This is one of the things that makes me hesitate when someone asks me to teach them piano. My experience has been that music theory is really easy to learn, it is just a system like any other. If you can pass a demanding college class, you can likely teach yourself music theory within a few weeks. And that is what I did, all the way up to functional harmony.

When teaching students, however, I'm always worried that I would be going too fast. Because my go-to is to teach the way I would have liked to have been taught, which would be something like the following:

  • Here's middle C. Observe the groupings of two and three black notes. You count up and down by letters to get you D, E, etc. (30 seconds)

  • Now, the black keys are flat/sharp corresponding to whether they are just above or just below a certain note. (30 seconds)

  • Observe the symmetry of the keyboard. Each octave is identical. See the pattern from C to C (2 black keys + 3 black keys). This repeats across the keyboard. (1 minute)

  • Now, each key is equidistant in terms of pitch from the next (semitone), black/white keys included. Each octave is twice the frequency of the previous octave. This is in terms of ratio (so the ratio would be the twelfth root of 2). Regardless, what you need to keep in mind is that starting on a key is the same as starting on a different key in terms of the ratios of the pitches, and that's why music when transposed sounds "the same". (1 minute)

  • Now, look at middle C. Here's a C major scale (demonstrates). As follows from the previous point, every other major scale would be the same sequence of distances of whole notes and half notes, by symmetry. We will start from C major for illustration purposes. Think of the notes as 1, 2 ... 7, 1. The basic diatonic chords are the first, third and fifth note starting from a given scale degree. (3 minutes)

  • A typical chord progression would be I IV V. From the previous point, you know what those chords mean. Melodies tend to use the notes in the chords, but the exact specifics of chord tones/non chord tones are better left for later. (4 minutes)

  • Try your best to memorize all of the major scales by next week.

So, that's a total of about 10 minutes of teaching.

It all seems perfectly logical in my mind. What would go wrong with this approach? I find that when I explain it to people, they can be too polite to let me know if it's all going over their head.

    Yeah but this is just some basics. It's not really all that much theory anyway.

    In a way music theory is like learning math or physics - you can read the textbook and understand it but you don't really know it until you can do all the exercises. Explaining it to someone is a good way to see if you get it.

    On the other hand, music theory is also very different from purely academic subjects because it's about music (duh). You should really be able to audiate all the concepts rather than merely knowing them intellectually. When I was learning functional harmony I was actually playing all the exercises at the piano and it made much more sense than only looking at a bunch of chord names and notation on paper.

    That's roughly the approach recommended by Seth Monahan, whose videos on music theory are great. Check them out if you haven't done so.

    I think your description, while touches on some music theory, is primarily the anatomy of the piano, with a music theory context.

    I personally think that when someone asks you to teach them piano, it may be good idea to gauge exactly how interested they are in piano. Gauging whether the way to just know what are the keys/notes, or if they wish to really immerse themselves in music-music, and whereby the piano is but an instrument for expressing and understanding such theory.

    I wouldn't be surprised, at that point, if 90% of people say, "no thanks!" 🙂

    At the end of the day, there's really no shortcuts.

      HeartKeys it may be good idea to gauge exactly how interested they are in piano

      I think it's safe to assume that those same 90% want nothing more than to sit down and learn an easy tune in their first lesson. Not listen to 30 minutes of theory and go home with a mountain of homework to draw the circle of fifth from memory ðŸĪŠ

      Just like our first driving lesson really... once the instructor mentions the most basic buttons (gas pedal, clutch, brake and steering wheel), I don't know of a single person who doesn't want to just DRIVE 😃 Ok, granted, before you are allowed to drive you need to pass a theory exam first, but I still think the principle stands 🙂

        I did teach it 18 years ago as a standalone subject to a student who wanted to learn it. I gave a summary in the thread "Has anyone here tried teaching?", with the three points of a triangle I pictured then. I won't write that out a 2nd time. 😉 If I were teaching piano, then theory would be introduced somewhat differently, because we have the context of music on hand directly.

        Learning goes best from concrete to abstract, and from familiar to unfamiliar. As a student learns their first pieces, it will be in the key of C major, or A minor, or D major. For D major, you'd point out the two sharps, have them play a scale from D to D, and observe the two sharped notes in there. Already your student has a passing acquaintance with major and minor keys, the sound of a scale, and key signatures. The prevalent chords are probably D, G, A(7) in D major - you might casually point out the 1st, 4th & 5th degree. They might practise playing these chords, maybe even exploring inversions. So now there are chords. Reading might be easier when you see that notes on adjacent lines skip a piano key; if on a line and space it's two side-by side piano keys. Voila: 3rds and 2nds - interval names.

        So now the student has been playing for a while, and has become familiar with some of these things in a rather casual way, in passing while working on music. You, as teacher, deliberately made sure that you made them "casually familiar" as part of your plan. Now you may want to actually introduce theory directly. You can refer to what you've been exploring as you go along. You'd want to be developing the concepts, though. It can't just be an "information dump", which your write-up sort of is. 😉

          For actually teaching theory, you'll want to be planning it out over a longer time period. You want to make sure that every basic concept is understood, because you'll be building on it. For that you have to have an idea of how to teach it, and be crystal clear that you actually understand the concept yourself rather than just being able to use it instinctively because of natural talent. How will you bring it across? What activities will the student do, to absorb the concept - and for how long? Learning happens through the doing of the student - not the doing of the teacher.

          It needs to be developed in stages. In my own opinion, theory should relate to actual music, rather than being an abstract subject that gets memorized secondary to music. I know that is not your goal, but often that's how it seems to happen.

          Looking at the points.

          - Here's middle C. Observe the groupings of two and three black notes. You count up and down by letters to get you D, E, etc. (30 seconds)

          Notice the black keys keep repeating in 2's and 3's. C is to the left of the two black keys. Play all the C's you can find on the piano. The one right in front of you is called middle C. The names of the white keys go in alphabetical order. (get student to name piano keys next to C etc.

          5 minutes, including the student's exploration on the keyboard, your checking that they got this. Are you adding notation to this?

          - Now, the black keys are flat/sharp corresponding to whether they are just above or just below a certain note. (30 seconds)

          I don't know if you want to add flats and sharps first time round. it might take the student a few days to "own" the names of the white keys. "above and below" can be confusing because they're actually to the left and right. "flat" and "sharp" is a new symbol and concept. A teaching method I learned which I like very much, for reading, is that the sharps and flats are like traffic signs. If your written note is C but there's a sharp beside it, (C#) you move to the right to the next key (a black one). This also takes care of B# (a white key).

          - Observe the symmetry of the keyboard. Each octave is identical. See the pattern from C to C (2 black keys + 3 black keys). This repeats across the keyboard. (1 minute)

          Now we have another new concept, "octave". You could actually leave this out, because we already have the symmetry of the 2 black + 3 white across the keyboard.

          - Now, each key is equidistant in terms of pitch from the next (semitone), black/white keys included. Each octave is twice the frequency of the previous octave. This is in terms of ratio (so the ratio would be the twelfth root of 2). Regardless, what you need to keep in mind is that starting on a key is the same as starting on a different key in terms of the ratios of the pitches, and that's why music when transposed sounds "the same". (1 minute)

          That's way, way, way too much! You might want to points out that from one piano key to the next piano key touching it is always a semitone. Problem: have they learned what a tone and semitone is? No, they haven't. When and how will you be teaching that? Also: I'm told that students tend to see the white keys and not quite see the black ones. "Two keys beside each other" will be seen as C and D. You may need to create awareness.

          In any case: at this point you've taught recognizing all the C's, D's, E's -- the fact of note names of the white keys - and the student has to master and own this. They may not be ready for the semitone part of it - depends on the student.

          This: "Each octave is twice the frequency of the previous octave. This is in terms of ratio (so the ratio would be the twelfth root of 2)." is problematic unless your student is in physics, acoustics. It's not necessary, esp. for someone beginning theory for the first time. The information is interesting and fascinating, but not for a first lesson, and not for everyone.

          - Now, look at middle C. Here's a C major scale (demonstrates). As follows from the previous point, every other major scale would be the same sequence of distances of whole notes and half notes, by symmetry. We will start from C major for illustration purposes. Think of the notes as 1, 2 ... 7, 1. The basic diatonic chords are the first, third and fifth note starting from a given scale degree. (3 minutes)

          Scales should be another lesson, on another day. In fact, maybe a month later, after the first things are absorbed.

          Ok, you introduced the C major scale. That scale is handy because it's white notes only, so it can be used as a reference for any other major scale. Assuming your student has grasped what tone and semitone are - and that the student is able to grasp that E,F and B,C are semitones, noting there are no black keys between them - the student can pick up the WWHWWWH interval pattern. Some or many students can also recognize the sound of a major scale. Therefore if they try to play D major and play F instead of F#, they'll hear it and correct it.

          Trying to play major scales in all keys merely by applying the interval sequence is way too hard. You might introduce the scales gradually along the circle of fifths. This would be done over time, not all in a first lesson.

          The basic diatonic chords are the first, third and fifth note starting from a given scale degree.

          You are saying that the root position chords are formed from (etc. - any of us understanding theory will know what you're trying to say). So our beginner, in the very first lesson, knows what "diatonic chord" means? Moreover, will that student be able to find I ii iii IV V vi viio of Db major, E major etc. at this point? S/he has just figured out how to find the piano key called A ..... some of the time! This is for later.

          - A typical chord progression would be I IV V. From the previous point, you know what those chords mean. Melodies tend to use the notes in the chords, but the exact specifics of chord tones/non chord tones are better left for later. (4 minutes)

          Our student, who is learning the first things of theory for the very first time, is not nearly ready for this. That is, per my suggestion in the earlier post, they would have become familiar somewhat with I IV V as you point them out in the music they've learned. The theory I studied started with I IV V and brought in ii, iii, vi, viio later - so it might be good (not the very first lesson) to see if they can find a IV, a V, and a I in a familiar major scale.

          "Melodies tend to use the notes in the chords" -- I guess you're saying "in the diatonic chords" - in which case, they also tend to use the notes of that given key. This one doesn't seem necessary. It seems more something you'd do in analysis when trying to figure out the chord, and have to sort chord from non-chord notes.

          - Try your best to memorize all of the major scales by next week.

          Why?

          ranjit Observe the symmetry of the keyboard. Each octave is identical. See the pattern from C to C (2 black keys + 3 black keys). This repeats across the keyboard.

          Here, I would have the student press the pedal, and improvise a "melody" using the same note all over the keyboard.

          ranjit Now, each key is equidistant in terms of pitch from the next (semitone), black/white keys included.

          From this point on, as someone who would like to learn to play the piano and came to you for her very first lesson, you would have lost me. Why teach music theory before I get any experience with the piano and its sounds???

          *
          ... feeling like the pianist on the Titanic ...

          Sophia granted, before you are allowed to drive you need to pass a theory exam first, but I still think the principle stands

          Not in the Netherlands, at least not when I learned how to drive. Just go ahead, start to drive!

          *
          ... feeling like the pianist on the Titanic ...

          keystring Learning goes best from concrete to abstract, and from familiar to unfamiliar. As a student learns their first pieces, it will be in the key of C major, or A minor, or D major. For D major, you'd point out the two sharps, have them play a scale from D to D, and observe the two sharped notes in there.

          Yes!!

          *
          ... feeling like the pianist on the Titanic ...

          Don't just tell. Show. Then have the student do it. Then do it again.

          And as BartK mentions, most of this is not theory, but introduction to the keyboard. As an aside, music 'theory' is a poor term, imo. These are conventions, rules of the game that have come to be accepted over time. There is no theory in music theory.

            Stub music 'theory' is a poor term, imo. These are conventions, rules of the game that have come to be accepted over time. There is no theory in music theory.

            I was so surprised when I found out what music theory entails! I thought it would be the theory of music. Like, what makes music music? And, for instance, theories about why certain combinations of notes would be experienced in a certain way. Not just major usually sounds more happy and minor usually sounds more sad, but theories about why.

            *
            ... feeling like the pianist on the Titanic ...

            8 days later

            So, I actually have a question. It's a bit of an odd question probably and I didn't want to start a new thread for it. I think it might tie in nicely with ranjit's topic anyway 🙂

            Right now my theory lesson talks about tonic, dominant and subdominant (I - IV - V) and then proceeds to talk about the circle of 5ths. It also talks about the importance of IV being the subdominant not because it's below the dominant (V), but because it's the same distance below the tonic as the dominant is above the tonic.

            This is very fascinating and I love learning new things... but my question is: what is the actual practical value of this knowledge other than just theory? I'm not sure how to ask this so it probably sounds like a clumsy question, but what I'm trying to say is how can this enhance my learning new pieces?

            I mean the next page is just another piece that seemingly is entirely unrelated to this knowledge... so how does knowing about these things make a difference, other than the fact that education is the premise of progress?

            Am I making sense here?

              Sophia This is very fascinating and I love learning new things... but my question is: what is the actual practical value of this knowledge other than just theory? I'm not sure how to ask this so it probably sounds like a clumsy question, but what I'm trying to say is how can this enhance my learning new pieces?

              What I find most useful is being able to analyze the function of chords. So, you think -- tonic goes to subdominant goes to dominant, then back. The specific chords can vary but the principle is the same and it gives you a kind of structure to understand what is going on.

              Can you explain that a little further please? What does it mean that tonic goes to subdominant goes to dominant, then back? Are you saying this information ties in with chords and their inversions?

                Hi Sophia, many pop songs follow a particular chord progression. One of these progressions is I (tonic), IV (subdominant), V (dominant) and then repeat. For example, in the key of C, this would be C, F, and G. So, I could be playing the root with fingers 1 and 5 in the left hand, an octave apart. And in the right hand, the actual chord (either inverted or not, inverting can help to stay within a certain keyboard range and avoids jumping around with the right hand). I play some of these progressions as warmup, as they are bound to sound "good." I believe Ranjit says that you could predict where the song is going. If you have just played the IV chord, then likely the next chord is going to be V, and then back to chord I. And when he says the specific chords can vary, he means that the name of the chord changes for I (tonic), IV (subdominant), V (dominant) dependent on which key you are in. For example, the tonic in the key of C is C while the tonic in the key of G is G.

                Below are more examples for chord progressions:
                https://online.berklee.edu/takenote/common-chord-progressions-and-how-to-make-them-your-own/

                In the below chord chart, you can see the chord progression: C, Am, F, G, C ... in other words, for the key of C, this is 1, 6, 4, 5, and back to 1. This is another one of the progressions that sound good. Sorry, I don't know yet how to make the picture smaller. So, you could be playing this song mostly by just remembering the chord progression because that chord progression should be largely repetitive throughout the song. And if you want to transpose in a different key, that would work as well. For example if you would want to play the song in the key of G instead of key of C, then the 1 chord would be the G, the 6 chord the E, the 4 chord, the C, and the 5 chord the D.

                So, I know this best from the world of pop songs, etc. (non-classical). Whether this also applies to some classical pieces, I don't know. But just check the song in your book on the next page and see in which key it is, and then see if you can recognize a chord progression (for example in the lower staff; the chord could also be arpeggiated).

                My favorite resource for this is www.pianoforall.com This is an incredible course that explains much of this in detail. This course is also available on udemy sometimes for around $15. If you contact Robin Hall, the course creator, he might send you a coupon.
                Best,

                Sophia Yes. Most classical music follows certain chord progressions. For example, when I tried learning Fantaisie Impromptu, the chords were initially a mystery to me because they used different voicings than the ones I was accustomed to. But when I realized that the starting was essentially I -> ii dim -> V in C# minor (ii dim is a substitution for the subdominant, like a different flavor of subdominant if you will), the whole thing clicked into place. He keeps using very similar patterns and so the chords are actually fairly "easy" to memorize, but the left hand patterns make it quite difficult to see this.

                Thank you so very much, both of you, for taking the time to provide such a thoughtful and well thought out reply. It makes perfect sense! @MandM I will definitely look into that course! I find learning so much faster when I not only know what, but WHY as well. Thanks again! âĪïļ

                If I may add to this.
                When you play I IV V I (for instance, C F G7 C), you hear that the phrase "comes home", back to the tonic, when you play I at the end. There is this feeling of something finished.
                But when a phrase finishes with another chord, for instance, V, it is not finished. The V chord creates a tension, an anticipation of more to come.

                For instance, in Alfred's When the saints go marching in, the G7 in m8 creates this unfinished feeling, also F in m12 does not finish the piece, but C in the final chord does.

                *
                ... feeling like the pianist on the Titanic ...

                Thanks Animisha, that makes perfect sense as well 🙂 It's funny how the books tells us about chords, inversions, I IV V, circle of 5ths etc, but then doesn't make clear what the application is. That way it becomes nothing but dry theory that you just wish to skip. But the way you guys explain it, the material becomes alive, useful and fun. It actually makes you want to learn 😃