It used to be that I could and would play my review pieces at anytime, but as I am learning more pieces and the pieces are a tiny bit harder, it is better to get up earlier to play the review pieces because the review pieces involve just playing carefully, of course, and slowly, a known time, and a growing time period as my review list gets longer and longer. My new pieces will only be 1 or 2 pieces that get harder and longer - but is very much an unknown in terms of the number of hours or the number of days it will take to learn a new piece.

Please say what you mean when you refer to "review pieces." I don't know that term.

Is it a reference to pieces that you have already learned but continue to play fairly frequently to keep them fresh in memory? Or something else?

In his (very readable and informative) book, "Playing Piano for Pleasure: The Classic Guide to Improving Skills Through Practice and Discipline", Charles Cooke lays out a good plan for maintaining a repertoire of 20 or some pieces. It's worth a read if this is a goal of yours.

A while back, I agreed for my family that I would restrict my practice to 45 minutes a day. As part of cutting back, older repertoire has taken a back seat. But what I am finding is that pieces I did a while ago are easier for me to play from the music, even if my memory of the piece is completely lacking, than they were so all is not lost. Paying attention to my reading skills is not in vain!

For much harder pieces though ... not so much. Last night I pulled out Debussy Arabesque #1 which I got to a pretty good level last year. Couldn't even get through the first two measures. Ouch!

The book The Musician's Way suggests spending 20% of time on old pieces (review). Another person does it simply, allocating one day a week for review (1/7 = 14%). How a person spends that time is up to them. Some have a relatively small group of favorites memorized and want to keep them at a high level for impromptu performances. Some have a longer list of pieces that they play with the music in front of them and rotate them through over time.

I like the 20% allocation. The other percentages are 40% for learning new pieces, 20% for technique (scales, arpeggios, difficult passage work), 20% for musicianship (theory, sightreading practice, ear training). This feels like a balanced approach to being a well rounded musician. I use this as a general guide, not as any rule.

This is why I record my completed pieces and post them on You Tube. Although never perfect, I have them to enjoy as an accomplishment. I can then move forward and let some of them go.

ClsscLib, I have read your post, here:

Please say what you mean when you refer to "review pieces." I don't know that term.

Is it a reference to pieces that you have already learned but continue to play fairly frequently to keep them fresh in memory? Or something else?

sorry, I will be more careful in the future when describing something.

You are absolutely correct.

I am a beginner, learning from the John Thompson book, so every piece is a lesson, if you will, and it is important to know and review/play pieces I have learned everyday along with the new pieces which I learn over many days. You see, I started a year ago so everything I learn is my piano ability so I play everything all the time and I expect to play every piece I have ever learn no matter how many days, weeks or months it will take for the rest of my life or until I drop dead. I am 64 now! I love playing the piano. I play anything I can play all the time. I just love sitting on the piano bench playing the piano.

I expect to complete the 5 John Thompson books. I am half way book 1. And then at some point I will go through the royal conservatory stuff just as material but not performance and exams, just learning the interesting and challenging material the Royal conservatory has for piano.

"Quick Quote will quote the users text to the Quick Reply box below the thread."
-PianoWorld FAQ page

To expand on Polyphonist's post: Michael 99, if you would click the "Quick Quote" button at the bottom of the post you are replying to, and then type your reply, it would make it much much MUCH easier for the rest of us to read your replies, and be able to tell what was said by you and what was said by someone else.

Using "Quick Quote" will make it more likely that people will read your posts, because they will be easier to make sense of.

Polyphonist, I have read your post, here:

Originally Posted By: Michael_99
ClsscLib, I have read your post, here:

Please say what you mean when you refer to "review pieces." I don't know that term.

"Quick Quote will quote the users text to the Quick Reply box below the thread."
-PianoWorld FAQ page

_________________________
Regards,

Polyphonist


Yes.

But the text is highted with a dark background so it difficult for a old man like to read it. Secondly, I have memory problems, I am dyslexic so I can't remember stuff I HAVE just read so I have to refer to it all the time. Well, the quote button only shows a portion of it so I have to scroll down to try and read it. In a word(s), everybody that ever knew me or knows me suffers from headaches. I never ever get a headache. I never understand why. Then I realized I have to do things differently because I am dyslexic and to survive I have to do things in a way that works for my brain. The result is that the whole world gets a headache from seeing what I have to do.

So if you are getting a headache, please ignore me. I want you to say healthy without head issues. Thank you for your patience.

Also you should know that everything I post I have to proof read at least 10 times, because of spelling, typos, lots of double words like the the, in in, you name it. There is lots you don't know behind the scenes. I have to keep a double window open for Google to check spellings every minute or second. Not complaining, just saying. But don't kid yourself, I love life so much there aren't words to describe it. cheers.

Whatever works for you.

But everybody else on the forum is quoting...how do you read those?

Well, when I copy and paste, that part is quoted and seen is part of the post that the person quoted. It has never been an issue but if it was, I would slowly cut and paste and scroll and cut and paste, etc. until I had all of the quote if i need it to refer to it.

>>
But the text is highted with a dark background so it difficult for a old man like to read it. ...
>>

If a person doesn't like the grey quote box, an older way to block off quotes, is to use double greater than signs as above. (Press shift and period to get those symbols.)

Why can't you just copy all of it at once?

I have read your post here, PianoStudent,

To expand on Polyphonist's post: Michael 99, if you would click the "Quick Quote" button at the bottom of the post you are replying to, and then type your reply, it would make it much much MUCH easier for the rest of us to read your replies, and be able to tell what was said by you and what was said by someone else.

Using "Quick Quote" will make it more likely that people will read your posts, because they will be easier to make sense of.


The michael99 reply is here:

Perhaps this is what is missing. Thank you for your feedback. I will try to create clearer structure of my posts.

Thank you, Michael99. Putting a line across separating the quote from your reply might be even clearer: easier for the reader to find with a quick scan. Like this:

--------------------------------

What do you think?

awesome. sounds good.

aline _____________________________________________