I have a delightful 14-year-old school-based pupil who has just one flaw - he wants to run before he can walk. He refuses to practise what I'd like him to practise and instead tries to teach himself to play really complicated repertoire by ear. He's very bright and extremely musical but because he won't take the plodding route with technique he is missing out vital steps and of course his technique is suffering. In other words, he can approximate quite advanced stuff with a lot of verve and expression but with strange posture and lots of missed and innacurate notes! When he gets it right he sounds amazing, but the rest of the time...

What am I to do with him? He now wants me to help him learn a complex gypsy jazz solo but flatly refuses to play any scales, studies or simple pieces.

Oh, and he practises for hours and hours, but in his own way and only what he wants to play.

I've given up trying to get him to play simpler stuff that will help develop his technique but feel I am failing him in important ways, although I also feel it's a good thing to support him in what he wants to do. How on earth to do both? He's amazingly stubborn.

Help!

Violinia

What about taking a slight risk and entering him for an exam - to make him cover what needs doing for it, as he's unlikely to want to let himself down. Not to get the certificate, but to force him to cover the technicalities for that grade. He'll probably keep doing his own thing, but hopefully would give enough time to the exam material to get by.

I've reached an agreement with one of my pupils - the first 20 minutes is taken up with the things I want her to learn and then and only if she does the first 20 minutes properly she can choose what she wants to play for the remaining 10 minutes. This way I get her to do technique, scales, tone, etc and she gets to try the advanced pieces that she's keen to play.

Once she agreed to this arrangement I've been very strict about enforcing it and if she doesn't co-operate in the first part of her lesson we don't do any of her music in the final 10 minutes. It only took her a few lessons to settle into the arrangement and realise that she had to keep her side of the bargain. I'm hoping that eventually she will appreciate the benefits of the 'boring' part of her lessons.

Edit: The alternative was that she found herself another teacher. I made it clear that I was only interested in teaching her if she wanted to learn to play the instrument properly!

I would find a book of studies where each one focuses on a particular technical point, but is tuneful and fun to play. Is he a pianist? If so the Czerny 101 excersises might be ideal for him.

Hmmm, I'm afraid I said this once to my teacher as well , although to be fair, I had played it wrongly inadvertently rather than deliberately. I don't know how long your pupil has been learning for, or whether he plays any other instruments, but it sounds like the sort of misplaced enthusiasm that I've been guilty of (another ). In my case, as a "newbie" to learning music, I just didn't realise how much there was to it, or how it's all inter-related and that you can't do one thing (correctly) without having done something else first. It took a while for that lesson to sink in, and you might find that your pupil is the same. But it seems unlikely that since he's so keen and loves playing, that he will give up lessons. Like your pupil, I sometimes went home a bit down in the early days because my teacher had burst my bubble (as I saw it), but it certainly never occurred to me to give up lessons. Like I said, it was just misplaced enthusiasm and I like to think that the penny has now dropped with me, and hopefully your pupil will be the same. Can you make his parents understand, even if he doesn't at this stage, so that they can make sure that he practises correctly at least some of the time at home?

Edit: Or what about getting him to write down the way he wants to play it - could it be a way of introducing him to composition, which might give him another outlet for what could be construed as frustrated creativity?

Thanks for all suggestions - all very helpful, although I know he would flatly refuse to take an exam - it's just not the way he wants to approach his music - he wants to learn it aurally like the gypsies! He's been learning 3 years by the way.

I guess I could drum into him that the gypsies often used to beat their pupils when they made a mistake! Also the suggestion to insist on 15 minutes technical traning first may do the trick. Then of course I'll want to see technical improvement before I agree to help him with the next thing. It seems a shame to enter into any serious conflict with him but it seems there has to be some before he can improve technically.

It's the violin by the way!

Violinia, trying not to be too obvious that I'm a violin teacher

Violinia, I know you're a jazz musician and although I can't play jazz (in the sense of improvising, but I'm going to a jazz workshop next month ), most of the fantastically skilled musicians that I've met at festivals have not learnt music in the traditional way or can read music. Everything they have learnt, they have learnt aurally, but they are still brilliant players. I know this might be sacrilege to ask, but would it be SO bad if he learns music aurally? I ask because I would like to understand more about how jazz musicians learn to play so brilliantly when they don't read music. Hope you don't mind my asking.

Sorry to sound hard-bitten and bitter, but I think there's far too much of this emphasis on self-expression in society today and I'd get rid of him unless he knuckles under and does it your way. Let's face it: what is he saying - that he knows better than you. I don't regard it as quaint or charming in the least but quite spoilt and self-indulgent actually. You see I'm a school teacher where I'm dealing with too much of this "I'm a teenager and I know better than old fogies" attitude. When you have several in the same class it tends to lose its charm. It's kinder for him to be told to find another teacher in the long run. Otherwise if you give in to any of his whims he'll get worse before he gets better. Music is a team effort. Yes, in orchestras etc. of course. But also teamwork in terms of you and your pupil working together and him remembering who's boss.
LR

Ah, you say they may not have learnt music in the traditional way, but I bet you're not talking about any violinists! Unfortunately the violin is a very difficult instrument in the technical sense - you really do need to have well-functioning fingers and correct posture otherwise you just can't play proficiently. This boy just can't be bothered with all that, keeps his left hand in the 'frying pan' position, positions his fingers wrongly and puts all his weight on one leg. Then he wonders why he struggles to play 'Bessarabian Girl' at a good speed! I daresay sax, piano and guitar can be fairly easily self-taught - I'm quite a reasonably good guitarist and pianist myself and have only had a handful of piano lessons and no guitar lessons ever. Violin is a different matter entirely.

The reading music thing I agree is less important although I do need him to be able to sightread for the String Group I run. I also agree that his way of learning is far more musical - I play him a phrase and he learns it by ear. This way he's learnt to play the tango piece 'La Cumparsita' (beautifully). ditto 'Two Guitars', 'Kalinka' and loads of other pieces. He's currently learning 'Drowsy Maggie' by ear although he doesn't see the importance of the correct bowing, consequently making it much harder for himself to play the piece cleanly and well.

I think what I'm really grumbling about is his refusal to plod and learn the basics of correct technique before rushing off to learn all this difficult repertoire. I want him just to place his fingers correctly and hold the violin beautifully because it'll help him to play so much better in the long run. With his brain, musical ear and willingness to practise (though not the way I want him to) he has the potential to be a fantastically good player.

I made the same mistake as him with the accordion, turning away from plodding through books and leaping instead straight to difficult Edith Piaf arrangements by ear. Consequently I established some poor habits although I can play some mean tunes! But I'll never be an accomplished accordionist unlessI go back and plod through all the necessary technical learning stages. You just can't bypass them!

For instance this lad used to complain that the early pieces I gave him were 'too simple' and 'boring' - but he never learnt to play them correctly anyway!

I think I've just got to stop being mesmerised by his startling gypsy renditions and just be a bit firmer with him, stressing that he'll be able to play far better in the long run. Whether he'll believe me remains to be seen.

Re learning jazz by ear - definitely the best way. I learnt all my jazz by ear, listening to the tunes, memorising them (never bought any Real Books) and then inventing solos by working out what the chord progressions were by playing around on the guitar and piano or working them out in my head. I would imagine before the advent of jazz education this is roughly how most jazzers worked. The (very good) jazz (ex rock and blues) guitarist in my band didn't get round to learning to read music until quite recently and he's 53!

Violinia

Thank you for your explanation Violinia, and yes you're right, I didn't have violinists in mind when I asked the question. I tend to gravitate towards the woodwind-orientated concerts so it's interesting to hear a violinist's perspective. I'm just so envious of people who have a good musical ear as it's not one of my strong points I'm afraid. It sounds as if he's worth persevering with if he's got it in him to "mesmerise you with his startling gypsy renditions", so good luck with him, I hope it works out.

When I had a boy like this (similar age but piano) I pointed out that it was a waste of his grandad's money to pay me if he was going to take no notice of what I tried to teach him.
He did cooperate for a while.

sounds like my ex flute teacher(that is one of the reason i stopped having lessons with her) and i developed my technique just by playing more and more pieces. i really hate to play something other than real stuff.

OOPS! I really must remember to read profiles and signatures.

It's all been said, really, but my initial thought was the bargaining thing like Amanda - don't stop him playing the pieces he likes, but insist that for you to teach him those pieces, he has to do "your" stuff, too.

Speaking as someone who hit the brick wall on the violin because my basic technique wasn't as sound as it should be, he WILL thank you in the long run.

If you could dress up or hide tecnical points in pieces of music and studies that he enjoys, maybe that would also help? & maybe if you could link specific technical work to specific pieces (ie, "if you practice this bowing technique/improve your posture/get your hand position right, you will be able to play Piece X better") that might help??

Good luck, anyway!

Totally bizarre - couldn't find my long post yesterday so I retrieved it from the members place (how come it was there anyway but not in the thread?) and reposted it. Then found it was in the thread so I deleted it and replaced it with a 'sorry, doubled up by mistake' message, and this morning I look and the original post is back, doubled up again.

Has anybody else noticed any board shenaigens?

Violinia, baffled.

Another option is getting him to play in public. (I was the one who suggested an exam!) Do you host concerts/musical evenings for your pupils? You could explain to him that there will be those in the audience who will be familair with what he is playing, and who will know if it's not as it should be. Would that spur him on to getting the technicalities right?

Thanks for all helpful ideas - I'll try'em all and report back. I've already tried most of the ideas above but I'm dealing with a very, very wilful teenager in a school environment where you only really get 25 minutes with each student by the time they extricate themselves from a lesson (which sometimes involves an argument with a teacher who deosn't want them to leave a test or an important bit of a lesson).

Also, he's involved in zillion other things, like drama group etc etc. But I think the suggesiton to be more draconian is a good one although I would hate it to spoil his enjoyment of the violin. If only he could see how it would increase his enjoyment in the long run!

So - next Friday I'm going to say: Look, there are serious issues with your technique that are holding you back. You could play so much more advanced stuff so much more fluently if you put in some groundwork. From now on I'm going to insist on 10 minutes of technical exercises before we do the other stuff and if you don't practise the technical excercises at home and I see a visible improvement in that area I'm not going to help you with the other stuff until you do!

Regarding playing publicly, yes we do regular concerts but he doesn't care about his frying pan hand as long as we play some of the stuff he loves (which the others now love too)!

I'm dealing here with a boy who wants to be a historian or a doctor (he hasn't decided yet) though lets hope he puts in the groundwork with his history and his sciences! I know he's in top groups for most things though I suspect he'll grow up to be a maverick character who will achieve things in his own way - he's no plodder that's for sure, though this could be his undoing if he doesn't watch out. He'd also make a great teacher, actor or stand-up comedian in my view, but again only if he's prepare to do the groundwork..

But in the end thank god for kids like him - it gives you hope in humanity that's for sure.

Violinia

Violin isn't a different matter entirely. Believe it or not, to play the piano, one also needs to have well-functioning fingers and correct posture otherwise one just can't play proficiently. This forum is littered with threads where teachers have inherited pupils with terrible posture and technique, and have had to take them right back to basics to develop hand shape, how to sit at the piano etc. etc. Even grade 1 pieces sound much better when played by a pupil who has started with the right technique, and doesn't just plonk the right notes in the right order.

Perhaps, just as your pupil thinks he doesn't need to learn violin technique to play what he wants to play, you think your piano technique is adequate for what you want to do. Maybe it would help your situation to think what could convince you that you needed to improve your piano technique - it's a similar situation .

If I was his age and my parents had been prepared to pay for piano lessons as well as violin lessons believe me I'd have done what my teacher asked me to do if he had been reasonable about it. I followed my violin teacher's instructions (with added support from my mum at home) and consequently developed a good technique. I'm self-taught on piano, guitar and accordion so consequently don't play them in live situations.

So, um, what do you mean by ? All I want to do on the piano is play for myself and work out chords for the jazz band I play violin in. I don't need to be a professional-standard pianist for that. This boy wants to grow up and play violin in live situations and I want him to pull his finger out and learn it properly like I did, otherwise he'll never be able to do anything more than twiddle around with it at home, which I think would be a tragic waste.

Violinia

Allow yourself to get angry with him! I did that (unintentionally) with a child last week - it was a different scenario; this was just a normal non-practiser - and felt terrible afterwards, as I'm usually pretty good at keeping my cool, but it worked - and then I felt very humble...

To me, getting angry with a pupil is totally counterproductive (unless they're messing about and being unruly). Assertive yes but angry? About music? You've got to be kidding.

There's a teacher at a school in my area who gets angry with her students when they don't practise. She generally starts out with about 8 new students in Year 7 and by the end of the year she's down to one or none. They'll all left because they're scared of her. I hear this year one of them has continued into Year 8 because he's too frightened of her to give up.

Remember kids who take up the violin do it because they've chosen to and because they want to. Getting angry with them because they haven't understood the importance of what you're trying to tell them can't be the best way. It's the easy way but it isn't the clever or creative way. Obviously I know I could take the angry route but I decided not to, and this is why I've brought the problem to you people here for some fresh ideas.

I've lost count of the adults I know who gave up the violin because their teacher used to get angry with them. They now regret not looking for a firm but kind replacement. I gave up the piano because my teacher got angry with me - it put me right off. My violin teacher never got angry although she was very exacting. If she'd got angry it would have killed it off for me and turned it into a chore not a pleasure and I doubt I'd be playing now.

Anger may work for some people but usually because they're used to being shouted at, but I think there's always a better way.

Violinia

Substitute piano for violin, and modulate angry into "just had a go at me once too often", and that's me. (& I *did* practice, she just never believed me )

I agree - it's not generally productive to be angry. I have never done it in my life before with a pupil. The reason this time was that I was so frustrated to see wasted talent, week after week. Perhaps it was because he knew it was out of character that he realised that it was real anger and not just a teacher being nasty. Week after week - no. That is not me, by any means. And I didn't frighten him. I think I woke him up, though!

EDIT - P.S. The most important thing is for a pupil to know that you genuinely care about his progress. Smiling all the time doesn't neccessarily convey this.

True, that

Actually I agree that there are occasional times when it's OK to be angry, but only monentarily and only as a last resort. I talked to two of my (teenage) pupils today about anger re lack of practice and they said yes it would probably make them practise more but at the expense of enjoyment and that it would make them want to give up lessons.

Carrots are always better than sticks - it's just a matter of finding effective carrots!

Violinia

How do you know that a violin is so very different in the technical sense?
You imply that well functioning fingers and correct posture are for the reserve of violinists only.

No, sax, piano and guitar cannot be fairly easily self taught, and one should not make unfounded assumptions, especially as you have admitted you are self taught on the piano...how scary...I would hate to see your technique and worst of all, listen to attempt to 'play'.

For your information, I am teaching myself the violin at the moment...it's a darn sight easier than when I tried to self teach myself the sax!!

I play the piano already, so learning the violin is easy...there is only one stave.



Please don't be so pompous about other instruments...it's offensive, especially when you are only guessing.

From a student's perspective, momentary anger has worked with me, but it can get quite scary. It depends on the pupil, whether they can stand criticism, and how sensitive they are. I think that generally, showing disappointment is more effective, because you make them feel that they have ''failed'' in a sense, and therefore(if they really care) would work harder, where as with anger, they are more likely to practise out of fear.

Technically, i find the violin much harder than when i first started the piano(no prejudice) because you need to worry about so many other aspects, ie, bow hold, bow speed, bow length, stance, fingers, hand and arm position(or maybe its because i just dont remember what it was like when i first started piano)....But piano does have its difficulties when you get onto higher levels...

I wouldnt approve of self-teaching. I think that if you ever want to learn an instrument properly, it has to be with a teacher, and a private teacher in most cases. People who teach themselves usually overlook huge technical developments, and a musical feel for the instrument. This is reflected when high-level pieces have a tendency to fall apart in the hands of self-taught musicians. But hey, this is only my opinion, others may think differently.

All the same (not that I'm advocating fear), whatever it is that spurs a lazy pupil with ability into action, it's great the following week to be able to show genuine pleasure at their progress, which can then propel the process.

I don't actually think fear is big factor these days; we don't sit with rulers any more!

I'm sorry but it just is very different in the technical sense. As for saxophone I daresay the embrochure is hard to get right at first but my son started sax at 9 and was playing a very competent rendition of 'Summertime' after just a few lessons, as do pretty much all the students at the sax school where he goes, no matter how old or young. Piano and guitar are harder but I'm sticking to my guns here - technically the violin is the hardest of all here. The only violinists I've ever met who play it remotely well have had very good teaching and do a lot of practice. The rest tend to scrape away, play out of tune or have very bad posture, left hand, bow hold, you name it.

Your remark about the violin being easy because there's only one stave makes no sense at all - unless you think playing the violin is just about reading the music correctly and having some idea of where to put your fingers. Your problem with the sax may have been a breathing one - I've tried wind and brass instruments and the only one I can play is the recorder - I can barely get a sound out of a sax, flute or trumpet. But I daresay once you've sorted out the embrochure the rest is a lot easier than learning the violin.

I have a good violin tecaher friend who has recently taken up the trumpet - she's taking Grade 3 after less than a year; she's tipped for a distinction. I doubt an adult trumpet teacher would be able to achiwve the same thing on the violin.

At risk of sounding 'pompous' again, my violin teacher used to give potential pupils a singing test: if they couldn't sing in tune she'd recommend they took up the piano instead.

Look I'm as aware as the next person that playing the piano competently and well without years of good tuition and correct posture etc etc is no mean feat, but you can still make a beautiful sound without it. A cat can walk across the keys of a piano and inadvertantly play a scale - not with any finesse obviously - but can you see a cat accidentally playing a scale on a violin? It might jump over a violin, get its claws stuck in a string or two and pluck a couple of open strings, but an F# pentatonic scale? Hardly.

I know you're piqued because you think I'm belittling the achievement of playing the piano but I'm really not. I'm as impressed and staggered as the next person by truly beautiful piano playing but the piano has a big difference - the hammer hits the string in the right way and at the right angle every time. And a guitar has frets. And no bow. And the genius of violin playing is really in the bowing.

As for this:



Ouch (was that really necesary?) - I aint that bad you know! Can even play a couple of Bach Preludes and some Chopin and Debussy by heart - quite passably too though I say so myself. Even piano teachers have nodded approvingly at the sound, though they may have frowned a bit at my wrists and slightly odd finger action.

But come on now - would you have said the above to George Gershwin, Erroll Garner or Bill Miller (Frank Sinatra's pianist) all self-taught pianists?

Now please come up with at least three world-class self-taught violinists. Oh and before you mention Grappelli, he spent 3 years on scholarship at the Paris Conservatoire..

Violinia

I usually stay out of things like this but felt a few things need straightened out...



I think making a statement like "once you've sorted out the embouchure ..." is to a flautist akin to a red rag to a bull. Do you honestly think that you find an embouchure early on in your playing life & then that's it?? It's a process of constant refining/ altering - at the same time hearing the quality of sound you can achieve & trying to improve it. Or at least it should be.
For example: Do you think where in your mouth your tongue is when you're playing a D3 as opposed to middle C - I don't expect so? I bet I work as hard on tone/embouchure/breathing as your students do on Sevcik & their bowing techniques. Someone playing a flute with a vibrant, resonant, beautiful sound didn't just get lucky - they've worked hard for it.

And flutes don't just play in tune all by themselves you know? Personally I find it a lot easier to play a string instrument in tune than adjusting the angle & height of the air stream to alter the pitch on a flute. Dynamics are so much more straightforward on a string instrument - you don't have to worry about going flat for p or sharp for f.


I think it would be perfectly possible actually - I've never had a violin lesson in my life - but can sightread the grade 3 pieces with good intonation & without sounding like I'm murdering a cat. Also IMHO examiners mark the early grades of violin a lot more leniently than for instance early flute grades ...I've seen & heard the evidence - same examiner, me accompanying similar grades different instruments.



The cat wouldn't get much out of a flute either?
We're all entitled to our opinions but I detest with a deadly loathing all these threads that end up with "my instrument is so much more difficult than yours.."
So I'll now keep out of this one.....

Hey! no instrument is easy to play well, in my view.
Does your son play all 4 octaves or so on the sax?

And I guess the cat was thinking of pizziCATo

Belittling doesn't go anywhere - ANY instrument needs a lot of work to be GOOD.

So true! One swallow doesn't make a Summertime (...flies for cover)

Well said Andy piano flute and SaxFan...and jazzfan. Like the joke, by the way

Also well said YAP earlier on in this thread.

Is Violinia for real, or is she/he just a wind up merchant trying to wind people up on this forum for a laugh.

No normal person would write such things.

Violinia clearly believes what she says - it's sincere even if a load of nonsense!

That's true - it's so nice to be able to say "well done" and really mean it.

Are you sure you're a music teacher?

This thread is beginning to get personal rather than actually about the original topic.

Can we try and stick to the original subject and not make personal comments which might be insulting to other members?

I won't close the topic, but if it does get out of hand again, I'm afraid I will have to.

Please be nice to each other, even if you disagree with someone else's opinion!

The debate of this instrument is harder than that comes up frequently. Usually everyone believes their instrument is harder than all the others merely because they're aware of the technical challenges they face in playing their insturment; but are unaware, or at least not as aware, of the technical challenges faced on other instruments.

As a not particularly great sightreader, and at grade 5 piano I sightread an LTCL violin piece the other day, on the piano of course (just having a bit of fun playing along with YAP's accompaniment). Given the clear disparity in level, say my sightreading should be 2 grades below my grade, grade 3 to LTCL level music is quite a big difference so I'd hope that the violin would have a lot more 'technical' difficulties to make up for that change in level of the music that can be played . Write the violin part of the most difficult of violin concerti as a piano score and it wouldn't be considered a difficult piece; unless the left hand had to play the whole orchestral accompaniment as well.

Of course I'm not naive enough to suggest that the violin is easier than the piano of course the difficulties lie elsewhere (and certainly not to suggest that grade 3 piano = LTCL violin ), but I think that one has to accept that the difficulties in different instruments lie in different places, and sometimes at different levels too: there's no way I'd be able to sightread an LTCL piano piece regardless of tone or what instrument I played it on; yet of course, if I press a note on the piano (a tuned one) that's the note I get so that problem is taken away. For example I think it's generally accepted that woodwind instruments are 'easier' to get through the earlier grades on (particularly if one isn't too bothered about a nice tone) but that the difference levels out at the higher grade levels. However maybe the violin will be just as 'easy' (note the quotation marks I'm not implying that it is easy) if one relaxes the rules: if intonation is not so strictly marked at the earlier levels then the playing field is leveled again.

Difficulties are all different and there's usually an equivalent: violinists often argue that tone produced by the bowing arm is one of their major difficulties that no one else has. Of course a pianist needs to use both shoulders, arms, hands and ten fingers with equal care to produce a good tone. Violinists have the added difficulty of intonation; then again pianists have to play the part of up to 4 string players at once which is again arguably a comparable difference.

At the highest levels there is no difference anyway: it's just as hard to be Maxim Vengerov as it is to be Alfred Brendel, it represents a lifetime of hard work, dedication as well as natural flair. Neither one of those people would be easier to emulate, they've both simply done more than everyone else who plays their instrument (well everyone else that isn't a concert artist of equal calibre) and that requires that they've put a lifetime of effort into it. Neither lifetime of effort is easier.

The hardest pieces on any instrument are written so that the best people will be able to play them with a lifetime of effort. If the instrument was 'easier' to play then the people playing it would get better, and thus the hardest pieces would get harder. To play the hardest pieces on any instrument is just as hard; if it wasn't the hardest pieces would be harder. This of course assumes two things, first that the people taking up each instrument are equally naturally good at it on average (i.e. it's not the case that all the best musicians take up the violin) and that roughly equal numbers of people take up all instruments so there's equal chance of getting someone exceptional. If anything the most played instrument would be the hardest to reach the top on as there's more chance that someone outstanding took it up; of course this has nothing at all to do with any property of the instrument itself....

P.S. Thanks to abrown for leaving the topic open, it's hard when musical discussions arise to not disagree with others' opinions; but it's good to see that we're allowed to disagree so long as we do it in a debating fashion . It would be sad to lose discussions like this; there used to be so many more of them.

Anybody wanting to know what happened here only need scroll back to where the personal insults began. All I did was say that in my view that violin is a particularly difficult instrument to play well and does need proper tuition. Also that in my view piano, guitar and some of the woodwind and brass are technically easier. Perhaps I should have said in the earlier stages to avoid this argument. Obviously to approach mastery any on of these instruments takes a lot of good teaching and practice; but having said all that I think Erroll Garner was an excellent (jazz) pianist with an enviable technique; I've yet to encounter a self-taught violinist who can touch him technique-wise. Perhaps this says something about the two instruments, perhaps it doesn't - but there's no need to resort to unpleasant insults.

Whoever asked me about my son's sax playing, I think he can play 3 octaves - don't know about four, I'll have to ask him. He did score 100% on each of his three pieces at Grade 5 and I know for a fact he hasn't put in anything like the effort you'd need to put in to play that well at Grade 5 on the violin.

Andy-flute, I accept that it's difficult to get the flute embrochure right - I've had a few tries on the flute and can barely get a note out! I do think sax embrochure is easier - my son found it pretty easy to make a nice sound pretty much from day 1 and I don't think he's unique in that way.

By the way my (diploma-holding) violin teacher friend who's taken up trumpet says she finds it a lot easier than she found violin in the learning stages, so look I'm not the only one here.

It goes without saying that have utmost respect for anyone who plays an instrument well and I have never said otherwise, so the personal insults in this thread are somewhat unwarranted.

Violinia

That old chestnut! I played the violin at a time when I couldn't pitch my voice for love or money - but I could pitch notes on the violin...

But back to the problem at hand. What are the student's personal aspirations? Does he want to be a concert performer, or would he be happier to play in folk groups, for instance? And would this affect how fussy you needed to be about his technique?

Good question. He wants to be a competent but basically good traditional-style violinist, able to play fast folk, Klezmer, Balkan-style and gypsy pieces at family gatherings, parties and hopefully in a professional band at some point in the future. He comes from a Balkan background himself hence his interest in this field. I agree he doesn't need to be a classical virtuoso for this but he still needs to knuckle down and work on his technique so he can play the repertoire he wants to play, some of which needs quite a lot of technical dexterity (both left and right arm/hand) if it's to be played fast.

Violinia

Violinia, whether or not your point about different instruments is a valid one, it might be a good idea to use the correct words! Flautists and saxophonists need an embOUchure, not an embrochure!

Hello Violinia...

I don't mean to make any "personal attacks" here... But I HAVE to disagree with this stuff about the violin being sooo much harder than anything else!!

You say that somebody (you son) got 100% on all three pieces in a Grade Five Saxophone exam with little or no effort...

[victormeldrew] I don't believe it!! [/victormeldrew]

That is VERY hard to do - on any instrument! I know I couldn't do it... I have done two Grade Five exams (Piano and Drums) and haven't got 100% on any of the pieces - even with a lot of effort! And as a Sax player myself also, I know that I would find it Gr5 Sax equally challenging as Gr5 Piano and Drums were... Because that's how it should be - all the Grades are pitched (no pun!) relative to the instrument... So that all Gr5 exams are around the same level - this has to be the case, to keep any level of consistency across the board!

I'm not gonna go into how hard the drums, piano, saxophone or clarinet are to play (you try them and see!) but I will say - I challenge anyone to take Gr5 Drums and get 100% for all three pieces... With little or no effort!





As for the original question... I understand that good technique is the only way to become truly competent on ANY instrument!! And your pupil needs to understand this too!


PS... May I borrow yor Sax Embrochure after you... I am thinking of buying a new mouthpiece, and this catalogue seems like it would have what I'm looking for... Thanks!

But some people do manage to do extremely well with little or no effort in all sorts of thing, not just music exams.
The rest of us mere mortals have to work hard for lesser reward.

Am I alone in noticing how these statements are at odds? Bet I could get a sound (albeit an unpleasant one!) out of a violin, even if my technique left alot to be desired.

But returning to topic, have you found a way to instil a good technique into this child whilst still enabling him to play the things he wants to play?

As a multi-instrumentalists myself I feel fairly well qualified to put in a few quids worth of say. I originally started out on the recorder and the clarinet. The recorder wasn't easy - plenty of cross-fingerings - but I became sufficiently competent to convince my father it was worth me taking up an orchestral instrument. The clarinet was more his choice than mine - he was a fan of Benny Goodman - I would have preferred to have taken up the oboe, but cost pushed that one out of the window.

Personally I didn't find the clarinet difficult, but I will restate that it was a personal thing. When I took up the violin I think having played two instruments already gave me a huge head-start. Intonation was not an issue and I'm generally very quick on the uptake of things, so learning the correct technique was not something I had to flog my guts over either. I excelled at the violin in a very short space of time, grade 2 in one term of lessons and grade 5 the following year. What some people might call a natural talent.

Having wanted to play the oboe since I was nine years of age, I eventually had the cash and the opportunity to do so eleven years ago....and have never looked back, but, I wanted to play it so much, no technical hurdle was going to stand in my way. Whatever the instrument threw at me technically, I dealt with it and managed to reach about grade 8 standard in little under three years - not bad for an adult working full-time.

However, I think attitude is often the biggest help (or hinderance) in learning anything. It depends just HOW MUCH you want to do whatever it is you're doing. Everyone is different and while some poeple thrive on what maybe regarded as a difficult challenge and succeed very quickly, others don't want that constant fight and are happier to take longer to get there. Maybe this is also part of the answer to what we think is either a lot of effort, or very little effort.

<applauds AmandaL> Well said, that woman!

seconded!

It's not really surprising that as an experienced violin teacher, you can pick faults in violinists that you wouldn't notice in pianists. I'm sure you can recognise bad violin technique a lot better than you can recognise bad piano technique....

Lucky him . However, it doesn't mean the sax is easy - just that he's good at it. I'm sure there are similar violin stories.

Yes, I'd expect an experienced musician taking up a second instrument to find the early stages easier: given they have a musical ear, experience with the notation, know how to practise effectively, are older and wiser etc. etc.

Respect enough to trust their views when they insist playing instruments other than the violin does require good technique?