It morphed from popular music of the day to the inflexibly crusty thing it is today. Don't get me wrong, I agree that it makes an excellent basis for honing one's technical skills, and enjoy listening to much of it - but only in spite of the excessive elitist baggage that its modern purveyors have adorned it with. And please don't tell me other musical genres are as bad or worse in that regard, I ain't buying it.

I just think that the ultimate goal of piano instruction shouldn't be to produce concert pianists. Just like the ultimate goal of a college education shouldn't be to produce college professors. But both unfortunately are too often the case.

Hopefully not! However, I have seen and heard many performers playing with the same feeling and expression on a digital piano as they would on a acoustic.

It's a practical thing also. Here in the UK they build new houses the same size as rabbit hutches. You can hardly get a dining table in some of the living rooms never mind an acoustic piano. So the smaller electronic is a better alternative for most!

I would say that most of the teachers in my local MTNA chapter do not teach only for those students who will go on to be concert pianists. Sure, when they get to college, most of the performance majors there are looking to be concert pianists, and so those college teachers do mainly take those students. However, your average private instructor is most likely going to take anyone who is willing to pay on time and show up. Most of us see ourselves as developing life skills in students as well as an appreciation for music in general. There are tomorrow's music consumers, not necessarily tomorrow's performers. If you ever go on the Teacher's Forum on this site, you'll see that is the case for the majority of the teachers who post there as well.

And while *you* may not have experienced strictness and rigidity in other genres of music, I have. Any time you make a blanket statement about any group of people, chances are you will be proven wrong by the exceptions there. In my experience, like I stated above, most of the teachers I know are not looking to only produce concert pianists, but once a student goes to college to major in piano performance, shouldn't they be taught how to stand up to the competition that's out there? This can be done in such a way as to still cultivate creativity, which I have seen. I've also seen the other side of the coin, so I'm not denying it exists. Just don't lump every educator in with them, and don't assume all classical/traditional pianists are like this as well.

It sounds as though you've had a bad experience in your life with piano teachers, and I'm very sorry for this (even though I had nothing to do with it). Teachers who are abusive are nothing more than charlatans and give the rest of us who really care about our students and try to cultivate their musical expressiveness a bad name.

Yeah, I think you're right, but you've underestimated the economics of it.

I would bet the percentage of music that we pay to hear that comes from speakers is above 99%. Probabably above 99.9%.

Sure there are live acoustic classical concerts, but the number of people willing to pay to hear them is so small that every symphony orchestra in the world is near bankruptcy.

(Most people buy the CD of the symphony anyway, and play it through .......guess what........speakers!)

Every live music event I've been to in the last several years, whether background music, dance music, etc., has been through speakers. To make any money you have to play to a big crowd, and that requires amplification. All of those bands had keyboards, none of which were acoustic.

There are some exceptions - wind bands don't usually need to be miked. I've played in a couple concerts and heard several over the past year. When's the last time you paid to hear one? Never? (Except for me, how many hear even like that music, Sousa Marches and Holst Military Suites, etc.?)

Show up for an orchestra gig with a .500 bore trombone, or a big band gig with a .547, and see what happens.

They're visually identical. They're probably sonically identical to the vast majority of people.

But you'll never get that call again!

Yes, I realize I was using the biggest blanket and the broadest brush I could put my hands on there.


The competition itself is what I find crazy. Whether or not you should be preparing them for a crazy field is a separate question. I would say no, as it tends to validate and thus perpetuate the unfortunate status quo.


I think punishment and reward via competition and ranking are inherently wrong. Not just in music (I disagree with grading in general) but I would argue especially in music.

Extrinsic goals take the focus off of the central activity of learning to play a musical instrument, and place the focus on meaningless things such as grades and rank. They corrupt the pedagogical process.

If you've never read "Punished by Rewards" by Alfie Kohn, I highly recommend it. Just don't read it if you are currently in school (like I did), as your hair is likely to catch fire and your head explode:

Punished by Rewards

If I may jump on the generalization bandwagon ... Perhaps those who most dislike competition are those least able to compete?

I actually read that book many years ago in college. Some people are motivated by extrinsic rewards, some are motivated by guilt, and some are motivated by the love of something. And I'm sure there are those who have a combination of these things that drive them to do what they do (as well as many other factors). Those that thrive on rewards do well in systems such as grades, competitions where a winner is chosen, job interviews in which only one applicant will be hired, etc. Those that do not thrive in such situations either have to adapt and learn how to thrive, or be complacent with not thriving. Like it or not, it is not just in schools and in music competitions that these things exist. They are a part of humanity in its many cultures. Some competitions I do not want my students to participate in, even though I know they are good enough, simply because I know that it would be a bad experience for them, knowing the judges and the way those particular people judge. However, is it a bad thing to have them perform at all? What about in Solo/Ensemble Contests and other "competitions" where anyone can advance to the next level if they do well enough for themselves?

I happen to believe the public performance can teach students a lot about test taking, public speaking and stage presence, discipline in seeing something to its fruition, planning well for an event, and handling stressful situations with grace. I use those competitions that are not attempts at giving the parents another opportunity to live vicariously through their children (and boast to their friends), or ones that simply pick one who is deemed better than the rest by one person's or a small panel of opinions, which is highly subjective anyways. However, these are things that happen in life. I can't change the culture, but I can help students approach such things in a positive light, and if they somehow don't do as well as they'd like, I help them grow from that as well. You won't always get the job you want, or the person to marry, or be everyone's friend and please everybody, and so you can either avoid all such situations or end up frustrated. Best to learn from experiences both positive and negative so that when another similar situation arises, you are better equipped to handle it.

Music is like any other field......those who can't become critics. Many music critics are simply failed musicians. In my own area of work, failed tradesmen in the building trades often become building inspectors where they can critique your work.
Clyde

For a second there I thought you were going to lob the "those who can't, teach" grenade into the discussion.

Haha, me too! Let's not go there...this is heated enough

I don't think Acoustics's will totally disappear however they will be confined more and more to increasingly smaller segments of the market until they become essentially irrelevant except to those using them for sampling or to a single digit percentage of players. Myself I haven't played a Acoustic in a professional capacity even in studio situations for over a year and even then is was rare to bother with the hassle of getting one in perfect tune and mikeing it up when we had excellent DP's and VST's. I can't speak for live classical or orchestral environments but with modern DAW software and effects banks we have absolutely no need for a Acoustic piano in the recording studio as we can replicate any Acoustic in a recording so that it is impossible to tell for even a expert ear. Live might be different but in rock/pop situations with what we can do these days even parts with significant acoustic piano parts its virtually impossible for anyone but a professional or a very well trained ear to know that in fact a DP or VST was being used.

All that said when I play at home alone for relaxation I most often play my C7 Acoustic .... make of that what you will.

Yea, we pretty much all know PC solutions have rocked for years now. I'm in the line wondering why DPs suck so hard in comparison. 8 GB or so and a decent processor and it's all over, what's so hard about that? I mean, why are we all waiting with bated breath for the next Yamaha non-explanation of their latest crap when, given the industry's track record, it can't possibly even live up to that minimal standard? Do I sound bitter?

They don't in a recording or live situation for rock/pop we can easily use a professional stage piano and if you listened you simply would not be able to tell the difference. Any of the currently available upper end stage pianos are quite capable of doing this with their standard onboard sounds and the correct effects processing and mixing. I'm not about to make the same claims for classical or orchestral arrangements but its getting very close. If you take the Roland RD700GX's Steinway or the Yamaha S90XS's S6 samples for example in the full live pop/rock mix nobody ..and I mean nobody could ever tell they were DP's. I loath to risk using VST's live because of the possible (and I've seen it happen many times) latency issues pathetically with big acoustic piano samples playing.
The new crop of professional DP's ( V-Piano, CP-1) will vastly improve of even today's current high standards. The question is can a DP be perfected that can stand alone as a Acoustic in a recital situation ? I don't think DP's are quite there yet but they are close and the new CP-1 might be the missing link as I'm hearing very good things.

For me, the acoustic piano has long
been gone from my life. When
I restarted as an adult in the
early 1980's, after 20 yrs. away
from playing, the first piano
I bought was a quality acoustic
upright (a similar model today
would be in the ~$20,000 price
range). I put that upright
into storage soon after I
got it--completely disillusioned
that it didn't help my playing
one bit--where it has remained
till this day.

Then in 1989 I tried my first
digital piano and there has
been no looking back. It
was a revelation the first
time I tried a digital. I
had grown up with classical
lessons and acoustic pianos
only, and I had always been
troubled by their need for
tuning and frequent repairs
and their excessive volume.
When I tried my first digital,
I knew right then that digitals
were the answer to all my problems
at the piano and that there
was no longer any need for
acoustic pianos--and this was
way back in 1989. Here was
an electrical instrument that
played just like an acoustic
piano for all practical purposes,
and it had volume control and
needed no maintenance and I
could carry it myself. Had
I died and gone to piano heaven?

Since getting my first digital
in 1989, I've owned four, and
I've gone to less and less
expensive digitals over the yrs.
rather than upgrading, as many
do. I now play a $600 budget
digital with a non-graded
action and a non-half-pedal,
and it serves fine for any
playing, from jazz improv to
the most advanced classical works.
I believe a big-time classical
concert could be played
today using something like a
V Piano or CLP 380, with maybe
some auxilliary amplification,
but nothing further. You
wouldn't miss much.

Not if I value my life, my piano teaching wife would have strangled me for such a comment. Add the fact that most piano teachers can play, some play well, some not so well, but they play none the less.
Clyde