I was rearranging my play lists today and I noticed that almost exactly 50% of my pieces are classical and the other 50% are some form of popular music. I didn't plan it that way, it just sort of happened.

I'm curious how others divide their time and styles, if at all. I'm also curious whether people believe that even if you're focusing on one style of music, say jazz, that it's beneficial to spend some time on other styles, or if you're better off spending all your time on your main genre.

I don't really have a main genre. Originally I was going to learn blues (hence my name) but that's gone by the wayside as I've learned a broad range of music instead.

What do you think makes a better pianist, the shotgun approach or the laser beam? Am I doomed to perpetual newbiehood if I don't start to focus on something pretty soon?

Mine are mainly classical, although I also have a huge amount of music sheets in other styles (which I never play, except for some Michel Legrand film scores).

I don't like pop or jazz.

Well, I'm 99% new age. And you can break that down to 55% Einaudi, 30% David Nevue, and 15% Other.

As a primarily pop/jazz player all my life, starting to play some classical absolutely improved my skills (and pointed out some huge holes in my ability). But I'd say that for most of us, I think playing stuff you love is the best way to ensure that you play often and strive to improve. As a player-for-enjoyment, I can't see myself spending hour upon hour practicing music I don't like, which can't do much for my productivity.

That's not to say that I don't ever want to stretch or make myself do an exercise that's unpleasant but "good for me". That's part of improvement in anything. But in terms of raw hours at the keyboard, it seems a bit like what makes one truly successful at work - do what you love and love what you do.

Seriously 100% classical but I've been known to goof off with folk.

Probably not, knowing you . But FWIW I've been a perpetual early intermediate for 50 years and I'm still having a ball I'm 63, and I didn't really notice a slow down in my learning pace until around a year ago, and then mainly in the final speed I can get with some techniques (like stride-style bass). And for all I know that wouldn't be there if I'd spend more time - but I don't.

I dunno, the amount one focuses on any one thing seems to me to be a really individualistic thing - sometimes I'm all over the map, and sometimes I'm all on one channel, to mix metaphors. I have a limited range of styles - contra dance, and old swing - at the minute. Well, honky-tonk sort of, and which I'm working on is driven by if there's a gig coming up soon.

If I had to guess? 50% contra (back up to melody instruments), 20% old swing tunes, 20% honky tonk, and 10% turning everything I know into either old swing tunes or honky tonk.

But for me it's always amazing how far I can get by working on pieces on essentially my level, but with a little stuff I haven't done regularly. One day I wake up, and voila! I'm better than I used to be! (Or, as my band says, d**n, we're not as bad as we used to be! - When we get a bus that's going to be painted on the side.)

Cathy

I could not have said it better. I play standards, and am now messing around with jazz. Why? -- because that's the sound I crave. In the jazz area, I do try to make the little exercises "fun". I'll play it with my Band in a Box backing track. Fun is the only way to go for me.

Barb

I'm only working on classical for now.

I like classical and could focus more on it. But the reality is that Jazz is already so complex and I haven't had much time to spend on other things. I know that eventually I will do more classical. I don't think I would have progressed as quickly if I kept trying different things. Basic blues is pretty much the same as basic Jazz so I could say I hit two genres at one time.

However, I vary my listening to include various genre's. I can always enjoy other genres without necessarily making to much of an effort to learn it.

I may get some flack for this, but why does it have to be strictly one or the other? My favorite classical is Chopin and Debussy, and I sometimes will borrow/steal a lick, style, or a pretty run from them to put into my standards/ballads. Sometimes I start out playing a classical piece and morph it into a ballad without thinking. A lot of classical themes have been turned into wonderful pop songs. Example: "Tonight We Love", AKA Concerto in Bb Minor, Tchaikovsky; "Stranger in Paradise", AKA Polovetsian Dances, Borodin..

http://www.cduniverse.com/search/xx/music/pid/1102850/a/Artistry+Of+Nelson+Eddy:+Popular+Songs+Adapted+From+Classical+Themes.htm

Am split around 50/50 between classical and modern. I have much more classical sheet music, but tend to play more of the modern stuff.

I'd like to get into jazz piano, mainly comping, at some stage but for now my focus is on learning technique via classical although my teacher doesn't mind me working on other genres like jazz or popular. Right now I am working on two classical pieces and one jazz piece which is a solo arrangment and makes a nice change, so I'll probably continue on in this way.

Another way I'm thinking is to carry on with classical for technique and then spend any extra time on jazz specific technique like comping. It would be interesting to see how much of my classical technique crosses over into my jazz playing given that I already know how to improvise on another instrument.