Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Adult Beginners Forum New here. La Campanella study group?

9 years is a bit longer than 7 months.

It may be that in relatively few years, a student might learn a tremendous amount - from working tremoundsly. But one needs to get to that level. It would be unreasonable to have a little kid who can hardly read "Curious George" to read Shakespeare's "Hamlet". Hamlet is hard even for advanced readers, not just to pronounce the words, but to understand the words and to understand the context and to understand the play as a whole. But, absolutely, if that student were to work very hard, he might, even in 3 or 4 years, be able to read Hamlet. But just reading it is only a small part of the task.


Piano Fairy commented that others acquire their skills in 4 years at a university, so why can't a pianist do the same?

Music is different from mathematics.

In mathematics, what matters it that you get the right answer. It doesn't matter how you get the answer. It doesn't matter how long it took you, or how beautiful the process was. It doesn't even matter what process you used to get the answer. All that matters is the answer.

In chemistry, what matters is that you set up a lab experiment to discover what happens when two chemicals mix. It doesn't matter how beautiful or ugly the design is. It doesn't matter how long it takes you to set up the lab. What matters is that you ultimately figure out what happens when these two chemicals mix, regardless of how many times you tried the experiment, or even what the experiment actually was and how it worked. All that matters is the answer.


In music, it is not enough just to play the notes. What matters is not the 'answer'. What matters is the presentation of the 'answer', and that presentation can often be very difficult. The pianist not only has to understand the notes, and not only has to understand how they fit together, and how to artfully play them - she has to actually have the physical ability to play in a manner that artfully brings out all of the details while at the same time tying the piece together as a whole, and she has to actually *play* that way, and not just understand how to play that way.


Sure, if you really really really want to do it, and you work very hard, you might be able to play it. I don't doubt that. But *how* is what is most important, and what is most difficult, and what requires the most experience.


Remember also that it is not the only beautiful piece of music. There is *a lot* of very beautiful music to be played, and you don't have to play it all at the same time.

Sam, thanks for posting that list of requirements, it was something along the lines of what I was imagining, but it looks even harder actually written out!! Aren't you a student at IU? So you did something along the lines of what you posted here? Wow, bravo!

Islamey, I don't think anyone is dismissing any techniques as impossible. We're saying they should be attempted after other steps are completed. To repeat Sam's comment, we're talking about 7 months of playing here, not a few years. Yes, a positive attitude is important, indispensible even. But piano is a complex skill and should be approached systematically, with planning and forethought guiding the work at hand, not just a desire to play.

I have never tried to play La Campenella (I never even bought the score, a quick look-over in the music store was enough to tell me that I'm not ready.) But I have attemped to play other things that I thought were way beyond my level. Some of those I gave up and put away (and some, I have since learned how to play, after working on other things in between.) Others I struggled through with more or less success depending on the piece. But all of my playing decision are made with a mixture of desire (I want to play this!) and calculation (am I likely to make progress in 1 month? 3 months? 6 months?)

I think people are reacting because it seems like Pianofairy needs a little more realistic planning and calculation in her pianistic pursuits.

Just my two yen...

Nope. Michigan.

Oops, sorry! But you are in a music program, right? What's the specific field? (i.e. music performance, music ed etc)

talent is part of it which would make things easier to begin with, but it only takes one so far without working hard. my teacher said that there're certain things you born with, such as ability to play really fast (like him), and he said that he can play as fast as he was a teenager then, but what difference between now and then for him is the quality of sound he plays. so, what i am trying to say is that talent plays some role in piano or any kind of activity, and that's why there's only so few of great pianists, artists or athlets in history, comparing with the entire population. but without such talent, one still could achieve some higher goals through some determination and hard working. you may not be able to play as fast as Richter, but you still can play well. that's my point and i agree with your saying about Chinese proverb. but everyone has some limitations, in any field or playing piano. sometimes, no matter how much you try, you just cannot go beyond certain point. such limitations might be improved through a lot of practice or just time to let skills develop naturally. but everyone would agree that after a person only learned to play a simplified Fur Elise, he/she is simply not ready for a Chopin etude or la Campenalla. i never said one shouldn't try (go ahead try it!), but my point is such trying may prove to be useless or worthless. i tried a lot of things myself, and i know what i am saying. btw, i taught myself to play piano, and nobody told me then what i can or cannot do, and i only speak from my own experience.

And I thought Schubert Gb major Impromptu is already at the limit for beginner-intermediate group. I know there is a Croatian Rhapsody study group. I am thinking of starting a Spanish Rhapsody study group

slowly, i guess. its difficult to shoot the moon.

it will take lots of time.. so, i guess patience is also key hehehe.

la campanella will remain exactly as difficult as it is, and it will not get any harder. what will change, however, is your technical command. i wouldn't say that no matter how hard someone tries, they cannot get something. it has been years before people play la campanella, but they have finally overcome the technical difficulties- their own abilities have superseded the challenges presented by the music.

i guess its abit overboard if i say you can play it now, but you can start learning the easier bits of it, and slowly, as your technique improves, you may be able to play more of it, and finally, the whole of it.

but you should really enjoy the music and let yourself develop technically and musically- and scale the demands of la campanella finally. you can prepare yourself better by perhaps playing simpler pieces, challenging ones though- that perhaps involves lots of octaves or trills or running notes or jumps. or by playing simplified versions, and by listening to more recordings- not just the original, but also the paganini violin version. when you are prepared for la campanella, it will come to you eventually. just keep going yea. (:

guess i won't be posting much over e next few days. got exams ): sigh. ohwell. anyway, keep practising and have fun with paganini's and liszt's "little bell"! (:

I'm finding this discussion very inspiring and love that piece so much too so I had to add to the argument.

From what I know based on myself and other pianists the beginning pianist can tackle many signature works and a surprising number of pianists are able to play the opening bars of La Campanella. Now whilst it's necessary to select music carefully for the level, there is an argument for letting a beginner play some of a very difficult piece like La Campanella if they want to. This is because the player will be able to gain a confidence that other players who are prescribed graded pieces will not.

Furthermore, if any pianist working through a passage of very difficult music discovers that a certain passage is after all not so difficult and changes his or her belief system that pianist will learn La Campanella regardless of whatever anyone says. We do this every day anyway. There are pieces of music I thought I couldn't get right sweating it out in front of my teacher. She told me I was out of tempo, I was hitting wrong notes. She never told me I couldn't do it. I took the piece home I worked on it patiently at home, I took it to bed with me - it was solved. Because I knew if I got one section right the others would follow anyway. It's just like stringing beans when you come down to it except some beans are bigger than others.

All I can say, Fairy is I wish I had a fraction of the confidence you have in tackling La Campanella, and only that if you want to play it badly enough you ought to. But you will not do it if you can't master the techniques. And to do those you'll have to practice and play other repertoire than this. And then when you are ready and it will probably take years you will play La Campanella. Therefore learn the A, B, C's and then the vocabulary you need from other music, and exercises. You will do this very well because it is going to help you with La Campanella. Also being an accomplished programmer means you're able to work through a project logically. Set your goals then and say that you will play it by a certain time in the future and it doesn't matter what anyone says you'll get there.

I'm backing you all the way and you'll succeed!

not meaning to be too harsh but i think this needs to be said : piano is a passion field & if you want to become a concertist you're gonna compete against an elite because people want to see the best (& not just someone who's decent) this is why the analogy with programming doesn't work in your studies there you were competing against regular people & so would you in a conservatory but once you go out & look for a job those poeple do find a job in programming & pianists find concertist jobs, however keep in mind that the pianists you see on tv are pretty much ONLY this that weren't of the "it took them 4 years while it took me 1" type heck they prolly are of the "oh **** it took me 1 year but only takes them 3 day!" lots of pianists you see on tv have been playing up to 8hours/day since their youth & while having the mentality you have will get you further faster it definately won't make you an international concert pianist in no time

sorry to tell it, but this is a sick ambition

you can not become a top bodibuilder in short time just because you work out a lot
you have to work out a lot in long period of time

so is with piano playing

Music History. So the requirements were a little less:

-- baroque piece (Bach Prelude and Fugue in C Minor, WTC I)
-- one movement of a Beethoven sonata (Op. 10 No. 2, 1st movement)
-- romantic or 20th century piece (Grieg Nocturne, Op. 54 No. 4)


I did audition first for performance, and prepared the longer program, but wasn't accepted. I might possibly audition again for performance this year or the next, to do a double-major in music history and performance.

Kinda off topic, but math and piano are not that different IMHO.

By playing the "right notes" at the "right time", you can pass a math exam, even finish your undergrad and get a master's degree in math. But to become a "concert mathematician", you must first finish your Ph.D. and learn what's it all about. You can't just read a book and understand the process of proving something that's not done before. Absorbing this requires at least a couple of years usually no matter how ambitious you are. Even after you got your Ph.D., it's still a long way until you're a "concert mathematician" and not everybody can become one.

Well, there are some people who got their degrees in no time and proved some really nice theorems. But, it is hard to say that everybody who believe in themselves can do it. Unfortunately, we, human beings, have some limits. We can't even move things without touching them .

So, in brief; not everybody can become a Yundi Li or an Andrew Wiles. Yes, they worked hard, but working hard doesn't guarantee being one of them. (BTW, Andrew Wiles is a mathematician who proved Fermat's last theorem and became very famous).

why does everyone feel they have to become a yundi li or something like him just to achieve la campanella? maybe i'm wrong but thats the feeling i'm getting from people. yea.

la campanella is challenging, but not impossibly difficult. you don't have to be a concert pianist or even a conservatory student or teacher for that matter to play la campanella. my stand remains that most people overrate the technical requirements of this piece. i know a few friends who play this piece- they are mainly small time music students. not big names. i myself play la campanella- and i'm no yundi li.

you don't need like 10000 years of practise. a few years is all it takes to handle anything you want- that's as difficult as la campanella. just keep working, and may whoever your God is guide you to your goals. (: (disclaimer: although my nickname says islamey, i am not a follower of islam. "islamey" is the oriental fantasy written by balakirev (1869)."

I think, Fairy implied that s/he wants to be a (concert?) pianist. So, it's not just about La Campanella.

hey islamey, you mentioned earlier in the topic that you learnt 'la campanella' to performance standard in a about 1 month from when you first looked at the score. I was wondering how much time you spent on the piece each day, to get it learnt so quickly? Was it the only piece you were working on?

i still disagree that it's the same as math , yes your math concertist may or may not need as much time as another to learn math but most often even the greatest mathematicians have not been doing math 8 hours a day since their youth, the pianists there are to compete with have so the thing is it's not a you'll need a lot of time unless you're talented but it's you won't make it at all but if you're talented you may make it but it will STILL take lots of time

it was the primary piece i was working on. i guess i would be working on it for about 30-45 minutes each day on average..? the irritating thing is some parts are terribly difficult to POLISH. like the trills on the 3rd/5th finger with a descending melody on the thumb. and the repeated notes part (RH fingering 215 215 215...)

it's not terribly fast though. i know this guy. he's more of an acquaintance, but from what i know, he learnt liszt's dante sonata to a reasonable standard in 1 day (5 hours crash course)- which is a feat far more remarkable than my la campanella in 1 month. and another of my friend- he polished the 2nd and 3rd movement of saint saens 2nd piano concerto in 4 days.

sorry for my terrible ego, but just to trumpet another of my more recent achievements- schulz-evler's concert arabasques on themes from 'on the beautiful blue danube' by strauss- from starting on the score to playing in the concert in 5 weeks.

to pianofairy: if you want to be a concert pianist, why not? it's a career path less taken, why not try it out? you just have to brace yourself first for the hours you spend slogging in front of your keyboard, refining your scales, thirds, octaves, arpeggios, trills, tone and technique.. (: but if you think it's worthwhile then go ahead..!

islamey,

How long had you been playing piano before you took on La Campanella?

What sort of training had you had?

Had you played other pieces of comparable difficulty (or greater difficulty) before this one?


At a certain level, music that was once very hard actually isn't so hard anymore. "Difficulty" depends on one's abilities - if you're well prepared for it, and if you can play it, then of course it is "easy" or "not so hard." On the other hand, if you aren't "good enough" to tackle a certain piece, it is very difficult and even 'impossible', so it seems. So even for the same piece of music, it really depends who is playing it, and what experience/abilities/knowledge/understanding they have.

I can bang out a "mean" Mary Had a Little Lamb!!

::::oops...pardon the interruption....now back to your regular postings:::::

uh. about 11 years keke. well.. i TRIED playing alot of difficult pieces... slowly... don't rush into things. start practising the easier parts first! in a couple of years you'll be able to get nearer to there..!! and finally.. (.....) ..!! (: (: