Has anyone used the Microjazz books by Christopher Norton? IIRC, one of the original 40-piece challenge articles mentioned them as a good source for pieces for the challenge, so I requested them from the library. Yesterday I got the absolute beginner book (which is too easy for me) and the level 3 book. The first pierce. In the level 3 book felt like sightreading level for me, but it kind of looks like the difficulty jumps up a little so maybe those will be ok for 40P pieces…

Also, they don’t really look like jazz to me…for what it’s worth… maybe later I can post a few photos of snippets of the score for a few pieces, I’m curious what people here think of them.

Anyway, if anyone has any thoughts about or experience with these books, please comment!

TIA

BTW. Is it possible to edit the title of a thread? I should have wrote Norton’s Microjazz (and not Micro Jazz with a space, as autocorrect did…) :/

ShiroKuro changed the title to Norton’s Microjazz books for 40P or sightreading? .

@Pallas Thanks! It shows up differently on my laptop and on my phone, I think that's why I didn't see it.

I have a book Microjazz for starters with exercises, and those exercises would really help me to play those rhythms correctly. Anyway, about your question, I think that I will do like this: if I can play a piece correctly, at the given tempo and with correct dynamics after only one or two days' practice, I won't count them for the 40 pieces challenge. But if I need three days or more, I will count them as a quick study for the 40P. (Or maybe I should set the bar just a bit higher, at four days or more, I haven't decided yet.)

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

    Animisha if I can play a piece correctly, at the given tempo and with correct dynamics after only one or two days' practice, I won't count them for the 40 pieces challenge. But if I need three days or more, I will count them as a quick study for the 40P. (Or maybe I should set the bar just a bit higher, at four days or more, I haven't decided yet.)

    This is super interesting, thank you for sharing it!

    I think it brings up the question of the difference between sightreading and 40P playing... which is ultimately (I would assume) based on any individual person's goals.... And maybe based on the level that they can sightread??

    What I mean is, as I understand it, the goal of the 40P challenge is to expose oneself to a wide range of music. And that's certainly part of my interest in doing it. But then ultimate goal in doing that is to get better at quickly reading and learning music in general. Which is part of the goal of sightreading (right??)

    If so, then, at least in my opinion, maybe it's ok to count a "sightreadable" piece toward the 40P goal?? If one should want to do that, I mean.

    I am truly thinking out loud here, I'm not sure how I want to approach this. I've been playing through different books I have, trying to figure out how I want to approach the 40P, on the assumption that I will start the actual challenge in January.

    Anyway, as I think about it, I can see benefits from both approaches: IOW, excluding sightreading pieces (on the assumption that 1) they're perhaps easier than a 40P piece, and 2) you only played it/worked on it for one or two days.

    Or alternatively, including sightreading pieces, on the assumption that playing them exposes you to new music even if you only work on them one or to days.

    I would love to hear the thoughts of the piano teacher who originally proposed the 40P challenge (even though I know that's not possible, unless she joins PT...)

    So, should there be a "hierarchy" of pieces?

    1. sightreadable pieces (1-2 days)
    2. 40P pieces (7 days?)
    3. Learning pieces (1 week - 3 months??)
    4. Too hard (work on them for a week, put them away for 5 years??) 😅

      What does "sightreadable" mean? I always sight read a piece to get a feel for how difficult it is before I start work on it.

      I would say anything that you can play fluently on the first sitting (after practicing it a bit) is too easy for this challenge but anything that is too hard for you to digest in its entirety in one sitting is too difficult. By that I mean that you should be able to practice every section of the piece each day so that you get it to a fluent state in about a week.

        BartK What does "sightreadable" mean? I always sight read a piece to get a feel for how difficult it is before I start work on it.

        Good question! Yes, I also read through a piece to get an idea of how difficult it is, or just to get a feel for the piece before deciding how to approach learning it etc.

        But when I say a piece that's "sightreadable," I'm thinking of something that's maybe half as difficult as what I normally play. In other words, I could use it for sightreading practice, so it's something I can play through on my first time looking at, at a reasonable tempo so that it sounds recognizable, playing all (or almost all) of the notes, hands together.... But also not so easy that there's no challenge to using it for sightreading practice. So again, this is a fuzzy descriptor, but that's what I mean by sightreadable.

        A piece that is at the top of my playing level is what I would call "not" sightreadable.

        BartK I would say anything that you can play fluently on the first sitting (after practicing it a bit) is too easy for this challenge but anything that is too hard for you to digest in its entirety in one sitting is too difficult. By that I mean that you should be able to practice every section of the piece each day so that you get it to a fluent state in about a week.

        Exactly! I would say that what you're calling "play fluently" is what I mean by "sightreadable." And the part I bolded is especially important too, particularly for the 40P challenge.

        So back to what you're saying here, something that's not too easy, but not too hard is probably the sweet spot for the 40P challenge....

        But say I'm working through pieces in a particular book, and one of them ends up being on the easier side, and I work on it for two days before moving on... Am I still going to write that on my 40P list?

        Dunno yet, still thinking about that one! 😅

              ShiroKuro But say I'm working through pieces in a particular book, and one of them ends up being on the easier side, and I work on it for two days before moving on... Am I still going to write that on my 40P list?

              I won't! Because, if I start to include pieces that are that easy for me, the challenge will be over too soon.

              I think that the 40P challenge is not a sightreading challenge. Maybe those of you who sightread can create a 365P sightreading challenge! 😉

              I have now decided to put those quick studies on my list that will take me four days or more to learn, plus I need to have made a nice recording (audio) of them. The recording is very easy for me, because everything I play gets recorded anyway, but it stops me from adding a piece to from my list that I basically can play, but that I have not even once played well enough.

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

                  Animisha I won't! Because, if I start to include pieces that are that easy for me, the challenge will be over too soon.

                  That makes a lot of sense.

                  I think that the 40P challenge is not a sightreading challenge

                  Yes, this is an important point as well.

                  As I think about it, I will probably include all the pieces I choose for the 40P challenge< even if someone of them end up being “too easy.” Partly this is because my goal with the 40P challenge is just to encounter, and work on, as much new music as I can. Another reason is because I have chosen books with pieces that seem looked they are at the right difficulty level, but if I get one that’s much easier, I’ll still work on it for 2-3 days to polish it and then move on.

                  Maybe I will have higher expectations for what counts as “polished” if the piece is on the easier side, and slightly lower expectations for what counts as polished with the more difficulty pieces…

                  I dunno, I will have to get started and see how it goes first, to decide if this is an appropriate approach for me.

                      ShiroKuro I dunno, I will have to get started and see how it goes first, to decide if this is an appropriate approach for me.

                      I think that most of us who are new to this challenge, will need to have that frame of mind. 😊

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

                        Back to the original topic of this thread (was it?)

                        Anway, I started #2 in Level 3 of the Microjazz book, and I can definitely see why it’s called Microjazz. This one is also a good bit more difficult than #1. It’s probably a 7-day piece for sure.

                        I may very well purchase this book… (I’m using a library book at the moment).