Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum Can you spot the errors?

I ran across this video on youtube and was amazed by two things. The performer has obvious musical talent but also makes quite a few technical errors. She has an interest in pedagogy. So I hope she doesn't mind my post. As I would like to one day adjudicate, I would like to know if my take of her performance is correct. I spot 18 blunders. If two errors are made in very short succession to one another, I only counted one error. Could you teachers let me know how many errors you detect without the score in front of you? Her performance raises interesting questions for me. The performance was still quite enjoyable despite the errors, and I'm amazed she kept going to the end as well as she did. (I know that at university they make you work far faster than you'd like to, so please don't misunderstand my intent.I admire her talent.)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpEDQNlKZw4&feature=related

I would rather concentrate on what she is doing well in spite of a few flaws.

And would never 'count' them!

If I were her and saw a thread on counting my mistakes, I would be horrified.

I guess if you've got to adjudicate a performance, then you need to know where all the mistakes are. Personally, the idea of listening to a performance just to count the errors makes me feel icky. Of course, so does a rectal examination, and I appreciate that that's sometimes necessary also.

I didn't bother to watch.

It's my theory - not necessarily fact - that students who tell themselves "....OK, now.....don't make any mistakes....play it perfectly......" are either going to hit tons of them, or play the most boring performance imaginable.

Wrong notes that occur due to musical exuberance, even if the student is of university age, don't really bother me.

I think it's unwise to look for "errors."

Put simply, pointing out errors is too easy. It requires basic listening skills and very little thought.

Far better is to get a feel for what will enhance a performance. And there are almost always ways that a performance can be enhanced.

In the case of this video (which I've seen before - the pianist has an excellent blog at http://colorinmypiano.com/ ), there is a bit of an issue with accuracy. It's not 18 errors with 18 solutions, it's one or two issues, and there are a handful of things that could help. Much would depend on what the source of the inaccuracies are - if the same errors are often repeated, then it may be a technical issue, a finger slip or a habit of rushing certain kinds of figures. If the errors change from one performance to another, then it's likely an issue of performance psychology and keeping the right kind of focus. Working through that issue would involve a very different approach. It's also very possible that a combination of both of these exists.

Regardless, there's much to admire in the performance, and there are other recordings of her recital online as well - you can access them from her blog or YouTube channel.

There are some errors in there, but they sound like nervous errors. She sounds like a capable musician to me and she can probably play this piece quite comfortably in her own studio. She has enough musicality to be a potentially good teacher too. She just needs to get over the nerves is the worst thing I could say about her.

Ewww. Somewhat amusing observation: just add one little "i" to that examination.


More to the topic ....

I have never held to the view that technical perfection and musicality were in some sort of tradeoff relationship. Improving in one dimension does not detract from the other. Musicians can walk and chew gum at the same time. Making lots of finger slips and nervous errors does not enhance a performance. Likewise, repeated problems because of insufficient technique is no virtue.

Mistakes will always be a part of live performance, and focussing laser-like on every one is no way to enjoy music. Likewise, counting errors is no way to judge. But obvious technical problems and repeated slips will diminish a performance, and it's fair game for an adjudicator to note certain inaccuracies and technical deficiencies as part of their write up.

P.S. I had to chuckle when I heard the piece. One of the young ladies who has been a constant competition companion of my son over the past five years played this movement at a classical competition about a year and a half ago. No comparison.

No comparison? By that you mean......

The youngster I know is an order of magnitude better.

I'm not a harsh critic of youtube videos. I'm a softie, actually. Anyone who puts up a credible performance deserves a genuine pat on the back and not a skewering for their small flaws and flubs. But in fact, at a basic technical level, we can discern better and worse playing. At the high school level competitions around here, this level of playing would get a nice round of applause for the effort. But to get on the podium you have to demonstrate substantially better technical control of the material.

Unfortunately, everyone fancies themselves an adjudicator these days.

Not me. As I said, I'm a real softie ....

The more that music becomes a competitive spectator sport, the more that this will be the case. It doesn't help that what a majority of people consider "good playing" is conditioned in pop music by completely overproduced artificial not-humanly possible creations and in the classical music world by studio splicing, creating reference recordings that are supposedly from an artist but instead are fradulent, manipulated impossibilities masquerading as authentic, live playing setting the bar for comparison impossibly, unrealistically and dishonestly high for live professional players, let alone amateurs. When Maurizio Pollini is getting booed by a supposed sophisticated public in the Concertgebouw because he doesn't sound exactly like his CDs, then we have clearly lost our way. http://www.meesterpianisten.nl/nieuws.php?NieuwsID=78

Even the most uneducated (in musical terms) person can pick out the bloopers -- our pattern matching and anticipation software in our subconscious does this obessively and compulsively for us automatically -- and tear people down. But, to look through these and be able to recognize the budding artist in order to build them up....that takes something very different.

It's probably unfair to adjudicate when someone hasn't asked for it. Some general thoughts on the making of errors -
Errors are such a big challenge! One thing I need to get much better at is playing through an error such that the rhythm is not disrupted. I still have a habit of immediately correcting, resulting in the Dreaded Stutter. As an audience member, an error played through is 10x less noticable that one that alters the rhythmic flow.

This subject makes me want to practise my Haydn until I know it backwards. Got to get a fine tooth comb and look for some more bits that I mentally gloss over. Scary stuff Haydn. Where's the metronome? Wears the metronome... out!

That's one of the virtues of watching unedited videos of live performances, and of going to lots of live performances in the flesh. Anyone who has done this sees the "masters" make lots of little slips. Heck, I have seen top pianists occasionally rewrite passages without missing a beat. It humanizes them and brings them closer to the rest of us mere mortals. At the same time, you see just how inconsequential these slips are to the overall flow of their music. And you see just how good their underlying technique actually is.

... and that movement is a real technical challenge.

In recording studio jargon, that is called "Frankensteining".

yes I can hear that. I'm considerably glad that my Haydn is considerably easier. On the other hand I am really looking forward to playing some challenging Haydn in the future, I mentally choose future sonatas sometimes.