Number Of Pieces Learnt Vs. How Well To Learn Them, A Fine Balance Options

[AnotherPianist]

Specifically I'm coming at this problem from the perspective of a pianist but I put it here because I'm sure it will apply to all instruments.

In improving one's playing two things are important (I'm sure that many others are as well...) playing a lot of repertoire to become experienced at learning, and learning pieces to a sufficiently high standard to get the most out of each one (as well as to become good at polishing and playing pieces well). These things are somewhat contradictory, which is unfortunate. If one polishes all of the pieces that one plays to a high standard then one will spend a lot of time on each piece and thus not play as many pieces; whereas if one wants to play a lot of pieces one can't spend too much time on each one.

I'm trying to work out which way the balance should be tipped or how the balance should be achieved (I worry every time between exams whether I should be moving on from each non-exam piece more quickly to the next to play more; or whether I should be polishing it to make it better). As a student I do feel that where the balance lies affects my happiness and motivation in playing the piano, too few pieces polished and I worry that I can't play anything well; too many pieces polished and I worry that I'm not playing enough pieces.

I realise this is a bit of a 'how long is a piece of string' type question but I think that some specific cases or a general idea of what's happening would make both for an interesting survey and would make it clearer to me where the balance should lie (thus putting my mind at ease!). So, the questions:

• How many pieces in general would people get through between two adjacent grades (not including exam pieces)? (if it varies too much with what the grades are grade 4 to 5 would be a good example from my point of view ;))
  
• How long would people expect to spend playing each piece?
  
• How polished are the pieces when completed? (difficult to describe, I know...)
  
• Do many people play (or tell their students to play) pieces of differing levels, some easier (around their sightreading level or slightly above) some harder (to polish) to help in achieving this balance?
  
• Do people have more than one piece to work on at once?
  

What level the pieces played are would also help in understanding the answers to the question e.g. all pieces at the same level as the next grade, varying from the difficulty of the previous grade to the next grade with time, harder than the next grade or some easier than the previous grade etc.

Once again I appreciate that this is one of those questions that doesn't have a definitive answer but I would be interested to hear people's views and what they generally do.

[Jen W]

QUOTE (AnotherPianist @ Feb 28 2005, 07:12 PM)

How polished are the pieces when completed? (difficult to describe, I know...) Do many people play (or tell their students to play) pieces of differing levels, some easier (around their sightreading level or slightly above) some harder (to polish) to help in achieving this balance? Do people have more than one piece to work on at once?

Up until I decided to start taking exams I had been playing pieces to the standard where I felt I could leave them aside, revisiting them say, once a week, and know that they could be polished to a reasonable performance standard fairly quickly if I wanted. I have a small repertoire of such pieces built up over the 15 or so months I've been having lessons. I presume that the more I improve, the easier it will be to polish these. (My teacher has always encouraged the building of repertoire rather than the polishing of each piece - in fact we've moved on more quickly than I really wanted to.)

My teacher has always given me pieces which were harder (even too hard?) than my perceived level, and there have been one or two I've had to put aside, because they were taking too long to master! All the pieces in my small repertoire are in the grades 4-5 bracket, and the grade 6 pieces I've generally had to put aside after 'sort of' learning them, as they were too hard to keep up.

I've always worked on at least 3 pieces at a time, even before I had lessons.

I'm looking forward to reading others' experience as this whole question is one that's been bothering me ever since I started learning...

[Decibel]

You have asked a very considered and important question and it deserves a considered reply.

How long is your piece of string? Every pupil's musical ability and rate of progress is different and so I can only answer in a general way.

First of all, I consider it is foolish to go straight from one set of exam pieces to the next - it happens I'm told! It is important to study a variety of pieces between grades, both from the point of view of learning repertoire and musical styles and for improving technique. Technique consists of many things, dexterity yes, but also smooth legato playing, development of good tone, control of loudness, phrase shapes, staccato and so on. Each pupil will need work on different aspects of technique according to their progress and ability.

These things can only effectively be achieved by work on pieces (and studies and exercises) between grades specifically chosen for the pupil. In my opinion it is not always necessary to perfect every piece studied but it is important to have learnt something positive from its study. On the other hand, as you say, it is important to learn at least some pieces to a high standard, perhaps to play at a concert. You can only be guided by your teacher on choice of pieces and how long you study them. I would never pursue one specific piece with my pupils for too long, particularly if they are having difficulties which cannot immediately be solved. It can be very frustrating for a pupil to be learning the same piece for weeks on end. Each grade requires some extra aspect of technique and musical understanding from the last, so it is advisable to work gradually towards the next grade, rather than tackle a piece of the next grade immediately. This is where the choice of pieces is so important. I consider it a good idea to have more than one piece on the go, but these should be of a different nature. I also think it is good for a pupil to be given an easier piece from time to time just for sheer enjoyment, after all, that is what we all want at the end of the day.

I hope this gives you some further thoughts on the question. You are obviously a keen student and I'm sure your teacher would welcome any discussion with you on this subject. I wish you every success.

[AnotherPianist]

Firstly many thanks for your helpful replies. My teacher is a new teacher, well he only teaches one person and that's me, so I (we) find the input of experienced teachers from here very valuable. I do pester him about this rather a lot but we're not sure of the right answer (or even if there is one!) which is why I'm so interested in seeing what other people do; as you say what's right for one person isn't necessarily right for another but a general picture is helpful in seeing how far one is from the mark :).

So in general is around 4 weeks too long to spend on learning a single non-exam piece? I guess that would mean that 12 pieces (including exam ones) could be learnt in a year: is this way too few pieces, not enough time on each piece or about right? I don't usually do more than one piece at a time: I've tried it before and I usually end up favouring one considerably more than the other at various points; or considering one to be the one I'm working on and the other to be for fun. I do work on all the exam pieces at once though, with a staggered start, and don't really have any problems with that: it seems illogical really. I'll give playing more than one piece at once a go again and see what happens. I think from what you've said that maybe I polish too many of my pieces to a higher standard than necessary before moving on, I need to learn be less of a perfectionist :rolleyes:.

I usually play pieces of the standard of a grade above the one I will be doing next, that is grade 6 pieces before grade 5 etc. but I do also play some pieces of grade above standard too (i.e. grade 5) I don't think that there's too much of a clear cut line between one grade and the next in that because each person finds different things difficult there will be grade 5 pieces that one person finds harder than some grade 6 pieces (obviously in general though grade 6 pieces are harder than grade 5 ones). I'm also a firm believer that one shouldn't reject pieces branded a grade below (or several grades below) where one is on the basis that they're too easy, there's always something to be learnt from a piece and I find it baffling when people say that piece is too easy for my why does my teacher give it to me...

Jen-just out of interest if you're playing three pieces at once do you cover them all every lesson or just one during each lesson?

Once again thanks for your replies :).

[Violinia]

QUOTE

So in general is around 4 weeks too long to spend on learning a single non-exam piece? I guess that would mean that 12 pieces (including exam ones) could be learnt in a year: is this way too few pieces, not enough time on each piece or about right?

This is a very individual thing and I'm sure practice varies from teacher to teacher and pupil to pupil.

I find with my pupils things slow down considerably when they want to do an exam, and too much time can easily be spent going over and over the same 3 pieces.

One pupil of mine (who doesn't do exams) sent me a card once saying something like "we've covered so much ground and done so much! I'm really looking forward to next year's repertoire..." She told me she was very bored with her previous teacher who kept her playing a very few pieces for the whole year (because she was working towards grade 1).

Doing too much can mean pieces don't end up polished before you move onto the next one, but doing too little means boredom can easily set in. You have to find a balance, perhaps trying out a few others while also concentrating on just 2 or 3 to make them perfect. There's such a wealth of music out there and it seems a bit limiting to play just a few pieces over the course of the year.

Why not play lots of repertoire from different genres, styles and eras at a level below what you're capable of, while working on just one harder piece at any given time?

There's a solution!

Violinia

[Silver pianist]

Why not play lots of repertoire from different genres, styles and eras at a level below what you're capable of, while working on just one harder piece at any given time?

There's a solution!


I agree.

There is no compulsion to have every piece at performance standard and a varied repertoire is so important

[samanthafung]

QUOTE (Violinia @ Mar 3 2005, 02:47 PM)

Why not play lots of repertoire from different genres, styles and eras at a level below what you're capable of, while working on just one harder piece at any given time?

May I ask a question........

How many repertoires are considered to be "adequate" and "sufficient" (they have different meanings, I suppose) in terms of technicality?

I always leave it to my teacher to decide what I should be playing. Is it a right learning attitude to leave everything with my teacher?

[George Burrell]

We have suggestions here for pieces that are at a lower grade and at a higher grade than the student.

Lower grade music assists with sight reading. I personally find that slogging away at music that is too difficult is a frustrating business. It takes so long to learn!

My rule of thumb these days is to keep working with a piece as long as positive progress is being achieved. A piece can easily reach a plateau where some engrained habits and mental blocks relating specifically to that piece can be a real obstacle, and the technical issues may be better addressed via the "indirect route". I think it is better on these occasions to cut your losses and look at some new material. And I do find that as more pieces of a similar genre are attempted, that the ability in the genre increases.

Following the above logic, examination pieces are then those pieces where positive progress continues long enough to achieve a confident performing standard. That is why I find it beneficial to introduce a student to at least a couple of pieces from each list - so that options remain open until it is obvious which ones are most likely to attain the examination room standard.

[Jen W]

QUOTE (AnotherPianist @ Mar 3 2005, 01:29 PM)

Jen-just out of interest if you're playing three pieces at once do you cover them all every lesson or just one during each lesson?

We cover all three usually - often working on detailed points in each (it's just that my half hour lesson tends to stretch to an hour - because my teacher's retired she'll just keep going until we've finished, so to speak!). Since I've been having lessons and paying more attention to other aspects such as sight reading, aural, theory etc, I've found a real pressure in doing three pieces at once but whenever I've tried to drop one, another has crept in somehow....I'm glad now of course, because that's how the exam is structured...

QUOTE

My rule of thumb these days is to keep working with a piece as long as positive progress is being achieved. A piece can easily reach a plateau where some engrained habits and mental blocks relating specifically to that piece can be a real obstacle

Yes, this happened to me recently with a Vaughan Williams piano piece, originally written for strings, where the fingering was so tricky I just couldn't master it (although I knew the original music perfectly well in my head) so I reluctantly let it go for the time being.

[maggiemay]

This is a really interesting question, and it seems to me that the answer varies quite a bit from student to student, depending on each one's learning style and other factors.

There are those who always want to be on to the next piece, (where even a third week on the same piece is not welcome ! LOL) though we do try to get at least some pieces polished reasonably well. I'm in this category myself as I was always a sight-reader, so I sympathise to some extent.

Also if students don't want to do exams there isn't even the constraining (bad word but I struggled here!) element of having to do three pieces to a higher standard every so often. In fact I think the reason that a small number of my adult students prefer not to do exams may be that spending so long on a small number of pieces would be anathema to them! There are others who resist starting something new in order to better perfect the current piece - I guess one is always trying to achieve some sort of balance.

With exams - yes we do generally learn several pieces from the syllabus; I like if possible to do at least two from each group. When this happens, pupils often naturally polish up those they enjoy most, and the final choice is easy.

To answer one specific question from AP - no, I don't think 4 weeks is too long to spend on one piece. I tend to get fidgety if I have a pupil learning a piece for, say, 6 weeks or more, unless there are good reasons for it having taken longer, and I'd hope that other things are on the go at the same time. It seems good in general to have at least two pieces on the go, preferably of differing styles, and at different stages of completion.

Eek - time - have to dash and will try to return to this later. Just a few largely unedited random thoughts here so far !

M

[maggiemay]

To add another point to the previous post ........

This may not help the OP much, as it's something I have found more useful with younger pupils - for perhaps obvious reasons! and I have mentioned it before on the forums - however, it may be of use to some so I will risk outlining it again.

I had been looking for a way to encourage youngsters (in particular) to feel there was some point in polishing as well as moving on. I've generally liked to start new pieces fairly frequently so as to maintain interest, (and where possible I leave open the option of discarding a piece after the first week if it doesn't appeal so as to avoid as far as possible the situation of getting bogged down in something not liked ) but still found it a challenge with some children to get them to add expression and that last bit of fluency. The exceptions were perhaps pieces that have an obvious story or dramatic title.

During last year I started using a "two-tier" completion system. You can earn a tick, or you can go for a Performance Star. A fairly accurate play through with notes and time reasonably intact will generally earn a tick - that means you can leave that piece behind if you like. A more polished attempt with expression, dynamics, all neatly done (and accuracy still intact of course) will earn an extra credit. I'm looking for something that would score around the 25 mark level if it were an exam piece. Six of these and you earn a place on the Performance Chart.

Sorry if this all sounds a bit juvenile to some of you adult students - and I hope it doesn't stray too far from the topic - however I have found it works really well with quite a number of pupils, who regularly go back to recently ticked pieces and ask if they can play them again. It grew out of an idea that I read on one of the piano teaching websites, and I mention it here in case any other teachers might like to use or adapt it. It's almost entirely under the control of the pupil who is free to choose which pieces to improve and which to leave aside.

Maggie

[AnotherPianist]

Once again thanks for all the replies, sorry I didn't get round to posting earlier but I thought I'd wait until I had a bit more time as this will inevitably be a long post....

QUOTE (Violinia @ Mar 3 2005, 02:47 PM)

Why not play lots of repertoire from different genres, styles and eras at a level below what you're capable of, while working on just one harder piece at any given time?

That's a good idea and in many ways I feel this becomes another issue a balance between sightreading and playing: when does a piece become a piece that we have 'played' not just sightread or read a couple of times? I don't tend to count something as a piece I've 'played' if I've only taken a couple of days to learn it (even if the standard to which I play it is good) I just feel like it's more something I've read: even if it is played musically. I think I do this but call it sightreading practise (usually using grade 2 and 3 standard pieces). Maybe some slightly harder pieces that take longer to learn would be better and would count more as having played it rather than read it, or maybe reading it a few times and playing it musically counts equally well. Or maybe I should count things that I can play reasonably well after a few readings as played: following my own logic there's no reason that they're not valid pieces and there's always something that can be learnt from them.

Maggie mentions that some people naturally want to move on to the next piece and some people are happy polishing. I think that I do lie in the wanting to move on category but I do not feel that I will be satisfied with myself if I don't polish the piece before moving on, I will just feel like I cheated to get on to the next piece. Thus I want to polish the pieces so that I can both play them well and move on, but I guess that makes me work harder! Regarding the idea of the choosing which piece to polish as Maggie says it's a good idea to work with children but I'd be too concerned, not to do what I want, but to do what is right, for the system to work! Thankyou especially for the specific answer about the length of time, it's good to know that it doesn't immediately sound like a completely wrong figure.

With the exams I do usually only pick three pieces and play those (although later on through the preparation I usually can't resist having a few reads through the others!) it may be intersting next time to start with a larger selection and narrow things down. I also intend to wait a bit longer before starting exam preparation this time as I started too early last time and the pieces had become a little too overplayed before the exam. That's another question (and one that I think has been posed before) how much of the year should be dedicated to learning exam pieces?

QUOTE (George Burrell @ Mar 4 2005, 04:55 AM)

My rule of thumb these days is to keep working with a piece as long as positive progress is being achieved.

This is an interesting point and a very logical approach. It is often said that the last 10% of work on a piece takes 90% of the time though so progress will slow naturally (I would guess) as one gets further and further into the piece. I guess it would be tricky to say at which point precisely is the optimum to withdraw from a piece as people do need practise at the later parts of the last 10%. As you say though if there is one technical issue that is the main hurdle and it could perhaps be better tackled indirectly then it's probably advisable to continue on. The only problem I would have with that is that I may feel that I've 'failed' to tackle the piece properly if I left that; although of course it would be rectified later. Perhaps moving on but just working on a specific section of that piece still (and maybe some exercises if appropriate) would help with that. Or maybe sometimes we just need to learn to give up and come back to things later!

QUOTE (samanthafung @ Mar 4 2005, 03:48 AM)

I always leave it to my teacher to decide what I should be playing.  Is it a right learning attitude to leave everything with my teacher?

I would say so, that's what they have lots of experience in doing and if what they say seems quite reasonable to you then there's no need to worry about it.

QUOTE (samanthafung @ Mar 4 2005, 03:48 AM)

How many repertoires are considered to be "adequate" and "sufficient" (they have different meanings, I suppose) in terms of technicality?

Still open for debate I suppose!

Once again thanks for all the helpful replies :). I am now currently working on two pieces at once so this thread has made a difference, and I've also noticed that I do a little more practice this way as when I wouldn't really want to practise if I was playing one piece I'm quite happy to play the other so it does work :).