Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Adult Beginners Forum On self-teaching

Dale:

The 52 week course can help because you get a real sense of playing real music instead of the fragmented way that guitar is usually taught. It is no wonder that many of us guitar players can't play song after years of practicing and playing, while a kid with a couple of years of piano can.

As for the band, I played guitar in a trio that played the typical Holiday Inn circuit for a couple of years in the late 70s. It was professional, with a band leader who was quite older than the drummer and I. I got the job because I could read music as well as hear it. We worked steady for two years. I left because I realized that constant life on the road was not the lifestyle I wanted. To me, music makes for a wonderful hobby, while my work life is separate from that. It makes for a good balance.

Tony

By the way, I recently got an award at work that allowed me to purchase a Yoke Wong course at Amazon. I got the bundled play from a fakebook course 1 and 2 because Duane Shinn only use public domain pieces and I thought this course might connect the dots with more current fare.

Was I pleasantly surprised!! This woman does a fantastic job of walking you through how to really use all those inversions and how to arrange a fakebook tune on the spot. She has a way of explain stuff so you just follow along, stop the DVD and experiment. It is really good and well presented material. I will have to get some of her other materials such as improv course and the runs and fills. Good stuff!

This must be a golden age for those who want a non traditional approach to playing piano. So much good material available.

The Duane Shinn 52 week course is very complete for laying that important foundation. The Yoke Wong course that I got seems to complement that 52 week course very well. I suspect her other course would too, probably with some overlap, which certainly doesn't hurt.

Tony

This post was a response to an exchange of Don's post and Starr Keys response about getting a live teacher...

Very interesting observation. The interesting thing in this particular forum is that it almost serves as a diary that lots of people contribute to. We can look back at our own posts as well as those who responded to us and us responding to others, and have a sense of where we have been and where we are going.

Regarding absolute statements to the effect that there is only one way to achieve a thing (the post you were responding to), it seems to me there is a sense of security in making one's world black and white. We can become lost at sea with all the choices available to us, and we seek solid ground in clinging to one thing that provides us with a sense that we have finally found the right thing.

It may well be that I change course again, and go with something other than Duane Shinn. To me, that is not a failure of either me or the course. If I am making progress to where I want to be, then I am fine. Personally, I would rather remain open to possibilities than to make a decree for everyone to follow and lock myself out of new avenues and ideas.

Many of the piano players I listen to never had formal lessons or a course such as Duane Shinn or Yoke Wong teach. How do we account for that? Usually we fall back on the talent theme. Among the players I have met, they seem to share an innate curiosity and open-minded willingness to explore their music.

I can't tell another in these forums what he or she should do. But if somebody gets something worthwhile from an approach different from mine, I will listen.

As for course promises, we all know the course can present information, but we have to do the work. We are all different and have different ways of taking in information. What works for one person can only be suggested for another as something that may be worth a look. Ultimately we each find our own path. Unfortunately for those who need to live by a black and white decree, the world has far too much variety for that view. Enjoy, rather than trying to lock it down.

Tony

I guess for me a "52 week course" is kind of a neither fish nor fowl...

I would not consider that really "self teaching" which to me would mean starting out on your own and when necessary looking things up in a book, video or whatever source of information is needed to address a certain question.

And it's not really a substitute for lessons in that you can get feedback on your playing, ask followup questions or benefit from having the course of study adapted to your own individual progress at various points in time.

So I really am left with the sense that canned learn-at-home courses mostly have to offer whatever real or imagined "promises" the buyer wishes to believe about a particular course. The fact that switching from course to course is nigh universal tends to confirm that belief.

Then again maybe it's just a way of buying something new every few months without it having to be a $10,000 piano! There a lot to be said for novelty as a stress relief, entertainment and/or motivational outlet. And switching to a different set of books and videos is a heck of a lot cheaper and easier than switching instruments or teachers. But I do fear that a lot of folks accept the setback accompanying the switch to Yet Another Course without quite realizing the extent to which that distraction interrupts their potential progress.

But I'm a firm believer that in music, making "progress" per se is not as important as enjoying the process. So I would certainly not tell anyone to forgo these courses if they create enjoyment and are fun to buy.

Brent:

Interesting viewpoint. Another view of self teaching that I read some time ago, and on more than one occasion, is that we are really all engaged in self teaching, since a teacher or self study course can only present the information and guide us. We have to take in and organize that information and guidance in a way that makes sense to us. From that perspective, the 52 week course, Piano Magic, Yoke Wong, a live teacher, etc are all really guides for our own self teaching. There are several valid perspectives on this.

Tony

I absolutely agree. A live teacher is just another "course" that may help you learn. The thing I like about a live teacher is that I can discuss which pieces I am going to work on and I can discuss difficulties I am having. If my teacher can give me suggestions as to how I might approach a problem area it helps me move along better. At least that is my perception. It is all about perception.

Doesn't that sort of contradict itself?

A teacher is just another "course" except that unlike a "course" you can discuss pieces and so forth.

That's like saying an overcoat is just another "tee shirt" except that the overcoat will keep you warm in winter and keep the rain off when its stormy. That's what different about a tee shirt and an overcoat, right?

A teacher can do everything a "course" can do. A teacher can also do many things that a "course" can not do. That makes a teacher and a "course" totally different things.

Then again, some days a tee shirt is exactly what you want to wear.

I see the point Don is making. Different "courses" can have different advantages. A "course that involves a live teacher has the advantage for him of real time interaction and feedback. So, from that perspective, at least to me, what he is saying does make sense. I can also see that, as with much that is posted in forums, there is often more than one interpretation.

Regarding the advantage of live teachers in general (I.e. not responding to any specific post), I can readily see the advantages that people cite frequently in these discussions. If my schedule was such that I could know that I could make such an appointment on a regular basis, I would seriously consider it. However, I also believe that much can be accomplished with many of the self study courses that are available.

Tony

After years and years of self-teaching, I finally started taking lessons with a teacher. But it wasn't for the reason of getting reassurance. Rather, it was because I realized that there were some things that I just couldn't teach myself.
That's harsh, and I don't know if it's quite true. One of a teacher's primary motivations might be to keep a studio full of paying students, but that's not necessarily the same thing as keeping the same students paying forever. It's like my doctor. She really does try to cure my ailments and send me on my way, because there are always other patients to fill the appointment slots once I'm better. But your other point is probably true, since why would a teacher try to discourage you?? Isn't the point of lessons to try to make it easier for you to learn? How can that be anything but encouraging?

It seems to me that, in general, finding whatever course of instruction one needs to learn to play piano is a matter that is more complex than simply grabbing the first course you see or hiring the first teacher you encounter. Discussions in these forums seem to suggest a parallel between selecting a "live" teacher and selecting a course for self-study.

In both cases, the method of teaching needs to correspond with the student's needs and goals. It does not seem uncommon to me for a person to find that a particular teacher is not suitable for a particular student's needs, and in that case, the student needs to find another teacher. The same can happen with finding a suitable course for self-study. I suppose we could use a particular course for some sort of trial period and get our money back if the course is not suitable, though I don't know how many people do that.

Though I am sure it is possible that there are people who hop from one course to another, or one teacher to another rather than knuckling down and doing the work, I would think it is more common for people to need to find the right teacher or course for their needs. A part of that process is discovering for oneself what one's needs and interests are.

Some people know right away what they want to pursue on the piano. Others have a sense that they want to learn to play, but it is only by actually sitting at the piano and trying different approaches that they begin to really clarify what they want. I believe this holds true for both those who hire a"live" teacher and those who try the self-study approach.

People who are pursuing a self-study approach will necessarily try one or more of the courses that people here recommend, even while the people recommending are in the process of discovering for themselves what works for them.

If a person is concerned that others in this forum think they are just avoiding doing the work, and choose to stay with a course or teacher whom they have come to realize just isn't doing it for them, then I would think that would not be a good thing in the long run.

Rather than "shoulds" and judgments about what another is doing, especially with the apparent stigma some attach to the self-study route as somehow being less "real" than a formal teacher, maybe a bit more open-mindedness and a supportive stance in helping that person discover whatever it is s/he needs to clarify about their own musical goals and learning needs might be a bit more appropriate.

These comments are not aimed at anybody specific, nor are they in response to any particular post in this thread. Instead, this is in response to just an overall sense I get from some people's comments whenever a thread of this nature comes along.

We all have opinions about piano playing and the approaches that would appeal to us. Where some people will spend months learning, memorizing, and perfecting a classical piece of music, others would much prefer to make up their own music on the spot or their own interpretation of a standard or pop tune. Neither approach is more right than another, but each does have its own path to gaining the particular skills need to do that thing. I see no reason why the latter approach could not be done without the aid of a "live" teacher. The classical approach probably does require a teacher and strict adherence to a prescribed set of steps to developing the necessary skills. Then, I could be totally wrong all around. I am just finding my own way, and certainly can't determine what is best for another.

Tony

I agree, it is a little harsh. But I think the less "full" the studio is the closer to the truth it is. A teacher with potential students on a waiting list is more likely to suggest a student try a different teacher if things are not going well.
While I believe that a teacher with empty spots is more apt to try harder to make it work.

I don't think there's any stigma attached to not having a piano teacher (although if it were being discussed in the Teacher's sub-forum that would probably open a can of worms). I certainly don't object to anyone doing what they think works best within their own life and musical objectives.

I just thought it was odd when one respondent said that a teacher was just another self-study course. Someone who wants to work from a DVD/book/etc. surely does not think a teacher would be just the same. And likewise someone working with a teacher doesn't think a self-study course would be just the same. Whichever one you prefer, it seems they are quite different things.

The only "stigma" type response that one might expect is if reporting here on starting ones fifth different course of study in an 18-month period. It would be reasonable to interpret that as a sign of someone more interesting in the novelty of starting over than with the reality of following through. I'd think three years of uninterrupted effort with a mediocre teacher or "course" would gain better returns than three years of switching between the best teacher or courses in the world every few months.

I agree that is one way of looking at it. I suspect that with a teacher, a person is making a commitment with the teacher as a personal interaction between two human beings. To me (not necessarily to somebody else), switching teachers frequently would be similar to switching colleges or something along those lines. I have read some tings in the teacher's forum that indicate this to be the case. When a person suddenly decides to switch teachers, there does seem to be concern over the reason and potential hurt feelings on the part of student and teacher. This would not be present with a pile of books. So, with a live teacher, there is a whole other dimension.

Self-study courses seem to often compliment each other such that having a couple of them to glean what you want to learn is not unusual. When I was involved in Piano Magic, there was frequent talk about other books and/or courses that people were also referencing.

To me, the bottom line is whether a person is enjoying what he or she (it just doesn't feel right to me to suddenly going plural with "they" when it comes to gender references when the context is singular) is doing. Having played guitar for many years, I saw in their forums many people who switched around guitars a lot. The people in those forums actually have a term for it: GAS (Guitar Acquisition Syndrome), which has also been modified as Gear Acquisition Syndrome so keyboardists can get in on the action too. I always thought that was strange until I finally realized that what I think really doesn't matter. I do what I do and they do what they do. I am not going to change them, but I might start an argument by superimposing my ideas on those who choose to differently from what I am doing.

For me, I see a combination of Duane Shinn and Yoke Wong materials as providing what I want to learn the skill set I want to develop to play the music that I want to play. I will be switching between those. I can state that, for me, this feels right, but what I do has absolutely no bearing ono what somebody else should or should not do.

I spent a couple of years in the Sudnow method and got a lot out of it, especially from the standpoint of how to frame teaching myself. I really invested myself in his philosophy, which deepened my understanding of what he was saying much more than simply reading it in a book. I listened to his tapes over and over that first year and really internalized his message. I was very fortunate to have met and talked with him on a number of occasions so that I was sure that I understood his context and meaning. That would really be of value - a real plus for dealing with a "live" person.

In Sudnow's case, he was really into the philosophy behind why he taught what he did and also really into how adults learn and the " cultural myths" (his term) that hinder one's progress in any self-learning endeavor. With both Shinn and Wong, there isn't really that sort of philosophy, and therefore their materials simply are what they are. I don't feel compelled to need to ask either of them questions. I apply what I learned from Sudnow, and had I not spent time with him and his materials, I would have questions.

What I am saying here is my take on my own musical efforts and not a reflection on anybody else's.

Tony

Tony,

I don't know you or anyone else I encounter online but the inertia or "stickiness" of having a piano teacher has two implications, generally speaking.

First is, because of that "stickiness" there's going to be a tendency that people who expect to jump around a lot are going to prefer various self-teaching options so as to avoid the awkwardness of leaving one teacher after another, possibly even with a matter of a few months. Conversely, people who are expecting to stay with one approach for several years will be more open to the possibility of working with a "live" teacher because they don't anticipate leaving/changing any time soon.

I think that's probably a reasonably strong sorting effect, going in. To a lesser extent, once into a course of study very little cost will be perceived to switching book or DVD courses whereas there's that same reluctance to break off a face-to-face arrangement. So to a lesser degree no matter what one thinks going in, in-person teaching will somewhat slow down the number of changes as compared to learn-at-home courses.

But as a student of human behavior my money is on the former effect being pretty strong. People's expectations of what they think they'll be doing (whether that reflects reality of wishful thinking) combined with a desire to avoid difficult or awkward social situations is definitely going to steer some people in one direction or the other. Not everyone, of course, but enough people to notice a pattern if you talk to enough of them (i.e. on a forum like this one).

Brent -

Your logical and observations are certainly sound, so I really don't have any argument with them. I suppose I am saying that it really depends on what a person is wanting to do as well as their personality and approach to learning will determine the correct path(s) for that person.

Here is an example -- among the small group of engineers at work, of which I am a part, there is one guy who feels he MUST attend one or more classes and be formally taught about the subject matter before he feels he can attempt to work on a particular project. The rest of us just figure stuff as we need to and get the work done. Neither approach is better or wrong or right - unless any one of us expects the others to do as he does. As long as we get it done, how we got there really doesn't matter.

I taught myself guitar out of books (way before DVDs) and did well enough to play professionally until I decided to leave that lifestyle. I could read music, which is why I got the job. Not everybody will do that. The stereotype of the guitar player is of a person who knows little to nothing about music and just bangs away. Really, that stereotype does not hold for all guitar players, but I can't tell you the number of times I have been in a musical situation and heard players of other instruments express surprise that I, as a guitar player, could read and write music and knew theory. Self teaching can and does work. A lot of the old boogie woogie players that people now struggle to emulate, were not schooled or if they were, it was a sort of "get what you can" from this or that guy passing through.

I am hoping this year that my wife's medical issues will have settled down enough that I can focus on teaching myself to play the type of music that I want to play on piano. I figure that the learning materials I have are sufficient, just as the materials I had when learning to play guitar were.

There is enough difference in people that it can be difficult to predict success rate. For some people, I am sure that switching methods may not necessarily be a bad thing. If it keeps a person's interest up (i.e. the novelty value, referred to earlier in this thread by somebody) while at the same time, the person IS learning to play the music he or she wants to play, then no harm is done.

So, I agree with your observations and the reasoning. I am just saying that this is not always a bad thing that must hinder a person's progress. The problem I had with the Sudnow method is not with the method itself, but instead that as I progressed I began to determine what kind of music I wanted to play. For a number of reasons, the Sudnow method did not really prepare me for that. However, in the process of working with that method I learned much more about how to frame the process of teaching myself as well as becoming more aware of what I needed to move in the direction I wanted to go. In that case, switching is not a bad thing, where staying the course might have been.

Tony

This is not really on topic but I didn't want to make a new thread(is there a thread for general beginner questions??). Anyways, I'm a self teacher and I have a question concerning my practice routine. Basically what I'll do is sight read a couple of pieces that I can go through without any mistakes(basically beginner pieces with singles notes, very few chords, slow tempo, accidentals, etc.) and then I will sight read pieces that are above my level but still manageable. Is this a good way to advance in sight reading? Here are some literal examples of what I do.

http://i39.tinypic.com/191g12.jpg
That is an extremely easy example for me but I read this this morning.

And then for the pieces with which I struggle a little, here is what I do with them;
Sonatina in c major by Haslinger is an example;
I started out reading through the piece with mistakes, slowing down, etc. Then I worked on the sections which gave me trouble until I could play through it fairly decently. At this point it isn't sight reading for me anymore the notes are more of a reminder. I aim to memorize these more difficult pieces with my sight reading practice focused on the easier pieces. It took me about 2 days practice on the Haslinger piece before I could play it up to tempo reasonably well. Anyways, is this a good routine? I'm mainly focused on developing my sight reading skills so I aim to achieve improvement in that area.

So where did you learn to read music and the basics of theory, Tony? Oddly enough, I think that the reading part is just about as well learned on your own and with a teacher walking you through it.

Yet a lot of folks probably find reading the most daunting part (it is, I'm pretty sure) and therefore want in-person lessons to make sure they get it. But observing people learn to read for various instruments, it takes soooooo long for an adult beginner to read halfway decently I'd think it could get mighty expensive springing for weekly lessons all during that time.

I think a late-beginner, early-intermediate type player can probably get a lot of value per hour out of lessons with a teacher. You're not slogging through the slow little one note at a time reading (necessary but more a matter of time and effort than instruction IMO) but instead you're getting concrete guidance and you have enough basic technique to practice each thing you're shown a good many times before the next lesson.

Anyway, I learned to sing from "notes" almost as early as I learned to read. Actually I learned to read from my mom before I went to Kindergarten and about the time everyone else was learning to read, the choir director at church was teaching us to sing from music, clap rhythms and such. I do appreciate the years of piano lessons my parents paid for when I was a kid but honestly I think the luckiest stroke was that choir director who knew how to teach 4, 5, 6 year olds how to read notes and rhythms. Actually learning to play an instrument when you can already read music (even on a very rudimentary level) is pretty straightforward.

Brent -

When I was in 4th or 5th grade, I played violin in the school orchestra. I wasn't very good and never had lessons, but I learned to read for that from the chart in the book. Luckily, my ear seemed to be good enough to quickly adjust so that my notes sounded on pitch. Then, in high school, I played trumpet in the marching band. Again, I never had lessons. My parents got a pawn shop trumpet and the teacher had me go in a closet in the band room with a trumpet book and just teach myself. I seemed to do well enough.

I taught myself guitar and it seemed normal to me to teach myself the notes on the fretboard and go from there. To me, it is more logic than mystery.

My musical interest is really not in reading music, but more in coming up with my own music. On guitar, I got into arranging tunes for solo guitar from a fakebook (lead sheet). For quite some time, I wrote these out in both TAB and standard notation, but that seems like too much work. I stopped doing that and got more interested in just playing the tune from the lead sheet on the fly.

For piano, that is really my interest. Being able to play from a lead sheet on the fly as well as creating my own music in a sort of jazzy new age style. I really don't know that formal lessons would go there.

What I like about Yoke Wong's fakebook course is that she takes a tune, shows several ways to approach it, and then leaves you to figure out how you want to play it. The only reading is the treble clef melody line and understanding how the chord symbols translate to the piano. Knowing music theory already, the concepts of how to spell chords and the inversions is pretty easy because the keyboard is so linear compared to the guitar.

You can see a pattern here - for the violin, trumpet, and guitar, I had to teach myself and then go into performing situations. I don't honestly know if I could "knuckle down" with a teacher after having been teaching myself for so long. The thing is that, with the violin, trumpet, and guitar, I did teach myself well enough to join in with other musicians successfully.

Tony