Hi all,

The subject is rather confusing. I'm sorry because they only allow that many characters. My real question is, should I be choosing a repertoire that is technically reasonably challenging, but takes a long time to memorize, or a piece that is easier to memorize but technically not so challenging?

The question was raised because I have a bad memory and it will me 2-3 months to memorize Bach's Invention 13. And I can't play fluently before I memorize it. I think I might have broken the record for taking that long to memorize this piece. However, this piece's technical difficulty is just about right for me. So should I be playing an easier to memorize piece but technically not so challenging or playing a piece that will take ages to memorize but technically at my level?

Or, is there something musically interesting, easier to memorize, but same time techincally challenging, so it's worthwhile to work on?

btw, I'm asking because I want to know what is best for me, not because I'm afraid of hard work. I don't mind spending long time to learn a piece I like, it's just the music lessons won't be that productive since I don't have progress each week. Like 4 bars/week.

Since this is teacher's forum, I want to know what's your thoughts on this?

Thanks!

I'm a little confused, but my first instinct is to answer "yes". Meaning do both, ones that are challenging alongside ones that will take you less time to memorize.

Now onto what's confusing me. Are you self-teaching (I presume so)? You say you can't play it fluently before memorizing it. I don't understand this. You should learn the piece fluently before attempting to memorize. I know there are some people who try to memorize as they learn, but I have tried this tactic myself and found that I didn't learn the piece as well that way, so I don't subscribe to this.

Also, who is it either/or? You should be working on more than one piece at a time. While I don't think you should be memorizing more than one piece at a time, you certainly can have 2, 3, or 4 pieces in various stages of development (one brand new, one still working on with the music, and another in the process of being memorized), and just cycle through.

Lastly, if you are self-taught, then I highly recommend finding a teacher. Perhaps you've had one and are done with that for now, but you haven't said either way and you're on a teacher forum, so expect to hear this . A teacher can help you with techniques on how to learn a piece more thoroughly which will aid in memorization much quicker. They will also select music that is appropriate for your level of playing and to help you develop properly. They can also direct your attention to technical flaws in your playing which can also impede advancement in playing. Something to consider.

I agree you should be doing both.
There are tricks to memorizing a song that make it easier. Have you analyzed the piece? Do you know what arpeggio you are playing at any given time? (or at least have figured it out in the past). Do you practice slowly? Can you visualize the notes on the page? Have you tried playing it with different rhythms? ex. Swing the 8ths. Try different dynamics just for fun?
Anyone care to add more suggestions?
Thanks

I think once you've completely learn a piece by musical score and it's something you enjoy to play, you will naturally remember most sections, if it's a long piece and quite technical then you may find certain sections don't always stick in your memory so just use your sheet music as a back up plan.

Listen to an audio version of the music when trying to memorise, and stop and start it on the sections that are tickling you.

Raindrops, it depends on what your goals are. For example maybe you want to have 3 pieces memorized and ready for performance at any time. You begin with a piece at your level and find it's taking a long time and that you cannot reliably play it.

So for the second piece back up a level or two and see how it goes. You also need to consider what pieces inspire you. Look at what you consider to be "worthwhile to work on".

Thank you all for trying to answer a confusing question.

Moridiene,

I do have a teacher. We have just started our lessons two months ago. So she doesn't know me for years. I just wanted to know what's all your thoughts are based on your teaching experience. Have you encountered students who are exceptionally slow in memorizing a piece and what kind of repertoire do you choose for her/him.

It seems it's not easy to find something that are technically challenging but easy to memorize.

Samasap, I do agree with you that if you click with a piece you naturally memorize it.

Hi Ann, My goal is to improve my level of music appreciation. There is no competition. T

There is something that hasn't been addressed or maybe just touched on:


I think that this is something your teacher can help you with - not being able to play fluently before you memorize something. There are other ways of approaching music and other skills. You may want to change your goals if you know there are other possibilities. At that point your question will change because it might be the wrong question.

What do you think your purpose is in lessons? Is it to complete a piece within a given timeframe? Is it to get skills so eventually you can learn any piece effectively on your own? Or a combination of both?

Everyone I know is either better at reading or better at memorizing.

I don't know anyone who does not either *read* or *memorze* faster.

In other words, we all tend to "go to our strengths".

In order to become well-rounded music musicians, we have to strengthen our weaknesses.

I find that MOST people, starting with no prior musical experience, find it easier to develop reading skills to the point where they can play a lot of music very close to perfectly without memorizing IF reading is stressed from day one.

So my students, who read very well, find memorizing an additional step, and we spend a lot of time talking about HOW to memorize.

However, for any number of reasons, some people never become fast readers, but if they have extraodinary, natural memory skills, they can decode music, bit by bit, then memorize it incredibly fast. If they also have very good "ears", they can become incredible musicians. However, they will always have to work around the slow reading, which will make learning music VERY fast and then playing with other musicians, who are also reading, quite difficult.

The only players who are in deep trouble are those who read slowly AND memorize slowly.

I am an extreme example of a super-fast reader and slow memorizer, so about 99% of my serious work regarding playing well for other people is always about making sure my playing from memory is rock solid.

I don't know if the fact that I just re-started my lessons after a 5 months break of one year lessons contributes to my poor skills in both reading and memorizing. If you ask me, I think my reading is worse than memorizing which is already alarmingly slow.

But I have to memorize it before playing it fluently is simply because otherwise I would be very busy looking up and down and can't make coherent music. My fingers can't find the right keys if I keep my eyes on music.

Does anyone ever have a student who is slow in both reading and memorizing?

They *can* find the right keys, if you don't look at them. Try wiggling your fingers behind your back: are they moving? How do you know they're moving, you can't see them! But you can FEEL them.

You shouldn't have to look down unless your hands are changing position (leaping away from where they are). I think this is key to your issues. Try covering your hands with a scarf or something light like that as you play, so whenever you look down you just see the scarf and not your hands, and it will remind you to keep your eyes on the music.

I honestly think this is at the out of your problem, so it is worth trying to go through this. It will be hard at first, but stick to it. I've worked with many adult students on this habit and they always improve in their playing as a result.

I am thinking that there may be more involved than memory vs. reading, for which we tend to have one strength overpowering the other unless we deliberately balance it out. There are ways to process music when learning it, (and "learning" music can also mean different things), and then when playing it from then on. There are also skills that musicians draw on which are there for them.

A few things off the top of my head:
- supposing that a student started off on his own and began learning his favourite music, so that he is playing lots of notes. But at no time has he ever absorbed the topography: gotten it solid that D is between the two black keys so that it stays vague for him. If he ventured into reading music, then recognizing the notes on the staff, as well as forming a connection between those notes and the piano keys. What if these are vague territory?

- How about the "grammar" of music. Musical form: a piece that is in ABA pattern so that the middle part is the same as the first part but in G major instead of C major, and then the first part repeats - making it predictable. Having an idea of cadences and a feel for them. Think of memorizing a poem in a foreign language, versus memorizing a poem with a story you know and rhyming couplets to jog your memory.

There are tons of such things. If, for example, a student starts lessons for the first time with a teacher, and he has already taught himself to play music on the piano, then that teacher might continue teaching him more pieces. The focus stays on the pieces. If those kinds of skills are not there, then the student will continue struggling with the kinds of struggles you described.

Right now you are having difficulties in areas which then make the whole task of learning music daunting. It is equally hard whether you are trying reading or ear (memory). I think that you should present that difficulty to your teacher, and let your teacher come up with some solutions. That would be both how to approach pieces, and any skills you might be missing that would help you.

i don't know.. but, i used to have great trouble with memorization. However, when i started studying pieces away from the piano, like in a chair, it became exponentially easier to memorize. I try to understand the structure, make a little chart, write notes...

Personally I would rather hear a simpler piece played well, with great nuance and interpretation than a harder piece slopped out.

I have a different solution: learn to have "fast eyes". While it is true that not looking at the hands may work well for 5 finger positions, for example, if music is moving all over the place, which it soon does, the trick is to look at the hands VERY quickly so that the eyes do not lose their place.

Huh? I think there was a quotation/embedment problem here.

I'm glad I'm not the only one this happens to!

Yes, I made a mistake, and I don't know how I did it. I think I fixed it. Thank you.

My teacher did mention try not to look at the keys while playing when I was still learning the first part of invention 13 because I told her I couldn't find the keys, but it's hard for me. I soon gave up. There are keys I can *feel*, but this piece is not easy for me to *feel* the keys. She also encouraged me to memorize it in order to play. That seems easier for me so that I can focus on the keyboard.

For the "grammar" part. I do analyze a little, like here's the cadence, here again and here's a section, here's a new section. But I don't go into details in analysis. Maybe I should. It's interesting.

For "quick eyes", I have to learn to use that now because I'm also playing a Brahms waltz which is to training quick eyes, as well as rythem, I think, bc my tempo is everywhere except the right place.

Right now I have these two pieces memorized, but not that secured.

I do need some basic skills in order to learn these music. Perhaps I should learn some easier pieces, but these two pieces are interesting to work on once you can play fluently.

Raindrops, I got into piano after having self-taught decades ago. I had gone straight to learning to play pieces, and any patterns to how music worked got absorbed accidentally. I had never picked up some basic things that might be taught to kids, and didn't know it. For example, taking time to notice that the key pattern is 2 black + 3 black, and D is between the two black - and taking time to really notice and know for all time where that D was. It is when I found out where the holes were in my knowledge, that certain things went easier and faster. It's a bit like when you plug the holes in a boat it works better. Or if you replace a lawn rake as oar with a proper oar. The two things were missing knowledge, and approaches to music.

Supposing your teacher says "don't look at your hands". That might induce you to start knowing your keys and notes, or it might just get you to mostly stumble along slowly. Why not put your heads together with your teacher and see what you might do differently and what you might be missing in order to get a better handle on what is tripping you up right now?

When I talk about "reading", I am using a short-cut for "learning very quickly, using the score."

"Memorization" for me means "learning how to play music, written or not written", as quickly as possibly, obviously without a score (music).

What I was trying to express, obviously unsuccessfully, is that some people play VERY well, with score, while many (and perhaps most) are not able to.

And some people read slowly and so are unable to play anything well, with score, but absorb incredibly quickly. Such people sometimes (and perhaps often or regularly or even *always* successfully decode music, absorb it, then play it from memory, and the whole process is remarkably fast.

That's all I meant.

Gary, your post was clear. I was expanding for the sake of a fellow student and not necessarily referring to your post. We may come into lessons without knowing the various sides that are involved, so it is good to know that besides the issue of reading vs. memory which the OP started with, there may be other elements.

OK.