How fascinating to see teaching in such a public space. Has it ever happened before? We must applaud Hugh's efforts, he's a nice guy as well. I have suggested to him linking a discussion thread to his teaching thread to avoid disrupting what is such a wonderful effort so here I suppose, is it.



The bell and drum thing is really helpful - Hugh makes it very clear, in a very accessible way, that keybedding, or any tension after sound production, is counter-productive. I have to disagree with his use of Audacity though. I have a friend who years ago, before I learned how to play the piano, insisted it was just a matter of playing lightly. It wasn't a helpful suggestion at all - you can play just as tense (I would say more tense) lightly as heavily. Playing the piano gracefully has a lot more to it.

Excellent point, Keyboardklutz - you can be very tense indeed and still produce a soft sound. What i found interesting in using Audacity with students is that more often than not, though, they misinterpret the various muscle tensions to equal a certain audible output, when either no change has occurred at all when intended, or quite the opposite of what they "felt" was coming out. Hearing, from a first person perspective, can be highly influenced by our own physical sensations and imagination. That lesson alone took me years to unravel, and it was mainly in the recording studio that i began to learn to be REALLY objective with the relationship between what my body physically felt and what was actually being produced sound-wise. Audacity by itself won't solve tension problems, but it is a terrific, objective tool to show sound levels visually, particularly when trying to develop a smooth crescendo or diminuendo.

I would highly suggest using both a visual and an audio tool - a webcam + Audacity - for best pedagogical results.

Thanks for the insight, Keyboardklutz!

I agree, adding a visual tool should really help. It must never be to the detriment of the ears or touch though.

Thanks for that Hugh! I really liked the Bell/Drum analogy. The one thing that I would caution against is some may then play staccato and let the pedal do legato for them. It's a matter of releasing the pressure while maintaining contact with the depressed key for a legato sound. I know that is not what you were advocating, but I see that a lot in students, and that is something I did myself in the years I was teaching myself. But it is still a great point, I hope you don't mind if I use it in my teaching (I will give credit, of course)?

The idea of videotaping and audio recording is great too. I do audio recording in my studio to help students prepare for a performance. Sometimes when you're in the midst of playing you don't realize that you had that little "hiccup" in that spot, or that the dynamics were too loud, too soft, etc. I think the use of Audacity to "see" what you're playing can be helpful to a person who already knows how to play piano and forte without unwanted/excess tension. KBK makes a good point that oftentimes playing softly can be extremely tense, so it depends on the student.

Making videos like this is very helpful, but there is always the danger that someone will go to an extreme or have an underlying issue that needs to be addressed in order for them to successfully play something. That is where a live teacher comes into play .

KBK, I like your thought about playing gracefully, and I think there is something to that, more than what some might believe is just choreography at the piano (and of course I know you did not mean it in that way). I've had people comment to me after a performance on how graceful my hands are when I play, and I make little attempt to "choreograph" in the sense of trying to look emotional while playing. But it is in the release of the pressure from the key, the upward movement of the wrist and the wrist flexibility, and the release of the fingers that are not being used that contributes to that "gracefulness".

So right, how many think we're doing it as some add-on! The gracefulness comes from the music, not any other way 'round.

You're more than welcome, Morodiene, and by all means feel free to use the illustrations if you find them helpful! What struck me when perusing YouTube piano lessons was the sheer number of people viewing those clips. I find that incredibly encouraging, to know that there is a vast population out there that really wants to learn to play the piano. One of the ultimate goals of this "Clair de lune from Scratch" series is to show how much fun piano lessons can be with a "real" teacher, and at the end to point to several teacher referral services and /or personal teacher websites. In fact, this might be the perfect place for teacher "signups" - anyone interested in joining the live teacher referrals at the end of the series?

Interesting (no criticism intended at all) - here, the instructional video, the first beat of every bar on page 1 is anticipated (the final dotted quarter note is not given its full value - so common and so wrong!). My teacher would have gone through the roof!




But here, performance, perfect!



You might expect reading the music it would be the other way around. (of course, you've got to count 9)

I find the bell and drum analogy very useful. It clarifies, to me, what I have heard from Taubman teachers: "aim at the aftertouch and follow through to the keybed, do not aim at the keybed." To me, aiming at the keybed feels like "hitting"; aiming at the aftertouch feels more like "throwing", as in a dart. (Apologies for the poetastrics.)

ocd

Lesson #19


The large leap 'Tai Chi' style unfortunately omits to mention being on the key before depression - something I can see Hugh was taught. He's obviously so right about remembering mistakes.

The buzzing bumblebee technique was suggested in an earlier lesson to help playing duplets followed by triplets. It's kinda good but not here. Here students must count in 9 and therefore learn to play 2 over a count of 3 - not impossible, and certainly a required skill.

I haven't had chance to sit and watch all the videos yet but from what I have seen Hugh is very experienced and talented not to mention selfless in producing such a wonderful resource.

My only question (which may be covered in the lessons) is about learning such a piece from scratch with no previous playing experience. In the overview Hugh states that it doesn't matter if you have never played a note. But this is an advanced piece and a beginner could not hope to achieve anything meaningful from working on it. What am I missing? I understand that it could provide inspiration and incentive but unless you already play to a reasonable standard what are you supposed to gain from it?

I'm not trying to pick fault and as I said this question might have been answered already.

Are you saying it is comparable to spending 10 years to learn a big time Romantic Concerto one measure at a time?

Actually, I don't see how it is so different to people attempting Fur Elise as their first piece on the piano. Whether they actually play it or play it to standard after going through these lessons is not as important as if these lessons turn them on to want more.

But they pick up loads of bad habits.

I'm not sure what you mean.

My point is that you don't spend years learning a difficult piece one measure at a time. You spend those years working your way up so that you can then learn the difficult piece quite quickly.

I get the point about inspiration and I can see that the thread over in the ABF has got a lot of poeple fired up.

I believe it's a bit of a joke (though a bit close to the bone methinks).

Witness all the hapless victims of un-professional piano teachers whose parents spent years paying lessons to someone who was letting their students pick up loads of bad habits. Having a teacher is no guarantee against that, unfortunately. Some of us had to spend years as an adult in remedial technique lessons, gradually unravelling all the damage done in childhood.

Yes, the smart (and desperate) ones.

At the start of the other thread Hugh said:

"This lesson series is designed for the beginning adult pianist in mind, so consider yourself warmly invited to participate even if you've never played the piano or read a note of music before!"

I don't know how many lessons there will be but I would like to know if Hugh really thinks that a beginning adult pianist can learn this piece from watching the videos, or if indeed that really matters.

He's really skirting the reality that technique matters.

This assumes that there is only one correct approach to learning to play the piano: perhaps several weeks spent on five-finger exercises and scales and then months spent on nursery rhymes and "beginner pieces".

Clair de Lune is hardly a virtuoso piece and is only 72 measures long, some of which are repeats. It will not take a beginner years to learn this piece and play it to a fair standard. Hugh is taking what I call the "just in time" approach, something that the Japanese auto industry employed with great success. In this approach you teach concepts just when they are needed to perform a passage. And you teach the minimum necessary, so you don't overwhelm the student with detailed minutiae at this stage.

So, what has the beginning student learnt so far? (i) She has learnt the F-clef and the G-clef. Calling them F and G clefs (and explaining why) as opposed to bass and treble clefs already helps the beginner locate the line on the staff corresponding to those letter names. (ii) She has learnt the meaning of sharps, flats and naturals (iii) She has learnt to decipher a key signature and 5 flats do not hold any terror for her (iv) She can read notes on the staff and locate them on the keyboard (v) She understands ledger lines (v) She knows note values (vi) She can count triple and duple rhythms (bumblebee buzz-ing) (vii) She understands tied notes (viii) She can play the thirds and chords needed in this piece (ix) She has learnt the rudiments of fingering (x) She has learnt the fundamentals of pedaling (xi) She can play octaves and make big leaps (xii) She knows about slurs and phrasing (xiii) She's been shown correct posture (xiv) She's had lessons in playing softly and with a legato touch. (xv) She can play the first page of a beautiful piece.

Not bad for 2 weeks of lessons.

Of course technique matters but only as a means to achieving musical ends and avoiding injury. Hugh teaches the technique needed to play a passage when the need comes up. He's taught proper posture, the technique for playing octaves, pedaling technique, etc. The student also learns much by watching what Hugh does. Of course one can spend years on technique but Hugh is not necessarily preparing students at this stage for Carnegie Hall.

Technique is not so readily acquired.

In this post you confuse demonstration of a skill with its acquisition. Anyway, it's all rather holistic - all these skills must work together without disruption by poor habits.

Ahem, at no stage is he. That's the point.

Of course acquisition takes practice and that is entirely up to the student. The teacher cannot practice for the student. I myself am a teacher and I know the value to the student of homework for the acquisition of skills that I have demonstrated in class.

I would hope you would want to disrupt poor habits.

Cathy

After some initial skepticism, I find that I've been enjoying Hugh's videos very much.

Learning technique and developing technique are very different things. I know this from golf - I have "learned" the elements of a basic golf swing, including the adjustments one makes for a variety of different shots (fade, draw, punch, chip, pitch, etc...)

This does not mean I can faithfully execute these different things 100% of the time. I have not yet developed my skills to a level where I am able to reliably draw a 5-iron, and I still hit the occasional errant drive or catch my 4-iron off the toe.

But despite my undeveloped swing, I still enjoy learning about the more advanced techniques, and if I watch a golf pro teach "How to Work a Drive from Right to Left" on TV or YouTube, I definitely glean some information and interest that gets me to the driving range.

I think it will. This statement greatly underestimates the demands of this piece.

I know a very hard working ABRSM grade 5-with-Merit student who worked hard for several months and achieved something performable.

I am willing to accept that this might just be the whole point, I would just like Hugh to clarify.

I teach hardly any adults and have rarely done so. Children are happy to learn basics and in fact are often put off by anything they think might be difficult. They will play simple pieces in 5 finger positions with each hand without giving it a second thought. Maybe it just doesn't work like that with most adults. The adults I have taught tended to be impatient and have wanted to play pieces above their level. Would others say that this is the norm?

+1 yet again, Kreisler

I've used the word "glean" here in PW to describe one of the ways I learn useful information. I've also used the way I've learned sports as an example of some of the ways I've learned piano. I've described my learning style as "spiral" - stretch and drop back, play harder play broader, play at the edge play in depth. I certainly, from experience in life, know the difference between seeing a technique and actually acquiring it. I liked very much jazzyprof's description of what is being conveyed in these videos.

When I first came to PW I had very much the sense of some others that piano was taught in pretty stodgy and non-musical ways. I learned soon that there are teachers who don't teach the way I was taught (and some still do . . .) But this and the "Learning from video game developers" thread are the first time I've seen some truly alternative approaches discussed with a real openness to what can happen by using them.

I didn't have good instruction in technique. I doubt seriously, tho it's hard to remember, that I actually had much instruction at all - I think what I got was pieces to play in some kind of graded order. Like piano*dad, I also wasn't very mature, certainly not musically, so the music itself didn't come until after I was a middle-aged adult. So I don't, in fact, believe that it is absolutely necessary to have been taught well from the very beginning - And I do believe that one can play *music* later in one's life even if one started with poor/no instruction. And I think these videos help that along.

I'm glad to see there's some openness to new approaches to piano.

Cathy

It's a bit confusing having this topic spread over 3 forums!

I would have to agree with kbk about the difference between demonstration and acquisition, that was very well put. All the things jazzyprof listed have been skimmed in the lessons but that doesn't mean they will be understood. It takes minutes to explain to someone the workings of notation and the basics of pitch and duration. Why then are there all these people who can't sight read?

Sight reading (and I am using the literal meaning, "prima vista") is a matter of practice: the more you do it the better you get at it. There are professional pianists who are lousy sight readers. If a beginner follows Hugh's lessons he will be able to decipher music notation and know what key on the keyboard corresponds to what note on the printed page. He will be able to read music but not necessarily "sight read", a very different thing.

You say that the things I listed have been "skimmed" in Hugh's lessons. To some extent that is true: he is teaching the minimum needed to achieve a certain limited goal. That goal, as far as I understand it, is to teach the student enough music notation and enough practical keyboard skills that they can work their way through Clair de Lune with a lot of help. Will this approach suddenly turn a beginner into an intermediate player? I doubt it. Will the beginner play Clair de Lune well enough to please a jury? Probably not. But he will play it well enough to give himself pleasure and feel a certain sense of accomplishment. His family and friends will be awed. "Why, Johnny couldn't play a single note a month ago. Look at him now!" As testament you can look at the video a beginner has posted in response to Hugh's lessons.

Will the skills learnt from studying Clair de Lune this way transfer to other music? I should think so. The student will recognize F-clefs and G-clefs and know what to do when he sees an octave. But the most important thing is that the student will be motivated to pursue further study because he is working on music he enjoys.

The nice thing about this teaching format is that the student has the videos at his disposal and can watch them an infinite number of times if there is something he didn't quite get on the first viewing. He can also post questions to Hugh and get detailed answers, sometimes in the form of dedicated mini-lessons such as the one he did on counting duple rhythms.

Do ya know how I know? Years of observing classroom teachers. The thing you see more often than not is the teacher who thinks, since they've demonstrated something, the students have learned it. No, that's not teaching, not even close. You look to the students not the teacher if you want to know what learning has actually taken place.

I couldn't find the beginner video posted in response to hugh's lessons. Is there any chance you could provide a link? Thanks.

I am going to post the link, but with some trepidation as I fear that the poor kid is going to be ripped to shreds. He is a beginner from Sweden, never played before and this is what he can do after one week. You will of course find many problems with his playing...wrong notes, problems with rhythm, etc. But this is where genuine positive feedback with suggestions for improvement comes in.

In his own words:


Here's the link, and remember, be nice!
Beginner

He certainly doesn't count to 9!

Must have learnt from Oistrakh.

That's right, at the Schmaltz Academy.

I'm going to come to this young man's defense and applaud his efforts to learn this challenging piece. Learning should be a joy and a continual process, not a minefield where counting less or more than nine gets you penalized and reprimanded. Teachers should provide avenues of possibilities, not barricades of myopic impossibilities.

That's why I thought maybe you could talk about the rhythm in the beginning, and make them be aware of that. Counting in the first page is NOT hard at all!!

You raise a good point, TonyY, but i suppose you could also talk about Una corda pedaling, half-pedal techniques, the circle of fifths, harmonic inversions, wrist/finger/arm weight ratios, tone and texture touch...at what point do you just start and dive in? No matter what gets left out, someone can always raise a point that this or that needs attention before you can get started.

When we collectively sing "Happy Birthday", everyone has an innate sense of the dotted rhythms in the song without having it explicitly explained. I'm assuming that people who want to learn "Clair de lune" already have the song somewhat in their ear - this lesson series simply won't work if it's 'forced' upon someone who's never heard the piece or has absolutely no interest in it.

There's an element of "Suzuki-style" pedagogy in letting the ear of the student pick up rhythmic elements before explicitly spelling them out (that happens a few lesson videos later, where I talk about time signatures, note values, and some techniques for counting triple and duple rhythms - did you get a chance see them yet?) One aspect that can be frustrating to students is when you try to cram in too much information all at once. I'm trying to keep an intentional limit on the goal of each lesson video (there's only so much you can cram into a 10-minute YouTube limit!)

The overall goal of this series is to make the lessons fun and to kindle the joy of reading real music to a general audience with a "learn by doing" model. I'm having a lot of fun putting these lessons together, and I can only hope that folks who watch and follow along will be able to share my love of making beautiful music!

Great points.

Even when taking a traditional approach with weekly lessons, soul-numbing boring exercises, focus on catching students doing something, anything, everything WRONG, self-serving reverence to the point of pious superciliousness, etc. it is amazing how many students after five years of lessons still can't sit down and play much of anything (except maybe parts from their last recital or exam) and certainly can't play anything well.

If all the aspiring guitarists were first put through the piano style wringer before they were "allowed" to try to make interesting music, perhaps guitar would be just as unpopular as the prissy piano?

The point is they, like David Oistrakh, don't have the 'song' in their ear, they have a private version which is wrong. All the glory and genius of Debussy is still waiting to communicate to them, and waiting for them to communicate to others. Your 'having fun' is just a self indulgence - a mutilation. From a teacher, Debussy deserves more respect than that.

Since when is counting the beats an advanced technique?

kbk, thank you for illustrating my point so eloquently.

Young whippersnapper!

And you condone that?

Au contraire.

I think that those who are incompetent and unprofessional should be "disrupted".

I do not see anything incompetent or unprofessional about the interest-generating, motivating, learning-by-doing, "aim at a star and shoot an eagle" approach that Mr. Sung is taking.
It is a good example of innovation through a disruptive technology and making the piano accessible to a global audience.
It will no more condemn students to a lifetime of bad technique any more than taking lessons from someone who claims to be a piano teacher will guarantee students won't acquire bad technique.

Most prospective students want to learn to play the piano because ... they want to make music on the piano!
What better way to introduce prospective students to the wonder of learning the piano than by piercing through all the opaque complexity and helping them do something substantial from the start, learning as they go along.

You and others may be dismissive of the youtube boy's achievement, but his enthusiasm was genuine and I am sure that his startlingly fluid performance of this excerpt from Claire de Lune as an absolute beginner is quite impressive for himself and the people in his life that really matter. As it should be. After all, it resonates as music much more then a five finger position "My Pet Goat" piece from Kiddies Book 1. Finally, apparently his "sins" you are counting are no different from those of professional musicians referenced in the other youtube video.

Can Mr. Sung's approach completely replace the need for personal instruction? Of course not.
Will it generate interest, enthusiasm and help people make music on the piano quickly? The evidence is already pointing to a resounding Yes!

As at teacher I would rather take on a new student like the one on the youtbube video that has just done this piece with Hugh and is flying high (and rightly so) rather than take on a student that has spent five years of glacial drudgery, has a playing mechanism filled with tension and plays like a constipated typist, oblivious to the music.

Bit of a facetious argument for you tJ. (originally: Is that the only choice?)

No, but they are the two prototype examples that have been quoted in this thread and that we are in the process of discussing.

There are also loads of motivated, results-achieving students receiving lessons from professional, conscientious, student-oriented, talented teachers with understanding of psychology, physiology, technique acquisition and, importantly, music in the world. Hopefully, this will be the kind of teacher that our youtube boy will be lucky or diligent enough to find now that his appetite has been whetted.

You presume too much from of your 'prototypes'. It doesn't work like that in teaching.

Tell that to youtube boy. Perhaps you can convince him he is a failure and should give up.

Here's a question for you tJ: The last student I heard play Clair played Gb's instead of F's in the RH chord in bar 15. Should I have corrected him? Or would it have spoiled his 'fun'?

Context and timing are everything.

If this was a first lesson and that was the first piece he had every played, basically teaching himself off of the internet with pure motivation and desire as the foundation, with no formal lessons and after a couple of days or a couple of weeks work, than I am confident that you could find more constructive things to say first to the student than to point triumphantly at the F's and say "na na na na naah na, you played the wrong note".

If this was a recital of someone else's student, perhaps it would be best to just say nothing or say something to the teacher privately if you had a relationship with them.

If this was one of your students with whom you had been working for weeks or months or years, instead of telling them they are wrong, you might ask them if they had played all the notes in that section as written and let them discover the error themselves. When they find it you might take the time to explain the harmony that is behind what is written and you might have them mark the score with a circle or exclamation point, the chord and perhaps one or two words that summarized the lesson you just gave them. Finally, you might have them play that section within a larger excerpt playing the right note and then work with them on the overall movement and sound being generated to cement the correction and to provide another learning opportunity and example of what they can do on their own at home when practicing.

Wow, then it'll be time to go home!

Hold on, I expect students to count note values accurately and suddenly I'm the teacher from Hell? Get a grip tJ.

First, this thread is about Hugh Sung's Claire de Lune, not keyboardklutz.
Second, those are your words, not mine.

What might be behind this urge you had just now to refer to yourself derogatorily as "the teacher from Hell?"

“The first step toward change is awareness. The second step is acceptance.”

-- Nathaniel Branden

This could be behind my 'teacher from hell' observation:

Do you disagree with my conclusion about first things first?
How would you (or did you) handle the wrong note?
How was it different to the way you handled the wrong counting here? Why?

What kind of things were the students doing right?
How did you handle those?

You're gonna have to run that one by me again. First things in my book are posture, followed by note names followed by note lengths, I suppose.

Thanks for that phrase!

ocd

Someone has the effrontary to think outside of the box, and suddenly the 'establishment' is up in arms about it.

Hugh Sung's video lessons, have inspired, at least one student from across the world to post his achievement, after ONE week's instruction, and playing experience, and he gets criticised.

Judging from 6 pages of responses in the AB forum, many more are benefitting from Hugh's lessons.

If any detractors have more to offer, then feel free to post your own videos. I am sure we all have much to learn from you.

Until then, I suggest you hold your own counsel.

Congratulations Hugh, on an excellent series of tutorials.

Thank you, theJourney.

First things first for me is the music. I'm with theJourney and Hugh Sung and jazzyprof on this set of videos (sorry, kbk, but we've known we have differences ever since we were talking about playing soccer for fun and exercise )

A specific thing that I love about these videos, particularly in the context of a give-and-take thread in the ABF, and given the way I learn things, are the extra things that come up that give a hint that there are huge things over the horizon to be learned, and what those things are, and that one might never "finish" this piece and be "done."

The most recent example of that is that dannylux posted a different edition of the sheet music with different fingering. Hugh said he had deliberately simplified the fingering for this set of lessons, and Mati added that his teacher uses, more nearly, the fingering from dannylux's edition, because it allows more legato playing throughout. I think this is terrific, because the whole context has expanded suddenly and enticingly, and with a specific kind of technique challenge for a specific end. If I were learning from these lessons I'd be excited about learning this set of fingerings that allows getting to those horizons. The example wasn't just listening to a piece I want to be able to play, but getting a glimpse of what I will learn in order to actually play it even better.

I'm sure there are teachers here who somehow expand the music horizons, and give students an idea of what's entailed in the journey there ( ) while students are playing, to use theJourneys example, My Pet Goat, and I'm equally sure a good many - don't. I suspect that even some here on PW have a fairly narrow view of *what students should be exposed to in terms of technique* and *what techniques students will use for making music rather than pushing keys in the future* at any given time.

I'd love to hear how other teachers besides Hugh Sung, and the collaboration from a group of students he's encouraging in this thread, expose students to those possibilities and future techniques. Because for me, this is the essence of motivation. I've taught math this way - as Hugh describes here - starting from wherever the student is and teaching, as jazzyprof says, "just in time", rather than starting from the "beginning" and building, oh dear, sequentially. I've learned simplified versions of fingering - I've deliberately simplified music myself so I could play it in time for a gig - and later on reworked it if I wanted to. I've "muscled my way through" pieces as piano*dad says (as I've also done with sports) and refined my technique as I go and expand my horizons. I have, goodness knows, played pieces above my head and used the feedback from those about what's not working well to figure out better ways to play it.

It. Works. For. Me. For me, it's the way it works best. I learn other ways, too, because over the years I've learned to learn in many ways, and differently for different situations. But this thread, and jazzwee's Autumn Leaves thread, are at the top of my list for exciting ways to learn.

Cathy

Shucks, you remember that? It's always said in teaching girls have longer memories! I'll just summarize what I probably said then - fun is a byproduct, not a goal in itself.

I've been waiting for that post.

A byproduct of ?

Sometimes fun is a goal in itself. Ferris wheels come to mind Sometimes fun is (only?) a byproduct (of ?) - Well, maybe, but *I* have trouble finding an example of fun being *only* a byproduct of something - maybe if I knew what the something is that fun is a byproduct of, for you, it would help For *me* - fun is often simultaneous with other things that are going on - hard work, exercise, goofing around on the piano, dancing, working on math problems. Not cleaning house, tho I don't get any fun out of it while I'm doing it, and it doesn't appear to be a byproduct either.

Oh dear. At 63 I'm not a girl any longer. Or any shorter, either. I'm not sure my memory is any better than any other 63-year-old's

Cathy

I hate ferris wheels, don't see the point. I found out some years ago I'm descended from a bunch of Presbyterian frontier folk - that must be where I get it from.

...agreed, on all points.

Disappointed in you cruiser. If anyone is being criticized it's Hugh. And should he be untouchable? He's putting loads of effort in yes, but much may well be misguided. As it's a public platform I feel these, both the positives and negatives, should have a voice. I don't see the point of the emotive posts that seem to be turning up in this thread, it's about pedagogy and interpretation - the life blood of piano playing.

On that note, there seems to be some confusion over pedaling. con sordina, in my book, means no RH pedal. Debussy is saying 'Have a really clear texture until bar 10, where you will then have to pedal.'

kbk, is it possible that you are just sore because your breakthrough videos were so heavily criticized in the past?

As an edit to my previous post I can, in all honesty, also understand kbk's concerns, coming as they do from someone who cares profoundly about his art.

I would only add that I believe no harm is being done to anyone following Hugh Sung's series of lessons. I'm also sure that any adult wishing to pursue the study of piano to any degree of excellence will, in any case, find themselves a personal teacher to guide them accordingly. We should not forget that Hugh's lessons are posted in the Adult Beginner's Forum and most adults, I think, are capable of understanding the issues here, especially given the fact that so much related, excellent advice abounds throughout these forums.

EDIT: kbk, our posts have crossed!

...I was wondering about the 'con sordina' (with mute?) marking which I can only find as meaning the equivalent of 'una corda'. Is this correct, or does it simply mean no RH pedal, as you suggest?

There's plenty of debate about the meaning of con sordina. Some think it just means soft pedal (una corda). It makes musical sense to me that it is an instruction not to use the damper pedal till you need to - a certain loneliness seems to be evoked.

That's the point of a forum! Let's try not to forget that.

So, let's see...The point of a forum is to criticize, the point of piano lessons is to find fault and belittle students' achievements and those that innovate with high quality, stretch lessons over the internet are a subversive threat to the edifice of the posture police whose own lessons pale in comparison? Have I got that right?

No you haven't.

Teach me. I'm all ears (not to mention thumbs).

I think it would be good for you to 'discover the error [yourself].' For instance, go back and find evidence for 'the point of piano lessons is to find fault and belittle students'.

Bravo. Please see: "can't count to nine after a whole week of internet lessons while playing an excerpt from Grade 7-8 repertoire" and "can't distinguish g flat from f"

I can't find either quote. Could you actually 'quote' them for me? With an address?

I could, but it simply isn't worth my time, dear. I'm afraid the lessons aren't going very well.

Cutting your losses and moving on is perhaps one of the most valuable lessons an adult learner can take on board.
There are too many excellent teachers out there to waste time (and money) on the others.

I believe the term for that is 'cut and run'.

Hm, this may be fuel for the fire - a blogger just posted some interesting observations on the "Clair de lune from Scratch" series. Thoughts? Reactions?

SonicState.com: Is This the Future of Music Education?

When one considers what is being achieved in the field of 'remote medical care' for example, I believe that the pace of advancement in information technology makes it inevitable that the future of music education will change too, for those who want to make use of it - and why not?

My own experiences with 'in-the-same-room' piano teachers have disappointed me and so, I'm excited at the prospect of having tailored, 'one-to-one' lessons with teachers of the calibre of Hugh, kbk and others. The 'Clair de Lune' lessons have whetted my appetite for more!

Perhaps there's something to be said for full-immersion baptism. Carpenters learn their trade on the job. The successful ones refine their technique & shed their bad habits with experience. Does a carpenter spend years unlearning a bad nail hammering technique? No, he outgrow the bad technique when he develops some skill and learns to do it better. Does this principle not apply to piano?

I'm reminded of the digital vs acoustic debate. Most folks would rather have a grand piano than a digital but better to play a digital than to play nothing. Better to play imperfectly than to not play at all. Likewise, better an imperfect video lesson than no lesson.

For what it's worth I'm a beginner and I'd love to take some private lessons but this forum makes me rather freightened of piano teachers. You teachers don't seem to agree on much of anything and a few of you seem to be unbelievably dogmatic, my-way-or-the-highway, pope holy. God have mercy on the poor student who gets the wrong teacher.

You raise some great points, Ludwig vB - one possible thought in favor for YouTube lessons may be the ability for the student to "audition" the teacher to see if they are compatible with the teacher's style and pedagogy skills. For some people, comfort with personality and ease of learning are paramount requirements; for others, a strong disciplinarian along the lines of a personal trainer are more of what they're looking for. The internet provides ample opportunities for informational transparency - in the end, when teachers disagree (and most will), who will you gravitate towards? Only you can answer that question in the end, but thankfully not in isolation, if you take advantage of forums like this one here in PianoWorld or the body of comments and dialogue within YouTube or other sites where you may find these videos linked/embedded.
Hope this helps!

I think an important aspect of teaching is realizing that we are all, to some extent, like this. It is impossible to be all things to all people, and just like a neurologist wouldn't pretend to treat a cardiac patient, I think it behooves teachers to teach only those whom they think they can help and refer the others elsewhere. I have a difficult time working with young kids (ages 4-6), so if I ever have someone inquire about lessons in that age group, I refer them to a school here in town that works well with those kids. As for adult students, I interview them to make sure the fit is right. If it's not, I do the same and refer them elsewhere.

I hope your observations aren't based on this thread. The teachers here are avoiding it like the plague, and I don't blame them.

Oh, and I also think that's why teachers come across a bit strange on the internet. We all have a certain way of working that fits our students and communities, but the internet is a much wider audience.

The things I write here have worked for me and have worked successfully for my students. But they also benefit from demonstration and personal interactions that can quickly clarify the things I say.

If I had a suggestion for Hugh, it would simply be to choose a different title for his videos. Instead of calling them "Clair de Lune from Scratch", I would suggest "A Concert Pianist Thinks Through Clair de Lune." That's really what it is - a peek inside the mind of a great pianist as he works through Debussy.

Much of the debate over his videos comes from the fact that "Clair de Lune from Scratch" implies that everything between "Lightly Row" and "l'Orage" is unnecessary, and since most teachers work with students who are somewhere between zero and Debussy, the notion that the musical landscape they inhabit can be bypassed is unsettling. (And sounds a little bit like a marketing infomercial that promises 3 inches off your waist in 2 weeks.)

That's been my experience. Because I was teaching in a classroom setting some students didn't get a choice about whether or not I was the teacher, so I always encouraged students to study with each other, or use the resources at the tutor center, or to talk with me during office hours when I had more time to ferret out an individual student's difficulties, or to buy study guides, or whatever might help them to learn in a way suitable for them. Some students wanted me to teach only one way to approach a problem, and some students thrived on knowing 6 different ways to look at it (my natural predilection is the "6 different ways" one).

The fact that a student didn't learn well from the way I taught was not an indicator that the student wasn't willing to learn, nor an indicator that I didn't have more than one way of teaching something, or didn't try to accomodate a student. It was just, as you say, that no one can be all things to all people. So I tried to steer them to the resources that would help them learn.

Which is why I think the videos Hugh has put together are so great. They aren't for everybody, and I suspect that the adults who don't learn this way aren't keeping up on that thread For me they would be less valuable if they weren't part of a forum with questions and discussions, but both here and on youtube that interaction is there. I'm watching the lessons, but I play other styles of music and have plenty to keep me busy so I'm not actually part of the study group. But I pick up something every once in awhile, and I like learning other ways of - learning, and ways to share information. I particularly like collaborative learning, and I think these videos are a good approach to that.

I object to someone who thinks they can teach any student, and thinks that if a student can't learn from them it's because the student doesn't want to learn, because I don't think it's true There are advantages and drawbacks to these videos, advantages and drawbacks to any individual teacher's lessons, and those advantages and drawbacks may be different for different students. The discussion of what can be done differently in different circumstances is the real meat of the forum, for me.

Cathy

Gee, and all this time I thought "con sordina" meant "with sardines." My bad.

The truth is that there is no consensus on that instruction. Some interpret it as using the una corda pedal, some use the una corda along with the damper pedal, some use no pedal, some use the damper pedal alone, some use the sostenuto, some believe the instruction applies to the whole piece. There is no need to be pedantic about this. As in all things musical, the ultimate arbiter should be the ear, especially since Debussy didn't stick around to tell us exactly how he wants things done. Of course you don't want the harmonies to be drowned in washes of pedal which is why Hugh teaches the student to change pedal often.

Mr. Sung's series does advertise itself as being from scratch - implying that a person of very limited training can learn to play Claire de Lune. To the old school (Pianus Sysyphus) this is preposterous. On a purely technical level I can understand this response.

But no reasonable person would interpret this series of internet lessons as promising students (which is what the engaged person becomes) that they will emerge out the other side as a concert pianist. Those few of you who need to be superior can continue on your higher plane.

I'm glad that it isn't only film critics who are allowed to see movies, or chefs allowed to eat, doctors allowed to think about health. I'm a very big fan of what he is doing here - not because it explores some elevated master-class-territory, but precisely because most anyone who has a willing attitude will get something valuable out of it. I especially like the way Hugh (and Willie Myette as well) are using the latest technologies to create a personal atmosphere of learning.

May they prosper.

Oooops, sorry kbk. I hadn't scrolled down to your clarifying post before responding to your earlier one on con sordina. I like this later one!

This answers some of my questions although I think you would be surprised at how many people think that they will be able to play Clair de Lune (all of it) from following the lessons. I just wondered what Hugh thought about that. If people are inspired and motivated as they seem to be then their expectation is that they will be able to play the piece right?

It was not a criticism, just a question. I can't see where the 'establishment' are up in arms. Are we (traditional teachers) not allowed to question these alternative approaches? It does seem that there is an awful lot of criticism aimed at traditional piano lessons. But why not ask Hugh Sung how come he is able to make such a nice job of Clair de Lune? Do you think it was the first piece he played? Has he not spent many hours on those 'boring exercises' that some of you seem to hate? Did he have a teacher or two who dared to correct his mistakes?

If it is the future of music education then I'm not sure how any of us are going to make a living!

Chris you make reasonable points. I haven't watched every single video, but I can say that Hugh at several points demonstrates common errors and contrasts them with the correct rendition. In fact he sets up a customized practice regime to facilitate a smooth movement from one hand position to another in a recent video.

The limitation of learning by internet is that the student does not get instant feedback. But neither does a student practicing at home. It is in the weekly sessions that interaction happens.

Serious students will always need (and want) personal instruction. Video resources like this that motivate people to learn will not wipe out personal teaching. Instead I think they may create a wider pool of motivated students, which may benefit you teaching types in the end.

If this is a genuine question, then I have tons of ideas to share about innovative ways to make a living as a musician in this day and age. If this is just a negative remark, then I'll keep my peace. Suffice to say, I'm excited at the thought of the amazing opportunities that technology presents to musicians willing to adopt these tools - this very forum at PianoWorld, for example, is an absolute gold mine of opportunity for the teacher willing to open their eyes and take a new perspective. The idea with these YouTube lessons isn't to take market share away from private teachers, but rather to exponentially expand the market to a much wider reach of people who might never have considered taking piano lessons before.

LOL! You beat me to the punch and took the words right out of my mouth, Birchy!

It had crossed my mind as well.

My singing teacher always had me record me lesson so I could go over it as many times as I wanted at home for "free".
This is an extension of this model.

Music education is often a cumulative process. New techniques and technologies don't always replace earlier models but sometimes just enhance them. In these days of video guitar games I'm thrilled at every attempt to bring actual music-making to as many people as possible by as many means as possible and, yes, with as much fun in the process as possible.

I'm not about to give up my teacher, but I'm also not about to give up looking at (and learning from) as many other resources as I can find.

I can't quite believe that anyone who has never played piano would believe they could play Clair de Lune at a professional performance level after some video lessons. But if they really love the piece and if starting to play it gets them into music-making, then is an alternative that says "NO - you haven't practiced enough scales yet to be worthy" really going to help them?

No one person (not even kbk) can be the gatekeeper and arbiter of who is allowed to teach, or how, or who is allowed to play or what they are allowed to play. No one has to show a license to purchase a piano, or become a teacher. This is nothing new.

I'm a bit surprised at some of the frothing at the mouth that's going on in this thread, only because the vehemence involved suggests this is the first time some people have heard of or seen teaching or playing that affronts their sensibilities. I find that impossible to believe; surely no one is that sheltered. Videos like this are merely the modern version of a philosophy of playing the piano that has been around probably since the piano was invented.

This is what some people want to play and how some people want to learn. The fact that it is diametrically opposed to how many serious pianists approach learning and playing and teaching is going to do nothing to change that fact. At least it is someone of the caliber of Hugh Sung they are learning from...not a crummy charlatan in a cheap lime green polyester suit who counts on people's ignorance to fleece the populus.

My only quibble, if you could call it that, is with the term "lessons". I believe to call something a music (whatever the instrument) "lesson" requires that the teacher observe the student (in person or using internet feed), preferably in real time, and give feedback. In fact, to me that is at least 60% of the value of lessons.

If Youtube demonstrations (which is what I would class this as rather than a "lesson") are clear on that point, and suggest that if the student really wants to take it up a notch, or several, they meet with an instructor for actual lessons, then I see no harm in it, and much potential good.

Agree 100% PP!

Hugh, it was a genuine question. It does seem that nowadays a lot of people want to be able to play the piano straight away, with little effort and of course they want it for free! Where does that leave us? I can't afford to spend all my time making videos and posting them for free on youtube. What happens when my electricity gets cut off?

This is what I am reading an awful lot.

People do not expect to play Clair de Lune at 'a professional performance level' or 'in front of a jury'. IMO they are not going to be able to play it at all, let alone well. Then what happens to that enthusiasm? You don't get any joy from playing something badly. It's not a question of playing enough scales or being worthy. It's being honest and realistic. If I have a new student who would love to play Clair de Lune then I can help them to get there one day. They will learn step by step at a pace which suits them and yes, they might even have fun along the way. Then when we get to Clair de Lune I don't have to start by explaining which notes to play in the first measure.

I am out of this one now. I get the benefits of video lessons and admire Hugh as a musician and a teacher. I just don't think it's a substitue for a good one on one teacher but I do acknowledge that it's not inteded to be.

I wonder how many teachers realize what important information a student (or potential student) has given them, when they hear, "I want to play Clair de Lune!" (or any other well-known piece)

Some teachers just roll their eyes and sigh but I would advocate a different approachWhy not respond "what is your favorite thing about that piece?" and USE that information...guarantee that the student will always be working on one "dreamy" (or whatever adjective describes their goal piece) piece of music, while they learn enough to tackle Debussy (and whatever other composers they want to play).

The student is not saying "I love Clair de Lune and ONLY Clair de Lune and that's the only piece I ever want to play." Clair de Lune is more likely the only piece of that style they can recognize and whose name they can remember. You can introduce them to all sorts of beautiful dreamy pieces they will also come to love...but if you tell them they can't play any dreamy impressionistic pieces without spending years on scales exercises...well good luck. Of course, I doubt any teachers of merit really do that sort of thing.

Most teachers, if they have been teaching long enough, seem to have a stack of "pieces kids like"...usually impressive sounding loud stuff. This is just expanding that practice.

It is asking a lot of the teacher, but if the teacher knows enough beginning and intermediate rep to always be able to find a piece in the STYLE the student especially likes, I think chances of success in piano are much higher.

Reminds me of some of my favorite past threads from the Adult Beginners Forum of guys in their fifties, never played an instrument in their life, "don't want to spend years learning classical piano and everything but just want to take one or two lessons to learn all the hints and tricks so they can play and improvise without music on easy music like the jazz standards just like one of these hotel cocktail bar players that never work up a sweat -- but don't understand that this requires more musical knowledge and work than learning a Haydn Sonata.

It doesn't seem reasonable to me to try to speak for everybody's experience (heck, some folks get joy from standing in front of a screen strumming a plastic game controller and pretending to play). And playing something badly may not be the end of the process for some; they may decide to go on to doing the sorts of things they need to do to play it better.

I actually approve of a methodical and systematic program of instruction that eventually leads to Clair de Lune rather than starting there. It's the way I have approached the piano (always with conservatory-trained teachers) because it's the way I learn best and fastest. But diversity is good, particularly for adults who use piano as a recreation and not a career.

Every method will reach some potential students and not others. If a teacher really believes in their approach then it's right for them even if they have to ignore a lot of potential students who want to learn other ways. There's nothing wrong with that as long as there are other choices for those other folks.

Well I don't think it's really "nowadays", I'd be willing to bet that this has been the case forever. That said, I can't help but think that what Hugh has done really isn't going to take any students away (net) from teachers today (at least not in the short/medium term). Sure, I guess there may be some potential students out there thinking "great, I don't need to go see that teacher now", but I think there will also be students who start and say "this is cool, let me go see a teacher now". Again, in the short/medium term. Long term, who knows. As folks like Yamaha and Roland start encroaching on this territory, it's not hard to imagine youtube type videos containing codes that DP's can understand so the lesson and the piano can work together.

I think that one thing enterprising teachers can do is to augment their studios by taking on these type of students. Go after these folks that are trying to learn by themselves and offer some value to them knowing that their path is different from the "classical" student. Allow "drop in" type lessons that focus on specific aspects of these online lessons ("e.g. having problems with part xxx on CdL, come on by and for $10/15/20/xx dollars I can help"). With the popularity of Macs with built in cameras (and resultant inclusion on more and more PC's) then a teacher who can offer online help (for a fee) could also be useful.

The promise of low-investment, high-yield has been a staple of marketing since the beginning of time.

If Hugh was charging people $299.95 for a DVD that "Will Have You Playing Debussy's Clair de Lune like a PRO after only 30 lessons!", then I'm pretty sure he'd be revealed as a total fraud and tarred and feathered and run out of town pretty quickly.

As it is, he's offering an interesting glimpse, for free, a demonstration of how Web 2.0 technologies might be used in music education.

I think when we have some distance and are able to look back that we'll find this kind of innovation will be right up there with MIDI, tape recorders, video cameras, and electronic keyboards. The use of things like YouTube and Skype will enter the world of music teachers and students everywhere.

But ultimately, YouTube and Skype will not replace nor make obsolete flesh and blood teachers or traditional lessons. CD's did not destroy live concerts. Telephones have not replaced getting together with your friends. Digital pianos have not replaced acoustic instruments. And MIDI itself ended up being something of a non-starter in educational circles while becoming extremely important in the development of other technologies - working behind the scenes in things like Garage Band and Reason, or enabling complex sampling in DAW software, etc...

+1

And those other choices don't necessarily lead to someone playing *everything* badly -

Cathy

As others have already said, there will never be a substitute for traditional, face to face lessons, but Hugh's example, shows that there can be alternative methods.

Most of us, I imagine, have grown up within the traditional system, and it holds no mystery for us.
However, some adults, have no idea what to expect, when considering lessons, and Hugh's videos can do much to allay their fears of what a real life lesson can be like. So in many ways, these videos may encourage the take up of piano lessons with 'real life' teachers.

I have found that some adults, who are already successful and knowledgeable in their chosen careers, can sometimes feel intimidated, as beginners in a new field, and hate to expose themselves as such, in front of a teacher, so the video alternative can be much more comfortable for them.

All this, coupled with the ability to review the video, over and over, and the convenience of fitting their 'lessons' into what usually is an already busy schedule, makes this system of learning, attractive to some.

We are fortunate to live in an age, where this kind of technology is available.
For example, I have an adult guitar student, whose work committments often mean he has to miss his regular Saturday lesson. On those occasions, I simply record a video lesson continuing on from our last 'in person' meeting, and send it to him, to view and review at his convenience.
On the plus side, he still gets his lesson, and I still get paid :-)

Hugh is making the most of available technology, is innovative in his methods, and is encouraging others to enjoy the making of music.
I suppose that's pretty much what we are all aiming for.

There's a great new book by Chris Anderson called, appropriately, "Free: The Future of a Radical Price". I downloaded the *free* audiobook version from Audible.com - a fantastic, eye-opening read. That is a great place to start to understand the new economy of information and its inevitable gravitational pull towards the price of "free". What does "free" do? It maximizes the reach of your service or product to the widest audience for the lowest cost. How does one make money from "free"? Mr. Anderson himself is available for lectures, seminars and workshops, albeit thanks to the success of his book and the increase of his perceived expertise and publicity, I'm sure his speaking fee has risen significantly.

Another great use of "free" is the way in which value can be assessed relatively risk-free by the consumer - or in this case, the student. If the material presented by the teacher is deemed valuable enough by the currencies of time and attention paid by the receiving students, then it's much more plausible (i hope) to develop material that the students are willing to pay actual money for.

The best kinds of "free" widens the prospective audience base and makes future transactions much more enjoyable and appreciated. Google is the preeminent example of a company that thrives on the development of "free" products that are leveraged for incredible profit. I believe we musicians can do the same.

There are several great examples in the book about musicians in China and Brazil, where they actually take advantage of "free" (via 'piracy') to draw bigger crowds at concerts and sell merchandise such as CDs, T-shirts and the like. Radiohead is another recent example of a wildly popular band that used "free" to make their biggest profits ever from the sale of physical CDs.

Regarding the difficulty of making videos: well, videos are certainly a powerful tool for education and marketing, but there's also audio podcasts (think iPods and iTunes) that would be much easier to make for musicians, or perhaps PDF eBooks on music methodology published electronically, or physically printed on-demand from sites like Lulu.com or CreateSpace.com - you could use an open-source music notation program like MuseScore to create print-quality scores and musical examples for your eBook if Sibelius and Finale are too expensive for your budget.

If you'd like some other recommended reading on new business ideas for the teaching musician, let me know and i'll be happy to share some more thoughts. Or maybe we could all get together for a "teachers-only" webinar, if there's enough interest


Hope this helps spark your imagination! (and i hope i didn't stray too far off topic from your reply, ChrisH )

Coming from a different perspective, I would like to offer something for your consideration on this forum as it relates to this thread. I have been self-taught for the past 2 1/2 years and was content with my progress. Since I was able to draw on 6 years of piano and organ lessons that I have over 40 years ago, I was able to "muddle through" with just about anything I set my mind to play. At least good enough for my own satisfaction. I live in an area where piano teachers are few and far between - if they exist at all.

Last week I became one of Hugh's students on the "Clair" thread. Two things happened. First, I'm actually learning at much faster speed and easier than I would have if I attempted to learn this piece on my own because of Hugh's instruction. Yes, he is that good! But second, and more important to you here on this forum, Hugh has made me realize that I really do need a teacher to progress. So because of Hugh's efforts another potential paying student has been added to the student pool.

I recommend that you join me in my thanks to Hugh for his efforts on this project. He has opened my eyes to the need.

Woody

Thankyou for taking the time to reply Hugh. I do think that technology will become more and more important and useful for music teachers in the future and I can't despute the amount of support you have found with the Clair de Lune project. I must admit to being a bit daunted by it all as my knowledge of technology is not great. I just bought a new PC and it took me a whole day to set it up! Looking at what you have done I really wouldn't know where to begin. I guess I better start learning pretty quick.

So far I have only managed to look at the first few lessons but I'm looking forward to sitting down this weekend and going through the whole thread over on the ABF. You do devote a lot of time to identifying each individual note in the early stages and I will be interested to see how you handle this later on as the measures become more complex. One thing I found interesting, in the second measure where you have the Augmented 2nd in the LH nobody asked you if the Gb should be played before the A natural. It surprised me as this is a question I get all the time when a new students encounters 2nds!

This morning I did have a student request to play Clair de Lune. They said it's off some TV show called 'Twilight'. Thankfully they are already quite advanced but I did tell them to check you out!

Dang.

Your brevity, as always, speaks volumes dear kbk!

Must admit I didn't see that one coming. I think I might go and download that Chris Anderson book after all!

Well, this is an experimental question for an experimental pedagogy model. One of the best things about this forum has been the great feedback (and strong opinions!), so i really want to take folks' thoughts and recommendations into consideration.

Oh, by the way, "Twilight" is the name of a movie that came out last year or so, based on a vampire love story novel series of sorts, so I think that's what your student was referring to. Hope they enjoy the YouTube lessons!

Oops, sorry - too early in the morning here! Forgot to add that i think i'm leaning towards a "Radiohead model" for the webinar

Just reading this interesting thread and saw your comment and can't help myself, so:

I would urge you to pack up your PC, and enroll in some serious training as I did. I began using a PC in secondary school and studied advance and applied math for 6 years. Later, enrolled in a university and got both a degree in computer science and a master degree in engineering. Do you know if you are not properly trained to used a computer what sort of damage you could have not to mention all the virus, security problems, Trojans, worms, causing havoc to you and others by becoming victims and zombies of hackers allowing your systmem to be used in coordinated attacks to individuals, businesses, and government agencies? No, you need proper training, at least 10 to 15 years before you should consider using a computer. You also need to spend several years to study and pass exams on systems and networking certifications before you connect your computer to the Internet. For now, if you must, pick up some children's games and play those only. You are not ready for real software especially if you are not capable of properly optimizing and configuring each software module for correct hardware interface and integration. Stay away from the Internet, that's too dangerous for beginners with no skills in computing. If you don't get some computer training right away, you are bound to become seriously injury from repetitive motion injuries as well!

Piano teachers should lighten up. I don't think any adult watching Hugh Sung's lessons would believe they could suddenly play like Rubinstein. Adult students will never be or care to be concert pianists. They just want to make some music at an adult level. Basic beginner's music all sound rather insulting, to be honest. Some adults rather play adult music badly than children's music well. Plus not everybody has the 10 - 15 years left in their lives to train, for what event?

Not everyone cooking at home is a three-star chef or received comparable trainig. Playing music at home is no different from cooking at home. I have no one to please but myself (or my family; unfortunately, they would have to suffer the cooking and the music).

Hilarious.

My reaction too. It was meant as a joke.... wasn't it? ...yes, of course it was!

Hugh mentioned Chris Anderson, and I'll definitely second the nominantion - he has some very interesting ideas.

Another is Cory Doctorow's "Content", a book on the future of copyright and digital media. He's giving his book away for free here:

http://craphound.com/content/download/

Do you think so Cruiser?

I thought it was sarcasm.

Never mind, I will choose to ignore this expert advice and carry on computing anyway. If I can find a 10 minute video tutorial on 'optimizing and configuring software modules for correct hardware interface and integration' I'm sure I can pick it up in no time.

Try sharing your sarcasm with an RSI sufferer.

Yes, of course....

The other day, I was at the piano store and the owner asked me, "do you know anything about computers?" "ever since I change this credit card processing software, my computer won't work right, and occasionally, my Internet connection disappears..." The thought that came to my mind as a computer/network engineer was, "if you don't know what you're doing, man, then you shouldn't bother." However, what I found myself saying to the owner was, "yeah, they certainly don't make these things easy to use do they?"

Actually this one item you picked up is not meant to be sarcasm, certainly less so than the previous parts. I work daily with those who suffer repeated motion injuries from improper computer use. They have improper posture and ergonomics. The raise of laptop use has increased people's injuries through the roof. Some of the people I come into contact with are sometimes nearly crippled by incorrect posture and ergonomics during computer use. It's a severe problem as many must use the computer 8+ hours a day. Ironically, both businesses and consumers do not include the cost of proper ergonomics in the budget of buying computers.

I personally have used a computer 12+ hours a day for the last 30 years, and I must credit my childhood piano teacher for teaching me proper posture at the keyboard. I was also the fastest typist in my class also a credit to my childhood piano teacher for all the Hanon and Czerny. We should make 4 or 5 years piano lessons a prerequisite for computer use.

Personally, I think teachers who object most strongly to this learning style through videos, etc. are simply a bit frightened that they are indeed "dispensable." I don't think a qualified and engaging teacher will ever be completely replaced by YouTube tutorials as the private lesson experience with a good teacher/student match is hard to beat. That being said I certainly believe that there is room for both within the realm of music education.

Not completely replaced eh? Well that's reassuring. er.., not.

My guess is it'll encourage an even bigger bunch of shysters.

Well in a free market people can decide for themselves--real live person or computer screen. If you're good at what you do (pedagogically) and people enjoy their lessons they're not going to ditch you so they can sit at home and watch YouTube tutorials. I don't understand what the big fuss is all about -- we should be happy that there has been an upsurge in piano interest over the last few years -- especially among teenagers.

~Jennifer Eklund

As someone who posts videos I'm not unsympathetic to the medium but I see digital media, initially thought of as an augmentation to the authentic world, becoming more and more its replacement. It's a detriment to the quality of our lives.

I think in the current economic climate this shouldn't come as a surprise. It's not a detriment because people are still seeking out their artistic impulses they just don't have money burning a hole in their pockets to dole out for private lessons.

Still, pay peanuts - get monkeys. I doubt that has changed!

+1.

The number of newbies to AB forum who state that they began their interest in piano by playing around with YouTube tutorials is impressively large. And a fair number of those students go on to stick with piano... not to mention starting formal lessons.

-
Computer technology is here to stay, it may or may not considered a replacement for real life but it isn't going away and, after all, without it this forum wouldn't exist. I'm no where near qualified enough to comment on the content of Hugh's tutorial but he's put an awful lot of work into it, which is to be applauded, and it should serve as an incentive to other teachers to get started using similar methods. I'm looking forward to seeing how Webinar pans out.
-

He seems to have done a runner!

What's more hilarious is that if you get a Mac, those problems (except for the possibility if an RSI) go away completely.

I have reached lesson 62 and have loved every minute of my learning experience, and the achievement that has come with it. I am very grateful to Hugh Sung for the time and trouble he has put in to pass his knowledge on to others. But imagine my devestation when I realised there were no further lessons. I am just checking with others who have gone through this that there is no further support from this wonderful teacher after movement 60.

Hugh is still a member here. I was fortunate that he stopped in Kansas City.. We had BLT's for dinner and he was SUCH an accomplished pianist that I didn't play a single thing.. what was the point?

kajp.. I hope you find another avenue. I almost hate to add to this thread.. there really is a lot of negativity, I cannot begin to tell you what an incredibly talented musician he was and he talked about his online lessons. a very charming conversationalist who also loved bacon. Hugh - you might like this lovely photo of you.