http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnUW_cBMrFU

Neat idea, isn't it? For those who can't open the video: Frederic Chiu gave his students 2 days to learn a Scarlatti Sonata away from the piano; at the end of the second day, they were allowed to play it, for the first time, completely from memory. This forced them to study the score very carefully, in order to understand the music and its technical difficulties before attempting to play the notes on the piano.

I'd like to try this with the 1st movement of Beethoven's Sonata in A Major, Op. 2 No. 2 -- anybody want to join me?

The situation will be a little bit different, for a couple reasons: first, I've heard the piece already. But I've never played it, except for the first couple lines very briefly this afternoon, and I'm not very familiar with the piece.

Also, I think a bit more than 2 days would be more beneficial for me -- maybe a week instead. It need not be perfect, nor up to tempo at the first playing. The idea is not to have a perfect performance without any physical practice, because physical practice is important, but rather to simply be able to play it --- and to be able to play it not through muscle memory or thoughtless reading, but through active effort to play the notes that I know I want to play.

So, anybody want to join me? During this following week, we can discuss aspects of the score / learning process -- how are you approaching this challenge? What are you thinking about when you look at the score? How are you dealing with technical challenges, before taking it to the piano? At the end of the week, recordings and/or descriptions of the first playing would certainly be very interesting.

If you've already played this piece, and would like to try a different one, I'm all ears to how you are approaching your own selection! If you haven't already played this piece, it would be neat to have a group, large or small, working on the same challenge together.

Sam - I can't join you because I studied Op. 2, Nr. 2 last year, but I wanted to tell you that I think Frederic's exercise is fantastic - he's such a great teacher - and I think it's GREAT that you've decided to embark on this project.

It has always bothered me that you hear and read pianists extolling the value of studying the score away from the piano so many times and in so many places, but they never explain what exactly that means. I would love to see that "checklist" that Frederic uses with his class. In my opinion it is irresponsible for a teacher to say something like that and not explain in very concrete terms what "studying the score" means. They should provide their students with the tools to study their scores, and to guide them through the process. Kudos to Frederic for providing this kind of guidance.

If I were taking part in this challenge I would be doing a very detailed analysis of form, harmony, and melody. I actually do this regularly with all the pieces I learn to play as a first step in the learning process (quite detailed in form and harmony, less than I should with melodic development - will have to work on that), but always at the piano, and I have never gone as far as trying to memorize an entire piece before ever playing it. I do memorize my pieces immediately with the aid of my analysis. I find in-depth analysis to be invaluable in both speeding up the learning period enormously and making it far easier to memorize.

Good luck, Sam - I'm sure you will gain enormously by this process. Let us know how it goes.

i'll join you sam,

sounds like fun

Jerry - thanks for the encouragement! ZP, I'm glad you're joining in for the challenge!

I'm going to try to keep a journal throughout this week, to document my thoughts and progress. Day 1 is up now, check back for updates:

here

its a long piece, sure we can do it in a week?

Zac

My hats off to anyone who can do this unless they've got a photographic memory. I know I couldn't do it even if I spent two months. If I remember correctly the students in Chiu's class had a great deal of trouble with the much shorter Scarlatti Sonata.

I wonder if it's anything like playing chess blindfolded (which I can do to a certain extent). I also wonder whether the ability to hear a score without playing it plays a big role.

Absolutely LOVE your first journal entry, Sam - GREAT job!!!!! I see you come at this equipped with an excellent background in analysis. I think this is going to be a breeze for you! I'm bookmarking your journal - I'm going to learn a lot myself from your analysis.

I take composition lessons with a brilliant composer whose pet project is to find the melodic connection between movements of multi-movement pieces (including Bach's Preludes and Fugues). After you finish your analysis, you might find it interesting (and fun!) to look for such connections in this sonata.

Keep it coming, Sam!

Where are the journal entries?

See Sam's second post above

You're right -- it's 8 pages! It would be great if we could get through the whole movement, but even if we fell short and only got the exposition, or the exposition and development, I think it would still be a great achievement.

I have a question for those of you who are doing this. Do you "hear" the music in your head as you look at the score? If so, is it in the correct key?

I have an advantage in that regard because I have heard the piece before -- although I can't run through the piece in my mind with my eyes closed, I do recognize some passages when I see them on the paper. But I don't recognize all of it.

Certain patterns are relatively easy for me to "hear" -- scales, alberti bass, the left hand figure in the e minor section of the exposition. I tried "hearing" that last section in my mind, and I think I get something of a resemblance, by following the sequence, but I'm sure it's not exactly right. I often imagine something that is a vague resemblance to music, but it's more guided by things like rhythm and direction.

Whether it's in the right key or not, I honestly couldn't tell you.

I think Chiu purposely chose an obscure Scarlatti Sonata so no one would have heard it before.

You're probably right.

I'd guess he probably also asked them each for a list of the sonatas they'd already played, so he could be sure that he could pick one that would be new to all of them.

very scary, but ok.

I think that some who might be interested in embarking on a project such as this would be happier starting out with a shorter work, with the idea of progressing to a larger, more complex work such as a Beethonven Sonata at a later time.

Regards,

i was reading over the score today and could "hear" the music (i have never heard this piece before) but it cirtantly wouldn't be in the right key, its more of an interpretation that my brain makes of the music

that isn't a bad idea, mabye we could also do a scarlatti sonata

Zac

I participated, several years ago, in Chiu's "Deeper Piano Studies" program, and remember very well doing that with a Scarlatti sonata. It was an interesting process, part of which included notating the piece from memory to the best of our abilities (and part of which included making pasta – from scratch, natch – together with the other participants!). I'd participate with you on the Beethoven, but I'm already pretty familiar with the piece. Have fun, though!

While you study the sonata will you be thinking about fingering? Or let fingering take care of itself once you take the sonata to the keyboard?

Well, I'm thinking now that I might not be able to do the whole 1st movement! Maybe just the exposition or the exposition and development will be plenty!

I don't have photographic memory, but today I was able to write from memory the first 30 measures, including phrasing, articulation, and dynamics (not by reproducing some visual picture, but by trying to remember what is "happening" in the music). Well, I'll write about it in my next journal entry. What is tricky in this first section are the 3-part textures -- right now, I can write them easily one voice at a time, but when I am playing, of course, I will have to play all three at the same time! But I'm sure over the course of the week, it will become much more solidly stored in my memory.

As far as fingering goes, that's a hard part for me! I suppose my goal will just be to be able to play it, and then after next week I'll spend a lot more time on fingering... but I'll have to see how my progress goes this week in terms of memorizing the score. I *should* spend some time on pianistic issues since, after all, the goal is to play it on the piano!

That must have been an incredible experience! Do you feel that the Scarlatti exercise has helped you with other music? Do you remember music better/longer?

I'd like to be able to say "a resounding YES!!" But – hopefully without sounding like too much of an a-hole – it didn't really appreciably add to my understanding of how to go about learning music. Some of the exercises were new to me (like trying to write the piece down from memory), but I don't feel like it made *that* much of an impression or change. It may have been useful subconsciously; who knows? Anyway, I haven't done it with any other pieces since then. It was a fun week, though, and I did learn a few things about how my own process works. That, in itself, was definitely valuable.

Well, gee, thanks for spoiling my fun.

I honestly don't know what I will gain from this, but there is only one way to find out -- and it will certainly be a challenge!

By the way, it's great to see you back here again. Haven't seen you around in quite a while.

Hello!
I'm very happy to see a thread like this one on this topic! Great initiative, and I wish you all good luck.

I'm happy to chime in and give some pointers. It will take me a little while to read all the posts and formulate some thoughts, but my initial reaction is - try a short piece, even a VERY short piece! And take your time learning it before you sit down and play it. The longer you wait, the stronger the results (hint - the real results come AFTER you play it the first time, no matter how bad it comes out!)

More later! Keep the thread going!
Frederic

Hi Frederic,

I'm so glad you saw this thread -- I was hoping you would! Thanks for posting here, and for sharing your videos on youtube. Since I've already spent some time on the Beethoven, I think I would like to continue at least on the exposition, before moving on to the rest of the movement and/or something else (that is shorter). I look forward to reading any pointers that you might offer!

Yes, exactly; the best way to find out is to do the experiment! I especially liked how Frederic likened playing the piece on the piano for the first time (after spending a few days *away* from the piano, getting to know the score) to meeting a person you'd been hearing about or reading about in the flesh for the first time.

And thank you - it's good to be back again!

And Frederic - boy, am I glad I had a good time with you that week instead of not, then coming here to write a scathing screed and then seeing your post a few lines down! That would definitely have been a *gulp!* kind of a moment!! Anyway, glad to know you're still doing it and people are still benefiting. (BTW, I really dig your Lt. Kije transcription! Is the score available?)

Just a few observations pj,

Beethoven’s Opus 2/2 was written in 1793 (aged 23)
shortly after arriving in Vienna ... when taking lessons with Haydn ... the sonata is dedicated to Papa H ... the Allegro vivace stays boringly in the key of A major with only 3 accidentals to edge the first MT 20 measures.

The fledgling composer over-reaches himself in the opening two measures ( IMHO a novice attempt to provide some zing) ... with a crude combination of note durations (8th, 4th spiked with racy 32nds ) which he would later dump ...
(a case of getting Haydn and Mozart out of his system).

Written in A Major, the note patterns in m1 and m3 are identical in profile (a move from the dominant to the tonic)... m5-m8 descend via degrees 2.7.5.4 profile ... 8th notes to m9-10
are a scalar ladder (1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8) off the keynote datum .

Good luck with the memory experiment ... hope the above structural analysis might help with making the bits stick in the old noggin.

Pianistcomposer - might it be that as a composer you have already developed a skill at recognizing form, harmony, and melodic development to a point that it is natural for you without having to "force yourself" to sit down and dedicate time and concentration to analyze the pieces you learn to play?

I know that my experience, as a pianist who is only learning to compose and improvise in recent years (after more than four decades of playing), is that it was all too easy to play well into the advanced level without ever having any understanding whatsoever (or extremely limited understanding) of these elements in pieces I actually learned to play. That made learning and memorizing pieces a ridiculously long, drawn out and difficult process (what probably passes for normal for many similarly trained pianists). Personally, I find doing thorough analysis on pieces I learn to play to be indespensible - invaluable for the practical reasons of speeding up the learning and memorization enormously (and making memorization much more solid), and having a sense that I really understand what makes the music I'm playing tick. It's hard to put a value on that last point, or to explain it's value, because a pianist doesn't need to understand the music he plays, but I put a huge value on it.

A few comments after perusing the thread and your journal (great work!):
1) the idea is not to learn it completely and perfectly without practicing it. Some people can do this, but they have some special gifts (photographic memory, perfect pitch, etc). For us "normal" folk, it is a chance to push the mental aspect of learning to our limits, and then to see how far that is, which gives us insight into how much of a mental pianist we are - or perhaps we are more physical or emotional. All three are crucial to develop, but you can't start developing until you know where you are to begin with. More on that as we go.
2) Writing on manuscript paper is VERY important. And not necessarily from memory, even though that is a good exercise. But it is only one exercise of many. Copying rote from the score is also very instructive. One spends much more time with each individual note by copying than by just looking with the eye. And details pop out when you have to copy every single detail.
3) There are ways to approach analysis that help you break down the task. My primary approach is to layer - go through your selected work or passage through different filters. Filter out, for example, everything except dynamics. What details are left? Go through the entire passage looking ONLY for dynamics, list them, group them, analyze the results, make some general and pointed observations about that particular layer. Then move on to another layer, say tempo. There are dozens of layers. Each of them will add to your general knowledge and deconstruction. Then putting them together will produce a much fuller picture.

I suggest that one of you look at this exposition of the first movement with a dynamic filter on, and post your results here.

Sam, great journal by the way. Also a great exercise. Part of the work I do with groups relies on the fact that everyone has to articulate what they are thinking, with the help of the other participants. We always think we know and understand more than we actually do. The requirement to articulate into words makes us aware of where we are truly clear about an idea and where we just have an impression that we "get it", but actually haven't really thought it through. Thinking is clarified by speaking, and speaking is clarified by writing. Writing is then further clarified by publishing!!

This doesn't mean that thinking that cannot be articulated is worthless. On the contrary! Mendelssohn expressed an idea that music is not describable with words not because it is to imprecise, but because it is too precise! The act of attempting to articulate only makes it clear what you are dealing with.

Likewise, this whole learning exercise is not to suggest that all music should be learnable totally away from the piano. The act of trying to do this will make clear to you what part of the work is mental, and in consequence, what part of the work that is left will be either physical or emotional. There are ways to split those two apart, which we will leave for another thread!

Good luck!
Frederic

Sam - thanks so much for this thread. I am, as you know, no where near a level of piano playing for this particular piece, but the whole idea here is great (and thank you, Frederic, too). Sam always has creative ideas and views (see the composer/pianist thread stickied at the top). I'll be following this with great interest.

I think I'll try it on something my own size - Baby Beluga from my Raffi book might be in my possibilities!

Cathy

Frederic - could you share the list of "filters" you had listed on the presentation easel in the video? I love the idea of examining a piece on the level of dynamics. I think the whole approach of examining a piece on different levels is terrific - forces you to be "hyper-aware" of things that would otherwise escape notice. Thanks for contributing to this thread.

For those of you interested in trying this experiment, I can assure you with a few comments:
1) all of the participants in my DPS workshops have done this exercise better than they initially thought they would do.
2) many participants ended up feeling a lot more confident in their abilities by the end of 2-3 days, even if their initial "performance" was not up to what they thought they should have done
3) all of you, I'm sure, will be able to learn something more difficult than you give yourself credit for!

Here is an initial list of filters:
dynamics, tempo, articulation, harmony, melodic transformation, rhythm, tessiture, pedal, fingering, etc. etc. The list is endless, and depends only on your own ideas.

One important thing to remember about doing a filter is that absence of information is actually a piece of information. The fact that there is one tempo marking in the Beethoven Opus 2 #2 mvt I - Allegro Vivace - and two modifications - rallentando - is important, but the absence of any other marking is significant as well. This ABSENCE of tempo markings is something we miss when we are looking at the score without filters. We are constantly drawn to the PRESENCE of so much other information in other areas.

Good luck!
Frederic

One of my first impressions when I began looking at this piece was how simple the harmony is for most of the exposition. The first 30 measures are basically just I-V-I-V, etc, with a few applied chords as well. The following transition is more contrapuntal rather than harmonic, with each "run" beginning on a different note of the tonic triad. The last 30 measures or so of the exposition, again, is very simple harmonically.

But in between is a secondary theme that is very chromatic, basically a big sequence, and as the passage moves on, the harmony begins to change faster and faster. Compared to the rest of the exposition, this middle theme is so action-packed, not only harmonically, but also rhythmically, with shorter slurs, and the feel of a quicker tempo. While the rest of the exposition is full of big runs and arpeggios, covering large ranges in short time spans, this middle section is very narrow, gradually moving higher and higher so that the overall range is large, but each measure itself is packed narrowly. While the other sections have a wide mix of rhythmic values, the left hand of the middle section is constant sixteenth notes, creating a constant, consistant pulse. It is even marked "espressivo", which is the only expression marking in the entire movement

I never thought about that, until reading Frederic's last post about filters, and about the absence of information being just as important as the presence of information -- the absence of complex harmonies, for example, in the beginning maybe sets up the middle section for a lot of drama.

It would appear that the object of the exercise is ultimately to be able to play the Beethoven 2/2 Sonata from memory.

All the described "filters" are an attempt to focus ... but having done so ... what exactly goes into memory?
1. An image of the score? Or
2. A list of note pitch and duration?

It is pointed out that the Chiu example of the Scarlatti would have been comparatively easy because of the largely single-note outline ...(limitations of the keyboard instruments of the Baroque period ... harpsichord/clavichord).

Beethoven’s pianoforte chords (even the novice 2/2) make for much more complex note patterns ... which baulk memorisation without dedicated practice and the support of aural and muscle memory.

We could be flying a lead kite.

Compare the opening measures of the Beethoven and Scarlatti.

web page

I'd like to give a Scarlatti a try.

When you've finished the Beethoven, would anyone care for a second round with a Scarlatti Sonata? I'll ask someone more knowledgeable of Scarlatti to proffer a sonata of reasonable length.

The purpose of this exercise is NOT to try to learn a piece from only studying the score. The real purpose of it is to clarify for each person the role of the body, the mind and the heart in learning the piece. These three functions are often confused, and their development is interrelated to the point of being indistinguishable.
There are jobs that are best done by each of these individually. Breathing, for example, is best done by the physical reflexes, even though we can consciously control our breathing when we need to. However, in most times, we fall back on our body to take care of that. Multi-tasking and analysis is best done by the mind, even though the body can do some multi-tasking, and our emotions can process information in a holistic way very quickly. But this is usually and most efficiently done by the mind.
The emotions are the best way for us to motivate ourselves, even though we can push ourselves forward against obstacles with mental arguments, and even set up physical actions that follow through to a certain goal without our constant involvement, desire or consciousness.

The role of this exercise is to help distinguish between these three approaches. And to do that, it is most effective to first separate the mind from the rest, as the mind generally sits between the heart and the body (but not completely, and not always). Once the mind's role is clear, the rest is much more easily seen for what it is, body or heart.

As I mentioned before, this exercise is not meant to replace practicing! It is meant to clarify what kind of practicing needs to be done - physical, mental or emotional. The same "mistake" coming out of the piano can come from any of these three sources, or a combination. The trap we fall into is to believe that, because the "mistake" happened while we were playing the piano, that we must correct it or practice it at the piano.

When I have time, I'll go more fully into how a mistake can sound the same but come from different sources. If you can get yourself to believe that, then you can start believing in the effectiveness of doing (a large) part of your practicing away from the instrument.

Frederic

i'll go for a second round, you only end up getting more back if you do it again...

Message to Pianocomposer concerning the Lt Kije score. I have copies for sale. Official price is $15+$3 S&H. Send me an email and your address and pay at paypal.com to contact@fredericchiu.com. Then I'll get to see who you are!! I can't figure it out from you screen name and profile!!

Look forward to hearing from you.
Frederic

How is it going for you with the Beethoven, zp?

it's actuall going better than i'd expected, i've remembered quite a lot, i have never heard the piece before so it should be interesting when i play it for the first time, i have written the piece out from what i could remember a couple of time and its pretty close.

Zac

Great! Have you gotten through the whole movement, or just a part of it? I've looked closely at half of the exposition, so I think the exposition itself will be plenty for me to work on this week!

I'm curious about how easy/difficult it will be, after studying the exposition in this manner, to then study (and later play) the recapitulation. Would we be able to quickly absorb the recap, having to learn only the notable changes, or will it be an entirely new process of learning individual notes in the new key? In other words, it will test whether we learned the exposition as a set of absolute notes, or as a set of positions within a key. I would think that the latter might be far more valuable, although much more difficult because it requires another layer of translation when we head over to the keyboard!

i'm pretty confident up to about bar 131, just after the start theme has been played in the different key. i think we would be able to quickly learn the recap in either way of looking at the piece, but as you said learning the piece as a set of positions within a key would be very valuable.

When i learn a piece normally, i do not find it hard to find patterns within the music, which makes absorbing recaps ect. rather easy, but mabye my mind can just work fast! who knows...

Zac

Publicity-seeking Chiu makes it clear that his "sans-piano focus" is NOT to memorize keyboard music ... his snake-oil philosophy prefers to grapple with illusionary concepts like "to clarify the role of the body, the mind and the heart in learning the piece".

But back at the ranch ... in spite of the Guru's apparent fizzle ... pj hangs in there with details of the Beethoven Sonata 2/2 .

Great stuff ... an in depth analysis will enhance an insight into the playing ... however the process needs to be systematic ... measure by measure.

To stay on topic, I would take issue with the "snake-oil" characterization! A little harh...

Perhaps an example of how practicing away from the piano can be effective - and even more efficient - would help.

I mentioned before how the same mistake can be sourced to the body, the mind, or the heart, even though it all comes out in the end by being played incorrectly at the piano. We think therefore that we need to practice "at the piano."

Example: Let's say that I'm going for a big, fast jump in the RH, up to a high G. And I miss it, and hit an A instead.

If it was a body issue, I would want to practice that jump, over and over, to train my hands to know the exact distance, to train my fingers to be strong and stable while leaving the lower note and arriving solidly on the G.
What if the reason I missed the G was I wasn't sure exactly what note I was look for up there. What if it was because I knew how it should sound, but, because I don't have instinctive, instant perfect pitch, I didn't translate that sound into "G", I just knew it was "that note up there". My hands, my kinetic memory, could take me up to the right note, and I could tell by sound if I actually hit the correct not or not, but I was unable to say consciously that it was a G, and not, say, an A. What if, in another part of the piece, there was actually a place where I made a similar leap but to an A, in order to make a kind of transition of some kind to another passage, another harmonic center. What if I had actually practiced leaping to an A as well, and that my body was fully prepared and trained to jump to either an A OR a G. What if I made the mistake only because I wasn't telling myself that I should be jumping to a G. I hope it is clear that repeating the leap to G by practicing over and over is not going to help me why I didn't think "G" in that spot, or why I thought "A" instead of "G".
The best way to solve this version of the A/G mistake is to study the score, and clarify for myself "why did I play A?" What made me think A at that moment, instead of G? I know G is right, so repeating that is not going to help very much. I need to know why I was thinking "A".
Not only does physical practice repeating the jump to G NOT help this issue, it actually distracts me from the thinking I need to do to clarify my thoughts. Unless I don't know how it should sound (in which case, I need to play it correctly a number of times to ingrain the sound into my memory), the sound actually takes my thoughts away from the structure underneath. I need to think about it first, without noise distracting me, without the constant forward-pushing motion of physical music forcing me to think linearly. Ironically, once this is clarified, then perhaps the physical part of playing it will just happen. It may turn out that I'm physically capable of playing whatever I want to play, whether it be A or G. My body was just getting a mixed-up signal (or no signal at all) from my mind.

The same A/G mistake could be caused by the heart. Perhaps this passage has troubled me in the past, and I have built up a little obsession with the spot. Perhaps I've "practiced" it alot, and it works fine in the practice room. I'm excited with the idea that the next time I play it, I'll be playing it correctly! During the next concert, I get to that spot, and I'm much more excited than I am usually in the practice room. I put more energy into my actions, therefore, and my leap overshoots its target. I hit an A instead of a G.

To work on this at the piano, later, in my practice room, when I'm calmer, less pumped up, is to reinforce a situation that will not help me much in a concert. The goal of emotional practice it to 1) be able to recreate to an extent the emotional intensity of a concert during practice, to see what I do in that situation, and 2) to remember as much detail during an actual performance in order to use it as one of my rare 'in the field' data points. In time, doing these two things will bring me to a higher intensity level outside of a concert, and to a cooler, more controlled place during a concert, and meeting somehow in the middle as a general state of mind.
By understanding the dynamics of my desires and fears, and how they play with my impressions of what my audience is expecting from me, I will see that there are a number of different situations that would cause me to "overgive" or "undergive" at a particular moment. These will reflect my general strengths and fears, in situations where I am under stress, where I am in the spotlight, where I am dealing with unknown situations, etc. I'm talking about situations outside of the actual performance, and outside of even musical things. How one deals with making a speech at a family dinner will be related to how one deals with being on stage alone as a pianist.
Practicing this means a kind of psychoanalysis, which means digging deep into the details of the situation, being honest with myself, and being extremely observant of myself. I won't go into it here, but there are many tools that pianists specifically can use. We are lucky because we have a number of "data points" to use, since we purposely put ourselves in stressful situations often, much more than most, normal people! And we have a professional attitude towards correcting our mistakes which gives us clarity of mind.

I hope it will be clear also how "practicing" at the piano in a situation like this will not only not be effective, but could actually be a setup for an even worse emotionally sourced "mistake". In fact, in the example I gave, it is BECAUSE I practiced so much, invested so much emotionally into playing it correctly, that I "overgave" during the concert and overshot the target.
Studying the score at a point like that will also tend NOT to help, and could even hurt, for the same reasons. Emotional practicing will not necessarily be as precise as physical or mental practicing - it can't be, because emotions are faster than thoughts and physical actions, and we can only observe them and set up environments that we hope will encourage the positive, constructive emotions and deter the "negative" emotions. In general, the close observation and understanding through analysis will bring us to a place of being totally in control and yet totally outside of the act of playing, which allows us to watch, guide, live and enhance our playing.

Frederic

I'm sorry, btb, but I find this statement rather close minded. You may not find Frederic's insights into the physical vs. mental aspects of playing to be valid or helpful, but I do.

Just FYI, "Publicity-seeking Chiu" was alerted to this thread by me. He was essentially invited to participate. He has shared details of his philosophy and insights into the learning process generously and freely. Since the thread refers directly to a video about his workshop, there is no way he could have shared his thoughts without reference to it, and I don't see any overt "selling" in anything he's written.

Frederic - thank you for sharing your insights into aspects of learning, practicing, and playing that I've not seen anywhere else.

Sorry chaps for the vent ... but snake-oil philosophies get my wick.

When Tiger Woods smashed his 300 yard drive down the 7th fairway to win the US Golf Open ... there was no doubt about the outcome ... He was there to entertain the crowds with his best.

No clash of "mind, body and heart" ... just razor-sharp reflexes to grab the 2008 Cup (his 14th Major).

Philosophising Chiu likes to gently dither ... but then everybody to their own.

PS Woods stepped-out the course in preparation ... and marked all the "Bogeys" ... but once on the course, Tiger pinned back his ears and hit the jackpot.

Likewise pianists should reverse any timidity in performance and go for broke ... WHO CARES what anybody else thinks!!

Hey btb,
I don't disagree with you, and in fact, I agree with you! When the moment comes - on stage, on the course - it's all performance.
Have you seen the Tiger Woods Accenture ads? Their whole point is that before any physical activity takes place, there's a whole bunch of stuff that has to happen. That's not snake-oil.
I'm all for reversing timidity in performance and going for broke. But you don't just do that by saying it, but by practicing it. Go tell a shy person to get over their shyness by "putting yourself out there" just doesn't work!

If what I'm pushing is snake-oil, then it sounds like you are touting elbow grease. Both are needed.

Frederic

I'd like to give a Scarlatti - or a Bach suite movement, etc. - a try as well.

I've read through the Beethoven sonatas so many times that I wonder if some preconceptions would creep into this exercise.

It's a great idea. Thanks PJ for bringing it up, and thanks Frederic for joining us. What a treat.

Phlebas,
In my opinion, one of the true benefits of doing this exercise (at least once, in order to get the full effect) is to learn a piece that you've never heard before. That's where the clash between what your mind concocts and what is actual sound in reality will be the greatest, and therefore reveal the most clearly where the divide is.
I would be very happy to participate in a thread, once this one is done, where we all (myself included!) a piece that none of us know.

Frederic

Frederic, thanks again for taking the time to share all of your great advice with us! It's a lot to digest, so I hope you don't mind the lack of written response -- but it's got me thinking.

Tomorrow's the day to try playing Beethoven -- can't wait! I look forward to trying this with a Scarlatti sonata, too.

I must be crazy with my perpetual lack of time, but heck, I think my last composition lesson for the year is tomorrow, and how can I resist such an opportunity. Count me in!

Thank you for the clarification.
I'd like to participate in that thread.

Sam,
While you play, keep a close observation on your emotional state. The fact that you have a mental comfort with the piece means that you will be less distracted by that while you play. Your physical and emotional senses should be heightened, and this will give you a greater experience. Not necessarily a better experience, but a more extreme experience!
It will be one of the few times in your experience as a pianist that you will get this, I'm betting.

Looking forward to hearing about it!

Frederic

Wow, that didn't go at all how I expected it would go!

I expected that I would play very slowly, and maybe with a little bit of extra rubato, but that I would get through the whole exposition with no big mistakes.

Well, I didn't get all the way through the exposition.

I got through most of it, but I found that I was concentrating so much on the physical playing of it, that sometimes I simply couldn't remember what I had been able to write down so easily during the week. The keyboard looks so much different than staff paper -- so I forgot things like what octave I was supposed to be playing in (especially in the transition, and also at the end of the secondary area I found myself playing much higher on the keyboard than I should have been, probably because I was thinking about the contrast of the higher notes and the lower runs), and as a result of focusing so much on getting the right notes, I forgot all of the accents and phrasing, etc. I had also grouped notes together in my mind, that looked close together on paper (like 6ths), but then seemed much farther apart on the keyboard -- theoretically, it was the same, but the visual image that I had associated with the passage by writing it down over and over again was very different than the visual image of playing it on the keyboard.

So after I tried it from memory, I put up the book and played it a few times from the score. It did not feel like I had never played it before -- unlike usual sight-reading, I already knew where everything was, and I wasn't struggling to read notes... it was more recognition of things that I already knew, as a reminder while I was trying to figure out things like fingering, motions, etc. So it was much more comfortable than I would have thought, and in terms of understanding it felt as though I'd played it for a long time, even though I'd never played it before. Of course it also didn't physically feel like I'd been practicing it for a week, either, because although I'd been studying the score as a score, I hadn't been studying it as a piano score, and hadn't done any work away from the piano on things like fingering, and what hand would take which notes during certain passages, etc. So I could get all of the right notes, but it wasn't smooth all the time, and I was still focusing on getting the notes instead of phrasing, etc.

It was somewhat enlightening in a few other ways to, in terms of the "mental" vs. "physical" vs. "emotional" components that Frederic was talking about. I considered myself a very mental pianist, so it was a little bit of a disappointment that I couldn't remember as well as I'd hoped while I was trying to play from memory. On the other hand, I've always known that I'm weaker on technique, so it doesn't surprise me that the act of playing took over my focus at the expense of the theoretical memory. But at the same time, when I put the score up, I *was* surprised how relatively comfortable I felt playing it, physically. As for the emotional component, it was completely missing, because I was putting so much of my focus on the mental and physical.

That tells me something important. The first time, I was trying to do two tasks at once, to remember the music and to play it at the same time, and so the playing part took over my focus at the expense of the other. But when I eliminated one of the tasks -- that of remembering the notes -- by playing from the score, my playing greatly improved, and I still felt the whole time that I knew theoretically what was going on. So it suggests to me that if I were to work on technique to the point that it wouldn't so powerfully overwhelm my thinking, then in such an exercise as this, I would be much more able to play from memory (and from the score) the first time.

Overall, a great experience, full of surprises -- thanks Frederic!

Here's a link to Zac's thread about Scarlatti:

http://www.pianoworld.com/ubb/ubb/ultimatebb.php?/topic/2/18157.html

This may (or may not) be a related exercise/challenge, but what about playing (without previous trial) a non-piano piece that one just happens to know backwards and forwards (all the harmonic progressions, all the main lines, textures, etc.)?

I've done this a few times years ago. One time was during a rehearsal of one of my pieces. One of my violinist performers starting playing the solo part of Mozart's Fifth Violin Concerto. I decided there and then to join in and play the orchestral part, and we got as far as the end of the solo exposition. The impromptu performance was great, great fun.

Another time was when I was alone, practicing, and simply decided that I wanted to attempt to play the first movement of Beethoven's First Symphony. I was able to play the entire movement quite well, pausing briefly two or so times when the textures got a little complicated.

I don't know, maybe this isn't such a useful thing to do after all, but I for one enjoy attempting such things!

Or, on the other hand, perhaps if I were to improve my musical memory / understanding to the point that I could focus 99% on technique while I'm playing, then I would be much more able to play from memory the first time.

Both need work, certainly, but I think I am better at this point at the mental than the physical.

mine didn't go all to wel either, quite like what sam explained, i was just concerntrating on playing the notes rather than what it sounded like

Zac

Great job to you both! Sam, your observations are very astute and deep. If I may make a few comments on them, I think it will give you even more to ponder and take away from your experiment.

First, I think you are quite aware of the separation of body, mind and heart through this experiment, not just conceptually but actually how it feels to do something physically, something mentally and something emotionally. That is one of the great benefits of doing this exercise to the fullest extent. We tend to confuse these three things, as they can all influence each other, and DO in daily life.

One thing which I did not bring up, but which will be useful in the future is the importance of mental imagery, not just of the score, but especially of the keyboard and you physical posture. Mental "imagery" of the sound is important too. These are things to meditate on, without involving any physical motion (playing in the air, or on a table, etc), or any sounding out (humming, whistling, etc). It is important to keep it a purely mental exercise.
If you use this imagery to study your mind's expectations for the body, then I can assure you that the reactions of the heart to the music will be much more obvious to you. Next time...!

So, what you see when you finally start to play is
1) the mental is not sufficient by itself to learn a piece that is even slightly complex.
2) what you imagined is more or less different than what actually happens.

This gap between what you imagined and what you do in reality is what "causes" your mistakes. If you imagine that something is easy to do, your mind will send "easy" signals to the body. If it turns out that the body needs more guidance, you (your combined "you") will not know what to do, who to listen to. Do you follow your mind's orders or do you follow what the body wants to do naturally? That clash needs to be resolved - either by forcing one or the other to be dominant, or by figuring out how they will interact.

I hope this is clear, because it is one of the most important points.
Mistakes come from the body wanting to do something one way - which is the easiest, most efficient for the body -, the mind wanting to do it one way, most efficiently for the mind, and the heart wanting to do it its own way, most efficiently for the heart.
There are three directives being sent to "you", and if they coincide, great! "You" do it. If they clash, and "you" haven't figured out who is more important, or how you're going to handle that situation, "you" could possibly make a mistake. Body wants to turn left, heart wants to turn right, "you" go straight and run into a tree.

By doing this exercise, you get to see fully what your mind is asking "you" to do. What is easy for the mind? What is hard for the mind? What details did you skip over in the score but which pop out in the playing. and vice versa.

So, to sum up, don't focus on what you played wrong as a negative thing, but rather, try to remember what you played wrong as a starting point to understanding WHY mind asked you to do the things you did (Sam, you've already done this quite well - continue!). The mistakes are your roadsigns, your markers. We can go into a completely deep discussion about their importance and how to practice looking for the (mostly an emotional practicing skill), but that will be for another time, another place...

Frederic

Frederic - in re-reading the comments you've made here, I was struck by what you said about recognizing that mistakes you make in performance that are caused by the anxiety of performing in public cannot be fixed by more repetitive practice in the practice room. That's actually comforting to me because it means that if you flub a passage in performance it doesn't necessarily mean that you've practiced it all wrong or not enough. My immediate response to these experiences is to always conclude that even if the flub is caused by anxiety, the real cause is that I haven't practiced it sufficiently or properly, and the solution is to go back to the practice room and practice it until it is learned well enough that it is somehow anxiety-proof. What you are saying is that that is never going to work because it is not dealing with the cause - the anxiety itself! I get that and it makes a lot of sense. But what I don't quite understand is what exactly the prescription is for this problem. It seems to me that the ONLY solution is to repeat the experience of playing under pressure (in public performance) and tune into your emotions during the performance and practice either playing the passage with the anxious emotions, or, I guess, try to practice controlling the emotion. What you have written, though, seems to suggest that one can practice playing with anxiety in the practice room. Can you clarify that?

Hi Jerry,
Think of performances as baking experiments, where you have the heat on high enough for ingredients to transform and combine. There will be problems that only become evident during the baking, which you will try to avoid through observation, analysis and imagination. You try to observe what really happened leading up to the baking and then observe what happened during and after the baking.
You analyze those observations and make some constructive, intelligent guesses as to the causes and effects.
You then use your imagination to come up with another way to put ingredients together for a new experiment.

In music/performance terms, you observe how you've practiced leading up to the performance, and observe how you perform - in all areas or body, mind and heart.
You try to analyze the causes and effects of what happened during the performance.
You then imagine what you can do differently so that you will have different results during the next performance.

The emotional "control" we are looking for is not a throttling of the emotions that are involved in performing. You need emotions - these are the source of energy and engagement. But we need to enter into the performance act with a sense of observation, rather than willful control. Remember, emotions are faster than thoughts. They can be influenced only by setting up situations and letting the emotions happen. By letting the experiment happen, the emotions will be what they will be. By trying to control them, you only add a layer of emotion to your emotional reactions, which complicates matters by exacerbating the effects of negative emotions while masking your true emotional reactions.

You can observe yourself in a more emotional state during practice and get a clearer sense of what might happen in a concert. You do this by creating a true sense of engagement and energy. For those of you who did the learning without practicing exercise, you will have noticed that your emotional state was more excited and nervous than usual. It is possible to create a sense of freshness and discovery every time you sit at the piano. "Practicing" less (physical practice, that is) helps keep the physical act of playing fresher, more novel, more direct. It helps keep our emotional reactions to the pieces we are playing refreshed. Thinking about music, especially about music you love and which you are excited to learn and play, makes you want to hear it more, play it more.

So, on the one hand, you increase the emotional engagement during practicing. On the other, you let your emotions happen without controlling them during performance, and closely observe and remember them for analysis afterwards. Eventually, you should find that your two emotional states will approach each other, until you are in a place where you are emotionally very similar, whether you are playing or practicing.

Ideally, you also reach this kind of state for the body and for the mind, through the same kind of process. You practice, then perform with observation. You eventually find your physical state to be the same before and during a concert.
You practice mentally, and you observe your mental thoughts during a performance. You then find yourself more and more in equilibrium, regardless of where you are and what you are doing.

These two states will constantly be pulling away from each other, and it is our job to know that and to constantly work towards keeping them connected.

I'm sure btb is banging his head on a wall with all this snake-oil talk! But this is really how I work, and I think it works for everyone, whether it is acknowledged or not. It just works better for those who acknowledge it!

Frederic

Interesting, Frederic. So, if I understand you correctly, you're suggesting that when I practice I should be trying to tune into 3 levels of sensation - my emotional state, my mental state, and how it feels physically to play. I'm thinking this may be a lot of energy to spend from beginning to end of a piece, and perhaps you are referring mainly to particularly challenging passages. Then, when I perform, I tune into those same things, and rather than trying to control them, I simply observe and compare them to what it felt like when practicing.

Are you suggesting that simply by becoming more in touch with these aspects while practicing a difficult passage I am more likely to be able to reproduce them in performance? That's a really interesting concept, Frederic. Normally when I practice a difficult passage, I don't think of my emotional state at all - I concentrate mainly on the physical aspect of playing it and the sound I am producing. This is really interesting.

My question is, then, while you are performing and you feel yourself "out of control," say, are you suggesting that the very act of tuning into how it feels will over time help you match the way it feels in practice without making a conscious effort to do so i.e. without having to actively reign in whatever is going wrong during performance? In other words, when we perform we think only of reproducing the physical movements, sound, and emotional content of the music, but we don't think of reproducing our own emotional and mental state we had while practicing, and even the physical movements may go on some kind of foreign auto-pilot. Very interesting... Have I understood you correctly, Frederic?

Sounds like the snake-oil Danny Kaye was selling in "The Inspector General" ... great spoof.

An inability to sight-read off-the-cuff has resulted in the snake-oil chappie resorting to a mind, body, heart approach ... which works for him.

So far we've hit Scarlatti Sonata I and the dull Beethoven 2-2 ... both of which are highly scalar ... but merely an undistinguished reminder of the distant past ... with resultant lack of emotion ... Scarlatti got born too early (Baroque Era) while Beethoven at 22, was an inarticulate beginner, who had just moved to Vienna ... it took opus nos. 7 and 10 to reach the LB magic of 13 (Pathetique).

But back at the snake-oil ranch ... emotional rapture dies when the score is devoid of quality note patterns ... to spark the marvel of aesthetic balance,

Wonder what dedicatee Haydn thought of the immature 2-2 work ... Beethoven later distanced himself from once having a few lessons with Papa.

Hi btb,
I'm not sure if you were referring to me as having "an inability to sight-read off-the-cuff", but this is certainly not the reason I resort to a mind/body/heart approach.
In fact, I'm a very good sight-reader. Too good, in fact! The connection between what I see and what my body does is so quick, it actually bypasses my conscious mind, and I'm left having played the work very well, but with very little memory of what I played and little emotional reaction to it as well.
By keeping myself away from what is easy (sight-reading), I've forced myself to enhance the other, weaker aspects of my piano-playing.

Approaching the activity with body/mind/heart is a way to see where you are strong and where you are weak. And then to work on the weak!

For Jerry, you are really taking it to deep place. I think that the difference between reproducing the personal emotional state and reproducing the musical emotional state is important.
Observing and remembering is the key to emotional work. Practicing is all about observing, remember and analyzing. In all areas of body/mind/heart. If you are open to looking in all three areas, and you recognize what you are looking for (which was the point of this exercise), then it will become quite natural after a while. Of course, to get there, it takes some practice!