital keyboard instruments.

At any level of complexity, the piano is easiest (of course you can generalize that to most keyboard instruments). The piano is difficult only when you are already making music too complex to be handled by most other instruments.

The only aspect of difficulty where it's hard on the piano while easier on other instruments is to moderate the tone of a note -- it's much easier to make one note sound in many different ways on a string or woodwind or brass instrument, but very difficult to impossible on an acoustic piano (but easy again on a organ or digital/electronic keyboard instrument).

Conclusion: Overall, when taking many different levels/types of complexity into account, the piano is still the easiest (well, along with a organ and electronic/digital keyboards).

[c18cont]

I'm not getting into this one...but I am enjoying it!!!!!!

John Cont

[TheHammer]

The piano can handle extremely complex music -- complex as in "sounding many tones, carrying many melodic lines, allow very fast run of notes, all at the same time." The piano is "more difficult" than other instruments ONLY when you play music much more complex than what you can with most other instruments.

Without giving a rigorous definition of "complexity," (let's just vaguely define "complexity" as some combination of {how many notes sound at the same time, how many "lines" are carried at the same time, how fast you have to go from note to note}), I'll venture to say that piano is easier to play than most other instruments at any complexity level.

Low complexity: make a tone -- piano is easiest.

Low-Medium complexity #1: carry a tune -- piano is easiest.

Low-Medium complexity #2: fast run of notes in a single line -- piano is still the easiest on which to play fast running notes in most cases.

Medium complexity: carry a tune with simple accompaniment -- piano is easiest (much harder on harp or accordion or lute-like instruments, practically impossible on bowed-string and woodwind and brass instruments).

Medium-High complexity: carry multiple tunes simultaneously (polyphony, counterpoint) -- somewhat difficult on piano, practically impossible on everything else.

High complexity #1: multiple tunes plus busy accompaniment plus fast running notes -- difficult to extremely difficult on piano, but impossible on other instruments.

High complexity #2: all the above plus multiple distinct timbres -- not possible on piano, have to move to organ or electronic/digital keyboard instruments.

At any level of complexity, the piano is easiest (of course you can generalize that to most keyboard instruments). The piano is difficult only when you are already making music too complex to be handled by most other instruments.

The only aspect of difficulty where it's hard on the piano while easier on other instruments is to moderate the tone of a note -- it's much easier to make one note sound in many different ways on a string or woodwind or brass instrument, but very difficult to impossible on an acoustic piano (but easy again on a organ or digital/electronic keyboard instrument).

Conclusion: Overall, when taking many different levels/types of complexity into account, the piano is still the easiest (well, along with a organ and electronic/digital keyboards).

Of course it is easier to play the Rach 3 on piano than on a violin. But that is simply because, as you say, violins are not made to play such difficult music, and therefore, you cannot compare one and the same piece played with different instruments. You have to go by the standard of the repertoire: how hard is it to become a violin intermediate/professional/virtuoso (playing the most difficult pieces) compared to a piano intermediate/professional/virtuoso.
According to repertoire, that would probably go, as some said here before, considering the difficulty of playing the piece on the instrument it was composed for (so not the same pieces but examples from the piano/violin repertoire):
piano beginner piece much easier to play on the piano than violin beginner piece on the violin
piano intermediate piece a little easier/same difficulty as violin intermediate piece
piano virtuoso piece more difficult than violin virtuoso piece (only my opinion).

Just to illustrate: We know there exists a piano version of the great Beethoven Violon Concerto op.61. Many pianists have complained how easy it is (especially the added accompaniment, some say it's just boring and does not use the aspects ad advantages of the piano). So you could argue that playing this piece with the violin is much more harder that playing it with the piano, although you even have an accompaniment to play. But, consider that the op. 61 presents one of the peaks of violin repertoire, presenting some nearly unsurmontable challenges (although it's definatly not the most hardest, but quite hard), whereas the piano version probably could be played by some gifted amateur. So you can not compare them, simply because it is nothing compared to the really hard pieces of the repertoire (Rach, Brahms, Prokoviev conterti...)

If you would play the violin pieces that are considered brutally hard on the piano, you  would be laughed at, because they are easy (of course there are some difficulties when playing them on the piano- mean runs and jumps). To become a master of the piano is IMO much more difficult than on any other instrument.

[whynot]

Well, this is getting interesting.  I don't think there's any way to prove an answer to the original question, that being whether it's easier to start on piano and move to other instruments or start on another and move to piano.  Because no one has done it both ways!  And we're also talking about what's the hardest thing overall, which I think is also impossible to prove, because something that's hard for me on a given instrument might be a cinch for someone else, and vice versa. 

I play a lot of instruments, as do many other people on this forum.  I did learn piano first and see it as a great starting point for learning general musical principles, greatly because of the visual aspect of seeing the intervals and chords right in front of you, not just on paper or in fingerings, but also of course because of experiencing harmonies and reading more than one clef etc.   

I heartily agree with those who've said that it's difficult to be REALLY good at any instrument, and the possibility of true mastery is always debatable.  The difficulties and outright obstacles particular to an instrument that one doesn't play may be imperceptible to the outsider, leading to assumptions like, "it's only one note at a time, how hard could it be," or the opposite, that fast scales are easiest on piano-- when, on woodwinds, you just lift or drop fingers onto keys that are lighter weight than piano keys and you don't have to shift position every three to five notes, so the potential speed is incredible.

Regardless of a person's starting instrument, there is also a factor about general learning that comes into play, especially if several instruments are taken up over time.  It comes across to me like the learning of languages.  Many people speak two or three languages pretty well (I'm supposed to be one of them, but I'm not).  But when you talk to people who speak even more languages, and fluently, you start to hear statements like, "The first three are the hardest," which is kind of funny but also probably true, because the same thing is true of instruments (and maybe other things, but I'm not good at other things, so I wouldn't know).  After a certain amount (and type) of experience, you learn how to learn certain things, and then you just, well, go and learn it.     

Well, that's my two cents' worth.

[teresa_b]

I suspect they're all equally treacherous once you tackle concert repertoire.  Piano seems fairly obvious as easier for beginners.

I didn't read all posts carefully, but I think no one has mentioned one of the unique piano features that makes it difficult, even for beginners--and that's the dying away of each tone.  Thus the challenge of achieving beautiful phrasing, even in the beginning. 

All the best, Teresa

[whynot]

Excellent point.

[c18cont]

I was going to stay clear of this, ,

However I don't recall any reflection on the first instrument, the human voice for this

. Many have written and spoken on it, including on this forum on rare occasion..but I wonder that no one did so in relation to difficulty related to other instruments for this thread...?

John Cont

[Axtremus]

The Hammer,

I think we are on the same page. Any disagreement between us on this subject would be one of semantics. We both agree that at lower levels of complexity (where we can directly compare to other non-keyboard instruments), the piano is easy. But then there is this whole other world of high-complexity stuff that only the piano can tackle -- and to get there, for a pianist, is hard.

[catherinel]

Having taught music in the schools and being a pianist, I would say that piano is among the more difficult to play well, but not the most difficult to learn. The brain needs to comprehend many notes at once, the entire body needs to react with the instrument to create the music.

It is definately a visual instrument and relies less on the ear. The string instruments require more in ear coordination with the fingers to produce pitches that are in tune and pleasing - if the student is a child, they need tp constantly adjust as they grow! Brass and wind require good lips and ears.

I have seen that what is "easy" for one person, makes absolutely no sense to another. Our desire, learning styles, and physical characteristics contribute to what we find easy!

[iumonito]

Here is a thought:  the literature for the piano is the most difficult, rich and demanding, because the piano is an easier instrument to play.

There is simply no question that NO other instrument has literature of the complexity and difficulty of, say, Gaspard de la Nuit, let alone the really hard stuff (like Godowsky Etudes, Sorabji's OC or Boulez 2nd sonata).

This incredible literature would not be possible if the instrument was as hard to play as a French horn (where the simplest passages are a big challenge even for the most accomplished professionals).

The piano is very easy to play.  Piano music is very hard to play.

[Axtremus]

Here is a thought:  the literature for the piano is the most difficult, rich and demanding, because the piano is an easier instrument to play.

Exactly!

[jbmajor]

The piano can handle extremely complex music -- complex as in "sounding many tones, carrying many melodic lines, allow very fast run of notes, all at the same time." The piano is "more difficult" than other instruments ONLY when you play music much more complex than what you can with most other instruments.

Without giving a rigorous definition of "complexity," (let's just vaguely define "complexity" as some combination of {how many notes sound at the same time, how many "lines" are carried at the same time, how fast you have to go from note to note}), I'll venture to say that piano is easier to play than most other instruments at any complexity level.

Low complexity: make a tone -- piano is easiest.

Low-Medium complexity #1: carry a tune -- piano is easiest.

Low-Medium complexity #2: fast run of notes in a single line -- piano is still the easiest on which to play fast running notes in most cases.

Medium complexity: carry a tune with simple accompaniment -- piano is easiest (much harder on harp or accordion or lute-like instruments, practically impossible on bowed-string and woodwind and brass instruments).

Medium-High complexity: carry multiple tunes simultaneously (polyphony, counterpoint) -- somewhat difficult on piano, practically impossible on everything else.

High complexity #1: multiple tunes plus busy accompaniment plus fast running notes  -- difficult to extremely difficult on piano, but impossible on other instruments.

High complexity #2: all the above plus multiple distinct timbres -- not possible on piano, have to move to organ or electronic/digital keyboard instruments.

At any level of complexity, the piano is easiest (of course you can generalize that to most keyboard instruments). The piano is difficult only when you are already making music too complex to be handled by most other instruments.

The only aspect of difficulty where it's hard on the piano while easier on other instruments is to moderate the tone of a note -- it's much easier to make one note sound in many different ways on a string or woodwind or brass instrument, but very difficult to impossible on an acoustic piano (but easy again on a organ or digital/electronic keyboard instrument).

Conclusion: Overall, when taking many different levels/types of complexity into account, the piano is still the easiest (well, along with a organ and electronic/digital keyboards).

That's a very interesting way to look at it, and it makes sense. 

[jbmajor]

Here is a thought:  the literature for the piano is the most difficult, rich and demanding, because the piano is an easier instrument to play.

There is simply no question that NO other instrument has literature of the complexity and difficulty of, say, Gaspard de la Nuit, let alone the really hard stuff (like Godowsky Etudes, Sorabji's OC or Boulez 2nd sonata).

This incredible literature would not be possible if the instrument was as hard to play as a French horn (where the simplest passages are a big challenge even for the most accomplished professionals).

The piano is very easy to play.  Piano music is very hard to play.

Another true and very perceptive point.

[ludwig]

I was gonna stay clear of this topic too...but just a quick point ... I think imitation is a very important learning issue here... and it is easy to do so on the piano, like catherine said, its physical/visual thing when learning. I do however believe that even though learning other instruments (especially stringed instruments) rely heavily on the ear, but this is often a disadvantage when starting out on an instrument that can change pitch and tone with even the slightest difference in posture, position etc... So I do agree that learning the piano first will make life easier in the future when learning a second instrument because it helps the aural awareness. This way there's always a comparison of what is right in terms of pitch.
Another thing is piano is also learning to be coordinated, it is physically possible to play complex pieces like others have said, I completely agree, because we have enough elements to work on! So much material! That is why learning the basics (creating correct  notes and sound to sound degree) is easier on the piano, but to master is a totally different thing (also like a lot of you have said ) For example, the discussion on why piano music is much more difficult - It is possible to write fo the piano and vary the :
1) layers of sound, so that we can have sparse or thick and powerful textures, also allowing us to create richer harmony 2) register or range of the notes on the piano ( i think theres a thread about the possibilities of motifs from just a couple of notes, with different combinations! The result is endless) 3) Dynamics   (I do think some instruments are disadvantaged from this expression simply because the way it is built) 4) Flexibilities of rhythms (ie on wind instruments, tonguing and breathing sometimes makes it impossible to play harder rhythms, althought this could be seen as a disadvantage to some because breathing and articulation can often stuff a pianist up when he/she doesn't feel the way things are phrased etc...) and many more reasons why mastering piano is harder because repetoire and expression becomes difficult

[yoda_muppet]

To the original question: (What is) the piano's difficulty in comparison to other instruments?

This is an interesting question from my point of view, I am a jazz pianist and concert violinist.

The piano is, as others have pointed out, easy to produce a beautiful sound on because the mechanics of the piano, for the most part, take care of this for you.  Beyond that, you are faced with an exercise in precision and coordination.  Piano is complicated, but not difficult -- so long as you have the ability to make musical decisions about what you want to say with the notes on the page.

Violin -- or most any other orchestral instrument, is faced with some other problems.  Tone, tambre, vibrato, bowing (strings), various complex bow strokes such as sautille', spicatto, and ricochet'.  Without these abilities, the violinist is quickly classified as amateur.  Producing a decent tone on a stringed instrument, for example, can eat up the better of 3 years of the beginning student's time.  Vibrato is an undertaking that can take years to perfect, only to never be mastered by many.

My point is, you may have two students equally dedicated to both instruments.  Who will sound better first?  Almost always the pianist.  Does this mean anything.... not really.  It all depends on where your heart is, and the way your brain is wired.  Some people are one-liners!  They would rather play one note at a time, and focus on it's beauty.  Some people prefer chords.  You want to play in an orchetra?  You'd better chose something other than piano!  Want to sound great by yourself and be a hermit?  Piano is for you.  There are so many reasons to choose.

I choose ... both.

Cheers

YM

[eins]

During my life I owned four instruments: the first a flute in school. From what I remember, it was maybe a 40-60% chance to get the tone you wanted. Was relatively easy.

Second was harmonica. I had it as a 'toy' and played as I saw fit. It felt easy once you got the concept of inhaling and exhaling and moving it about on your lips. I wish I still had it.

Third was an acoustic guitar. That was definitely the most difficult of those three  for me. Coordinating the hands was not the problem but producing specific tones in succession was.

Last came the piano. Easy  to hit a key and produce a tone. A bit harder to figure out a simple melody. Damned hard to coordinate different activities of left and right hand to produce a simple melody on the grand staff.

For me, piano is the hardest. But the most fun and most rewarding, and I am most motivated to learn it. There you have it.

[andyaeola]

Another thing to consider when contemplating how difficult a piano is to learn is the perception we may have of what defines a good player.

What I'm trying to say is, so many people play the piano really well, that we probably think it is extremely difficult to learn to become an exceptionally good player. 
While learning to become competant is comparatively easy, and becoming quite good takes perhaps a few years, we may feel we haven't fully learnt because so many people play at very high standards.


Andy

[hgiles]

Any instrument is going to take about X hours a day of practice to get good at it, regardless. 

OTOH, people learn differently and the visual nature of the keyboard makes piano less difficult in some regards.  However, playing more than one note at a time makes it more difficult.  Reading two staves...  Multiple rhythms, played by multiple fingers/hands -- more difficult.

I wish my facility on the piano were half what it is on saxophone!  Of course, I don't have nearly the practice time at piano that I have on saxophone either!

[Doodle]

Having been a music education major, I had to play almost every instrument known to man.  Each has their inherant difficulties, and their music is written accordingly.

The hardest instruments I have had to learn?

The Pipe Organ - if you though counterpoint between your hands was tough, trying doing it with your feet ... and your hands.

The Drum set (trap set) - same reason.  Any instrument requiring all 4 limbs will be more difficult.   I think having to play exact rhythms at speed with your feet if much more difficult than anything you can do with your hands.

D

[ranakor]

i keep seeing things as "playing with 2 hands & having 2 staff" but it's >not< a big deal at all actually it counts for zero in dificulty i mean... what do you think great pianists think "oh crap that staccato 128 run is gonna be hell or"  "holy !!/("§ i need both hands for this one piece"  reading 2 staff is as natural to a pianist as reading 2 to other instrumentalists & same goes for 2 hands playing it's an added learning step but once it's learnt it's not an added dificulty (at least not at the time the piece is ready & you're performing it) so i don't think it should count as that much of a dificulty but maybe as something that lessens a bit the easy starting of piano

[silvaone]

maybe im biased cuz I only play piano but to me piano is much easier because it is more visual, its like a remote almost, press the right button to get a reaction, the guitar for example relies on co-ordination of both hands to make different sounds, but with piano you can just use one finger to hear 88 sounds one after the other

[sarab]

I started out on piano and started guitar at a later age. Since piano was my first instrument I had a hard time seeing the music on the guitar. For me, it's like learning foreign languages - I think piano will always be my first language.

As far as difficulty goes, I really don't think you can say that any one instrument is more difficult than another. These threads exist on every musician forum that I have ever participated in. They are interesting discussions. I read a comment from someone in a classical guitar forum a while back that I thought was good. He pointed out that the difficulty of an instrument should be determined by considering that instrument's own repertoire. Certainly taking the same piece and trying to play it on all instruments will reveal that some are easier than others (there is also a bit of subjectivity to consider as well). But, the way that difficulty should be determined is by that instrument's repertoire. I think that getting into more advanced repertoire for any instruments reveals that all instruments are difficult. Weighing that difficulty is not something that I want to attempt.

On the other hand, someone trying to decide which instrument to choose must decide what they want out of the experience. I think that many musicians choose their instrument by what it sounds like to them. If you want to get to an advanced level you will have to face challenges on any instrument you choose - sooner or later.

[ail]

sorry, mistake in post. Can this be deleted?

Ail

[ail]

Hi, just my opinion. I have not read all of the above because it is extremely long, but this question reminds me of other arguments I had in the past: the 100m runner has an easier time than the marathon runner at the olympics, yet they get the same prize (if they win); or, Engineering is a much harder degree than, say, English; or, Karate is more difficult than Kendo.

Want to know my point?

In each of these departments, if you want to be good, you have to give the best you can do, you have to excel. So, the top of the difficulty class in your degree, martial art, instrument will tax you equally independently of what your instrument is. There are nearly impossible things to play on the piano; so there are on the violin, flute, whatever. You cannot of course compare pieces written for one instrument with those written for another. It's like saying that Michael Jordan is a lousy swimmer. The difficulty is not in the instrument, not in the art itself but in the challenges that have been proposed for that instrument / challenge. Each art, instrument or science will require different skills, but in the top of the scale, their challenges will always tax your skills in the area to the extreme.

I hope I've made myself understandable.

Just for the record: I tried once to learn the ukulele and guitar, and I came out with the conclusion that after I learnt the piano, I'll never be able to learn anything else. I'm just used to a completely different way of using my hands.

Ail

[Aziel]

The instrument doesn't play the musician.