hi there. I already play piano, clarinet and tenor saxophone. I wanted to start a stringed instrument; but is this too much?
Dx

If you can cope with it, and practising, as i see you are high grades on piano, and the other instruments, so bear in mind they will need alot more practise now, if you can cope, try it!

If you have enough time to devote to the practice a string instrument requires, then it's worth a try. You will need to develop an ear for playing in tune and this won't happen overnight, even though you already play other instruments.

If you intend to take up the guitar, then you'll have the advantage of frets, but no such luck if it's a bowed string instrument.

I'm wary of spreading myself too thinly.

There's years ahead of me and I'd really hate to have to turn up at a lesson and make excuses for not having practiced because I've got so much on.

It depends really on you. I don't know how old you are and how much free time you have, but I started my 3rd instrument two years ago, my first stringed instrument, cello. It was one of the best things I've ever done but I've noticed how it has gradually got so much harder for me and how it needs more and more practise, and once I have GCSEs to contend with next year I think that my clarinet may need a break (although I don't want to give it one)

I think it is something of a mistake to think that at a higher level things become easier. I have found that the more I progress, the more I need to practise.

Certainly having played an instrument to a fairly high-level means the beginnings of a new instrument are easier (you don't have to learn to read the music again) but is arguably more frustrating as there is a bigger gap between the music you can hear in your head (just by looking at the score) and the sound you actually produce.

Personally, I think it is easier to play lots of instruments a little than to play one really well.

I would really love to learn another instrument, but at the moment i dont think there's time for me. I have enough trouble learning violin and piano, as i always feel as though im not fitting in as much practice as i want to so right now theres no way i could start something else.
x

But you can stop taking exams and just enjoy anytime....... and progress at least as well too.
Hopefully if your are continuing to take exams it's because you like to?

Kerioboe's observation is right though..... the better you get the more you need to practice if you want to keep going.

I successfully manage playing flute, clarinet, violin, recorders and piano, and if I ever dont get round to practicing then it's more that I haven't been bothered than that I don't have time.

I'd say it's perfectly possible.

It depends why you are learning them.

As someone that plays only piano - I don't understand how anyone can find time to play multiple instruments and reach a high level in them all. There is always some aspect of piano technique to improve, or some piece to be interpreted better, or new repertoire to learn. I am sure that continues to be the case no matter how high a level you reach.

Many years ago I did start to learn clarinet alongside piano. I stuck at it for about two years and reached grade 5 (probably couldn't play a note now!), but my piano skills went backwards at the same time.

Maybe learning piano as second study is useful for musicians that play other instruments - but (correct me if I am wrong) there is no obviously best second study for the performing musician who primarily plays a keyboard instrument.

It is a bit like languages. English is overwhelmingly the most sensible choice of a useful second language for most people that are not native English speakers. But what is the obvious choice of second language for an English speaker? French (nearest neighbour), Spanish (very widely spoken), German (Technical articles), Arabic (useful in business), Chinese (a different way of thinking) ...

For the musician that is not aiming primarily to be a performer - but inclines towards conducting or composition. In that situation it would probably be best to know at least the rudiments of as many different instruments as possible - to better understand their possibilities, and their particular difficulties.

As others have said, it depends on why you are learning. You might get a lot out of playing multiple instruments so only you know whether another would be too much!

Whether you have time depends on how far you want to go with them too.

I started on piano at aged 4, and so far the only other instrument I've managed to really get into for a while was flute. I got grade 5 on it at school, but wasn't fussed about carrying on with it afterwards.

I like picking up other instruments and having a go, but it doesn't take long before I miss my piano. For me nothing really comes close to comparing to it, so I guess I'm just a pianist full stop

Maybe in a while you'll decide you want to stick with one or two. If an extra instrument makes you happy then do it! You'll soon know if it's too much

To take up several instruments all at exactly the same time and expect to reach a high level in them all, needs a lot of work. However, if you become very proficient on one instrument (say Diploma level, or at least post Grade 8), then it's perfectly possible to take up, or bring your playing skills on another instrument up to the same level.

If someone is aiming to be a concert soloist however, then I would agree, playing more than one instrument is not a wise idea, in fact totally impractical. A lot depends on your overall goals in music, or what you've already achieved on your primary instrument.

There are a surprisingly high number of professional orchestral players who are, or have become during their career, multi-instrumental, many of whom can play a second or or even a third instrument to high standards.

My principal study kind of shifted depending on what my needs were. My first study was the piano, then the next phase was piano with saxophone 2nd, and it became conducting followed by singing (with a bit of piano now and again), and now it's horn then conducting (which requires me to do a lot piano and singing anyway). Obviously my standard on the piano couldn't be kept up, however what I lost on the repertoire side I gained in speed of sight-reading and quality ensemble playing. Sight-reading orchestral reductions makes many piano pieces seem like a doddle. By the way the reason why I am shifting away from piano is because I much prefer playing in orchestras and bands; nothing against the piano itself

I think whether you can take too many instruments depends on your needs and wants; the amount I do is sufficient and extremely doable for what I do at the moment, which is principally to improve my horn playing, being an accompanist of sorts and with a bit of conducting thrown in. However if it was something like jazz piano and classical singing I needed (say) then even just the two would be too much for me since they are so different in principal and lack the overlap which would be mutually beneficial. It's not so bad doing multiple instruments say if you just play clarinet, bass clarinet, saxophones or what not, but something like bassoon, viola and horn would be slightly extreme in my opinion (wind string brass and all using different clefs and require a different embrouchure + technique of playing!)

For a main study pianist I think the most sensible 2nd study would be singing (I wish I had been a half decent singing; alas it is not to be...for the better too )

It can be useful to play loads of instruments but usually you have to choose to be either good on all of them, or fantastic on just one or two...
For ages i played clarinet, flute, saxophone, oboe, and piano but although i was good at them all (g6 and above) i wasn't particuarly good at any =/ So my dad harshly told me i'd never be good cause i play too much. So first thing i did after he said that was go upstairs and get all my instruments, and choose which i was gonna get great on. I chose flute, and practised like mad and within 2 years i'd gone from pretty decent, to grade 8 distinction material.
I don't play my other instruments now =/ I do from time to time, but all the different woodwind instruments mess up my flute embouchure so i avoid them. But i'm definately glad i learnt them - lots of experience i'm sure it'll be very useful to know how to play so many instruments.
I also play violin now mind But the only two i actually play and work at now are flute and violin. TOTALLY different instruments so no worries about one affecting the other =] Flute is my main MAIN instrument though

Anyway after that little essay (sorry!) i'd say i don't think playing a stringed instrument will be a problem for you - it's a great change and nice to do something totally new. So go for it. But keep in mind you may still wanna keep just one instrument as your *main* instrument

I play many instruments, i play most very well. I don't see any problem in learning a new instrument....maybe its better to learn one at a time though. By the time you've passed your grade 8 i think you can say you know how to play an instrument, then move onto the next instrument you want to learn.

From personal experience, it can be very beneficial
But a few teachers have repeatedly recited the quote 'Jack of all trades, Master of none' repeatedly.
So, now I only concentrate on Piano and Singing...
whereas I was playing the Viola, Violin, Flute, Clarinet, Oboe, Bassoon and Guitar before hand!

Not exactly a different instrument, but I met someone over Christmas who was considering taking up accompanying (sort of as a second instrument) for postgrad purposes.

Alternatively singing is a good second instrument for a keyboard player as its possible to do both at the same time. From the singing side I find it handy for practice purposes that I can manage a reasonable attempt at the accompaniment of most things. From an organ playing side I find it very handy to be able to sing along as otherwise if I'm playing at a small funeral in a large church it is impossible to hear the congregation singing and I forget which verse we are on.

I learnt to play piano and cello 'seriously' i.e. I had formal lessons, practised a lot, took exams up to grade 8, studied them at university and played in groups where standard was important. Alongside that, I also learnt singing and recorder on an informal basis and took part in various relaxed groups: I practised when I could but it didn't matter if I didn't have time. Consequently, I got to about grade 6 standard. I couldn't have got further without putting a lot more time into it, but it was always welcome to be able to play/sing without pressure. I think I got the best of both worlds by doing it this way.



I don't agree with this. As long as I have listened to the instrument enough and can hear the sound clearly in my head, I usually find that something will work. Books on orchestration can be useful for pointing out the classic techniques and foibles of particular instruments, and discussion with the performers is hugely important to ensure that everything is appropriate. In fact, my least inspiring music is for my own instruments because I feel limited by what I can play rather than focusing on what is achievable by the people who will play it in the end.

I think it depends on how much time you have and what level you want to reach in each instrument.

Piano is my primary instrument, then it's violin then flute. When practicing, I do not move on to other instruments until I think I have made satisfactory progress on the piano each day. I play them when I have time, but I would not cut short my piano practice to accomodate them.

I agree with others that one cannot learn everything and expect to be good at all of them. But I have found learning the violin quite beneficial to my aural skills. I relied on the tuner to tune the piano, but for the violin I have to consciously listen to my own playing, since if my finger was just one millimetre away from the correct position then the passage just sounds hideous.

Are you someone who doesn't work? I could play the violin for three hours but at the level I'm working at, there wouldn't be huge improvements on a very difficult work between start and finish times. It's more about the aggregate result, achieved through little and often. I have to fit personal practice around my work and other commitments, therefore quality of practice over quantity is the order of the day. One hour in total, of really intensive work, beats three hours that might seem impressive but were little more than waffling.

Any non-fretted string instrument certainly sorts out the men from the boys (as it were), when it comes to listening skills. The knock-on benefits from there, also include better tuning if you also play (or take up) a woodwind instrument. Good intonation is something that is sadly lacking in a lot of amateur woodwind players.

I second joolsters. I began on trumpet and played that for five years reaching only grade 5. I then took up T.Sax in my orchestra and moved up with that. My bassoon teacher, who worked in the orchestra, saw I had picked it up quickly and asked me to learn bassoon. in the last 2 years I've picked bassoon up remarkably quickly and its become my first instrument. Now i plan to move through some more woodwind, unsure of whether to go for easy single reed or something more challenging and stick with the double reeds. I'd say you should try to stick within your family but if you find you're better in another family, as i did, move to that and see if thats any better/easier. Now i can play almost any woodwind to a good standard, having learnt one of the hardest first(bassoon).

How do you organise practising all of those instruments? I have three on the go (violin, piano, flute) and a fourth that I "dabble" with (clarsach) and I never seem to fit in as much practise as I would like.




Oh - is bassoon the hardest woodwind instrument? I thought it was oboe. I stand corrected.

[quote name='BassoonBoy' post='712446' date='Jun 21 2008, 11:45 PM']
INow i can play almost any woodwind to a good standard, having learnt one of the hardest first(bassoon).
[/quote]
Oh - is bassoon the hardest woodwind instrument? I thought it was oboe. I stand corrected.
[/quote]

similar idea with the double reed in both, he did say one of the hardest...I think it would be up there with the oboe, with all instruments having their challenges, getting to grips with a doulbe reed is quite a hurdle to get over...

[quote name='Misterioso' date='Jun 22 2008, 10:20 PM' post='712695']
[quote name='Morgan's Munchkin' post='698509' date='May 13 2008, 10:34 PM']

[quote name='BassoonBoy' post='712446' date='Jun 21 2008, 11:45 PM']
INow i can play almost any woodwind to a good standard, having learnt one of the hardest first(bassoon).
[/quote]
Oh - is bassoon the hardest woodwind instrument? I thought it was oboe. I stand corrected.
[/quote]

I didnt say it was the hardest, it is one of them though. I think the amount of keys and movement of the thumb, left thumb alone having 9 keys to play around with where the the others have 2 or 3 is a hard part of the bassoon. Also just balancing the thing is difficult; its so awkward! I'd say oboe and bassoon have different but equal difficulties.

Yes, all those concert pianists who have got their Grade 8 and then moved on to the Trumpet...Seriously though, you need to think about what is "very well" before devoting your time to 8 different instruments. If your aspirations are to have lots of pieces of paper then fine but I would consider being able to play something very well indicates a level of profficiency well in excess of Grade 8.

OP Yes, you can learn too many instruments. Jack of all trades, master of few and all that. If you think about how much free time you have and how much time you would want to dedicate to each instrument regularly. Sadly, only so many hours in the day.

To have an understanding of many instruments is a good thing of course, it doesn't mean it would be possible to "play" them all - having a go might be a better turn of phrase.