40(ish) Pieces in 2025

Nightowl I just listened to those pieces

Oh wow @Gooseberry, I completely missed that wasn't just an itemized list, but actually links to the pieces themselves! Very well played and I too loved the galloping horses - I believe one got away at some point but you managed to catch up and reigned it in pretty quickly afterwards. And I agree, the horses display was a nice touch, I would have completely missed that if Nightowl hadn't mentioned it

Nightowl The 40 Piece Challenge has been around for a few years, as a way to improve sight reading skills - here is a link to an article which outlines how the concept began:
https://elissamilne.com/2015/02/04/where-did-the-40-piece-challenge-begin/

On a previous thread people discussed their ideas and approaches to tackle this challenge - link attached:
https://forum.pianotell.com/d/1418-new-year-new-approach-40-pieces-challenge-2025

I think that the challenge is manageable provided that the pieces are at a level which aligns closely with a player's existing skill set (or one grade lower). The target number of pieces seems feasible for beginners/intermediate players, as it equates to learning one piece every 9 days. However, this target may not be suitable for advanced players who are tackling complex pieces to pass exams or perform in a professional setting, as they may be unwilling or unable to commit further practice time. Those players might like to tweak things slightly so as to make the target less onerous - perhaps a target of 25 pieces would be manageable - one easy piece every 2 weeks could be a welcome distraction from stretch pieces and is still likely to reap benefits. So, set your own target, choose your pieces and plot your path to sight reading success!

This thread is somewhere to post monthly updates about progress with the challenge. I aim to list titles/composers of the pieces I have played each month, along with a running total. I look forward to seeing how everyone gets on with this challenge and I hope that this thread will also provide useful information for other beginners looking for easy pieces to play. Good luck everyone.
I know that for some people this approach is apparently useful and that's fine and they should do it, but as stated in this post I see what I would call several misconceptions.

I assume this idea is mostly geared towards beginners or low intermediates because beyond that I don't think any pianist ever learns anywhere near 40 pieces a year or even 25 pieces a year. I am guessing most of these pieces for people who do this challenge are very short, one to three pages. So starting with these assumptions I don't see this. approach as more than minimally useful for site reading improvement. To improve sight reading, one should be spending at least 5 or 10 minutes each day doing it, so that would be more like 365 pieces per year. It is true that learning one short piece around every 9 days will help with general reading skills which is related to site reading skill but not exactly the same.

The best way to approve sight reading is to do a lot of it. And the best way to do a lot of it is to choose pieces one likes and wants to sight read. Most of the best site readers never thought they were practicing sight reading although they did a lot of it . There is nothing wrong with reading some pieces at one level or even above one's level as long as the piece is not too far above one's level.

Even at what I would call the intermediate level some pieces could be 5 to 10 pages long so there's no way someone practicing an hour a day would usually learn 40 in a year. I don't think choosing pieces below one's present level just so one can get up to 40 pieces per year is a good idea.

pianoloverus I don't think choosing pieces below one's present level just so one can get up to 40 pieces per year is a good idea.

In fact, the teacher who originally came up with the idea recommends just this very thing -- playing 40(ish) pieces below one's present level. Given that sightreading pieces are also set below one's level, it is quite well-aligned with those ideas.

Also note that the 40 pieces do not replace one's other pieces, but are in addition to them, which I think is an important element.

Separate from that, if you @pianoloverus would like to engage in a discussion about the pros and cons of the 40P challenge, perhaps we can move that to a different thread, since I note that @Nightowl 's original goal with this thread was:

This thread is somewhere to post monthly updates about progress with the challenge.

and that is in fact how posters here are using it.

ShiroKuro pianoloverus I don't think choosing pieces below one's present level just so one can get up to 40 pieces per year is a good idea.

In fact, the teacher who originally came up with the idea recommends just this very thing -- playing 40(ish) pieces below one's present level. Given that sightreading pieces are also set below one's level, it is quite well-aligned with those ideas.

Also note that the 40 pieces do not replace one's other pieces, but are in addition to them, which I think is an important element.

Separate from that, if you @pianoloverus would like to engage in a discussion about the pros and cons of the 40P challenge, perhaps we can move that to a different thread, since I note that @Nightowl 's original goal with this thread was:
This thread is somewhere to post monthly updates about progress with the challenge.

and that is in fact how posters here are using it.

Quite a few posters both before and after my post did not use this thread for monthly updates about their progress with this challenge.

I was very careful to say that if you feel it works for you then it's fine. But I also gave reasons why I thought some of the ideas involved were not correct. Namely that if improving one's sight reading is one of the main goals of this approach, then 40 pieces a year is nowhere near enough. 5 or 10 minutes a day which would mean at least one piece per day makes more sense. Limiting sight reading practice to pieces below one's level Is also not the best idea I think. The best way to improve sight reading is to do a lot of it and people will tend to do a lot of it if they are enjoying the pieces they are playing and are not necessarily concerned about their difficulty.
Since you are so concerned about thread drift which probably has occurred on the majority of threads on this forum, I will not post further on this thread. I hope some readers will take my advice into account.

@pianoloverus thank you for your consideration. However, I do think a discussion of pros and cons, and also a discussion of 40P versus sightreading, would be great and have many participants (including you).

So how about joining me in the thread I just started, here: https://forum.pianotell.com/d/1543-40-piece-challenge-versus-sightreading-pros-cons-approaches-etc

Third piece. A quick study this time (3 days).

1. Michael Head - The Quiet Wood - The Best of Grade 1 Piano
   2, Joanne Bender - Ripple Effect - RCM 3 Piano Etudes
2. Henry Mancini (arr.) - The Pink Panther - Piano Adventures Popular Repertoire - Level 3A

Ideally, I like to work on 4 kinds of pieces at a time, so that's what makes up my list:
a) Piano Adventures lesson pieces
b) Classical pieces of my choosing at whatever I think my grade level might be
c) Non-classical pieces of my choosing that isn't too much of a stretch
d) Quick study of an easier piece that I've sight read and liked enough to flag for quick study

Nightowl lilypad It seems like we have a similar approach, in that we will be playing a ratio of roughly 3 easy pieces to 1 current level piece (which might also be a stretch piece). I intend to play one stretch piece and 3 easy pieces each month, which would take my yearly total to 48 pieces. When I finish book 2 this will be my way of keeping the momentum going, as I don't currently have a teacher, nor any plan to buy book 3.

By the end of the year on paper 3 easy pieces to 1 piece at current level is what it looks like. As far as everyday practicing for me, it's 3 pieces at my level plus 1 quick study piece.

The turnover rate on the quick study pieces tends to accumulate, although it takes a while. I don't really have a numerical goal, but I like to keep a list out of curiosity and a 'memory lane' of what I've played. Sometimes around midsummer before the accumulation effect has really kicked in, I'll wonder if I'll even make it to 40. But surprisingly without extra effort, by the end of the last couple of years I've had over 70.

Here is my list from the end of last year: [

I decided to give Edna Mae Burnam's pieces a break for a bit. This latest one, "Love me Tender" is from a supplement book to Alfred's Basic Adult Piano Course. But it also includes suggestions on when to play each piece (ie: after page 54) for those doing Alfred's Adult All-In-One course instead, which is nice.

1. A Canyon Deep by Edna Mae Burnam (From Pieces to Play with Step by Step Book Two)
2. Stained Glass Window In A Church by Edna Mae Burnam (From Pieces to Play with Step by Step Book Two)
3. The Shoemaker by Edna Mae Burnam (From Pieces to Play with Step by Step Book Two)
4. Love Me Tender by Elvis Presley & Vera Matson, Arr by Christine H. Barden (From Alfred's Basic Adult Piano Course Greatest Hits Level 1)

lilypad Third piece. A quick study this time (3 days).

Michael Head - The Quiet Wood - The Best of Grade 1 Piano
2, Joanne Bender - Ripple Effect - RCM 3 Piano Etudes
Henry Mancini (arr.) - The Pink Panther - Piano Adventures Popular Repertoire - Level 3A

Oops! I guess I can't count! Pink Panther was number 3. I finished my lesson piece yesterday after being on it for around 3 weeks.

4. Shenandoah from Piano Adventures level 5 lesson book.

This week I'm playing some Scott Joplin. This is Maple Leaf Rag without the trio section, which would have taken much longer to learn. Again, it's not perfect but that is not the point.

Quick Study List for 2025

1. George Frideric Handel, Passacaille (variations 1-8).
2. Enrique Granados, Danzas Españolas, no. 2 Oriental
3. Scott Joplin, Maple Leaf Rag (without trio)

That was awesome @BartK !!

Animisha Satie's Petite prelude was actually the most boring piece that I have ever played. I added some dynamics - but maybe I should not have done that, in case Satie actually intended this piece to be as boring as it is.

Your description cracked me up. Seriously, though, I liked it. I listened to it a few times. Personally, I didn't find it at all boring.

@Animisha as always, very, very well-played!! Esp. since you thought it was boring. In my sightreading/40P pursuits, when I sightread a piece I don't like, I use as SRing practice and don't move it onto the 40P list. I think you have more perseverance than I do!

I don't know that I thought the Satie piece was boring, but I can see why you might. Actually, I hadn't heard it before, so I found it very interesting to listen to it while thinking about contemporary minimalist composers -- some of whom are more minimalist than others. I actually don't think of myself as a fan of minimalist piano... I prefer music that has a clear and accessible melody line, and I think of minimalist piano as lacking that. For example, people call Einaudi minimalist, but I don't think that's accurate... Anyway, I'm starting to cause thread drift, sorry!

@Animisha I found this score online, is it basically the same as what you played? (sorry it's a little blurry bc this is a screen grab)