pianoloverus Although Chang's book has some good information, I think an awful lot of it is nonsense. To the best of my knowledge he has never taught piano and is not an advanced pianist. He may not even play at all. He says his book is based on observing the lessons his two daughters received but how can he be qualified to evaluate what he observed?

I agree. I read some things that piqued my interest. But then I started skimming through the book after I read the following (bolding is mine):

Many students make the mistake of thinking that the fingers control the music and they wait for the piano to produce that gorgeous sound. This will result in a flat performance and unpredictable results. The music must originate in the mind and the pianist must coax the piano to produce what s/he wants. This is mental play, introduced above; if you had never practiced mental play before, you will find that it requires a level of memorization that you had never achieved before – but that is exactly what is needed for flawless, authoritative performances. Fortunately, mental play is only a few steps beyond the memorization procedures in this book, but it accomplishes a giant leap in your musical capabilities, not only for technique and making music, but also for learning absolute pitch, composing, and every aspect of piano playing. Thus technique, music, and mental play are inseparably intertwined. Once you are deeply involved with mental play, you will discover that it doesn’t really work without absolute pitch. These discussions provide a firm basis for identifying the skills we need to learn. This book provides the practice methods needed to learn them.

My days are numbered. I don't have time to learn absolute pitch (assuming that was even possible)! 😅

      Ok, I'll bite. What is written there is complete gobbledegook. The piano is tuned, there is absolutely NO NEED for perfect pitch. In fact even singers don't need perfect pitch - that's what tuning forks are for.

      What is that writer even trying to say????? NONE of the skills mentioned are needed as such. You don't need to be a composer to enjoy making gorgeous music. What is that book trying to teach???

      The only thing I agree with is (somewhat) that you need to be able to hear what it should sound in order to produce the sound that is needed. But the rest, excuse my colourful language, is sheer BS.

        There are online discussions whether kids learn better or faster than adults. The simple answer is NO. We learn differently.

        I come from a non-musical family. Everybody in the family had music lessons in the past including recorder, violin, guitar or accordion but nobody played at a high level or became a professional. A few months ago there was a performance of the Tchaikovsky "Pathetique" Symphony #6 on TV. Mom watched the performance without any emotional response. She didn't know what the music was all about besides the fact that it has 4 movements.

        As an adult learner, I don't have a choice to start earlier. Growing up dad had a collection of Classical LPs. There was always music in the background but nobody was drawn to any particular instrument. A few cousins took lessons including flute & violin but nobody would talk about practicing or playing songs in the past. The peer pressure to get into music wasn't there. People would say we get further starting before 10. I wasn't ready until a few decades later. I got into music as a hobby than even passing conservatory exams. The main reason I got into piano was stress relief from work and other issues in life. I'm not concerned with research data or statistics on the ideal age for starting piano. I play keyboard at least an hour a day like taking my vitamins & antidepressants.

        Parents getting kids into piano or violin at a young age are giving them the gift of music. On the other hand, kids know next to nothing about "Classical" music or the instrument they're supposed to learn. There is a bit of trial & error to see if they're interested in playing an instrument and whether piano or something else is the right fit. The majority of students don't end up becoming profession concert pianists or musicians. Years ago a friend brought her 2 sons who were in Suzuki piano & violin along and played a few pieces for us as duet including "Minuet in G". They were asked to play at their grandfather's funeral in church. After graduation neither became professional musicians.

          Kaydia That looks like an interesting book, I took a quick look at the contents and there is a section called "Can we all be Mozarts?" which has piqued my interest.

          Based on my starting age of 65, the message is basically that time is short, and I should hurry up and learn so I can get to the music I want to play. As long as it's not too complicated and won't take too much time to learn. I guess it's a good thing that I like simpler pieces. 😜

          I'm 63, so we're in similar territory when it comes to our brains being a bit less effective than they once were. I have a similar mindset about the pieces I'm capable of playing, in that I'm happy to play simpler pieces and have no aspiration to play complex pieces that students might study for a grade 8 exam. More than that, I actually dislike listening to pieces involving masses of notes played at crazy speeds, such as Flight Of The Bumblebee - they make me feel ill! I like simple melodies and slow romantic pieces, which is fortunate because I doubt that I'll ever be able to play fast moving pieces.

          "Don't let's ask for the moon, we have the stars." (Final line from Now,Voyager, 1942)

              Kaydia Once you are deeply involved with mental play, you will discover that it doesn’t really work without absolute pitch.

              I'm guessing that his kids are string players?

                pianoloverus To the best of my knowledge he has never taught piano and is not an advanced pianist.

                He was an advanced amateur who often practiced for upto 8 hours a day during his undergrad. He's also a physics researcher or something.

                    Kaydia Many students make the mistake of thinking that the fingers control the music and they wait for the piano to produce that gorgeous sound. This will result in a flat performance and unpredictable results. The music must originate in the mind and the pianist must coax the piano to produce what s/he wants. This is mental play, introduced above; if you had never practiced mental play before, you will find that it requires a level of memorization that you had never achieved before – but that is exactly what is needed for flawless, authoritative performances. Fortunately, mental play is only a few steps beyond the memorization procedures in this book, but it accomplishes a giant leap in your musical capabilities, not only for technique and making music, but also for learning absolute pitch, composing, and every aspect of piano playing. Thus technique, music, and mental play are inseparably intertwined. Once you are deeply involved with mental play, you will discover that it doesn’t really work without absolute pitch. These discussions provide a firm basis for identifying the skills we need to learn. This book provides the practice methods needed to learn them.

                    This is kind of true. Basically, he's talking about pitch memory. At an advanced level, it is when someone can recall, say, the opening note of Fur Elise, and figure out the other notes using relative pitch. I have experienced this on occasion but have never managed to be consistent with it. I know several people without perfect pitch who can do this.

                        the first sentence I read in that book is, "This is the best book ever written"

                        that's quite a lofty claim!

                        ranjit To the best of my knowledge he has never taught piano and is not an advanced pianist.

                        He was an advanced amateur who often practiced for upto 8 hours a day during his undergrad. He's also a physics researcher or something.

                        The physics researcher part is irrelevant as is the number of hours he practiced. There are too many statements in the book that are just plain wrong which is why so many advanced pianists don't think much of the book. I assume you agree he has never taught piano since you didn't mention that, and that's, of course, a serious flaw for someone writing a book about learning piano. Finally, since my understanding is he discusses piano technique but has no diagrams or photos that's a terrible flaw In a book discussing piano technique.

                          Sophia Ok, I'll bite. What is written there is complete gobbledegook. The piano is tuned, there is absolutely NO NEED for perfect pitch. In fact even singers don't need perfect pitch - that's what tuning forks are for.

                          What is that writer even trying to say????? NONE of the skills mentioned are needed as such. You don't need to be a composer to enjoy making gorgeous music. What is that book trying to teach???

                          The only thing I agree with is (somewhat) that you need to be able to hear what it should sound in order to produce the sound that is needed. But the rest, excuse my colourful language, is sheer BS.

                          I think the theme is mental practice. And I believe he's saying mental practice uses absolute pitch to help with the memorization process. Here's a link to the page with the below quote (I don't want to keep quoting too much since it's copyright material.): Learning Relative Pitch and Absolute Pitch (Sight Singing, Composing)

                          In that section* we saw that the final objective of memorizing is to be able to play the music in your mind (mental play, MP). It turns out that, by paying attention to RP and AP during the process of practicing MP, you naturally acquire the pitch skills! Thus, you do not only play music in your mind, but you must always play it at the correct pitch. This makes perfect sense because, without playing at the correct pitch, you lose so many of the benefits of MP. Conversely, MP will not work well unless it is done in AP, because MP is a memory function, and memory is associative and AP is one of the most important associations – AP is what gives music its true melodic lines, color, expression, etc.

                          *He's referring to the Memorizing section.

                              thepianoplayer416 I come from a non-musical family. Everybody in the family had music lessons in the past including recorder, violin, guitar or accordion but nobody played at a high level or became a professional. A few months ago there was a performance of the Tchaikovsky "Pathetique" Symphony #6 on TV. Mom watched the performance without any emotional response. She didn't know what the music was all about besides the fact that it has 4 movements.

                              Thanks for sharing. It's interesting to hear other people's musical backgrounds. The only music I remember being played on the radio while growing up was what they used to call Country & Western. Other than that it was the Hee Haw and Lawrence Welk TV shows.

                              thepianoplayer416 As an adult learner, I don't have a choice to start earlier.

                              I never had the choice as a child. I remember trying out for the school band, but didn't get selected. Over the years I toyed with the idea of learning an instrument, however I didn't get serious about it until a couple months ago.

                              Thanks for posting that video. I like that guys energy and I like what he had to say. I'll be checking out more of his channel.

                                  Kaydia Sophia Ok, I'll bite. What is written there is complete gobbledegook. The piano is tuned, there is absolutely NO NEED for perfect pitch. In fact even singers don't need perfect pitch - that's what tuning forks are for.

                                  What is that writer even trying to say????? NONE of the skills mentioned are needed as such. You don't need to be a composer to enjoy making gorgeous music. What is that book trying to teach???

                                  The only thing I agree with is (somewhat) that you need to be able to hear what it should sound in order to produce the sound that is needed. But the rest, excuse my colourful language, is sheer BS.

                                  I think the theme is mental practice. And I believe he's saying mental practice uses absolute pitch to help with the memorization process. Here's a link to the page with the below quote (I don't want to keep quoting too much since it's copyright material.): Learning Relative Pitch and Absolute Pitch (Sight Singing, Composing)

                                  In that section* we saw that the final objective of memorizing is to be able to play the music in your mind (mental play, MP). It turns out that, by paying attention to RP and AP during the process of practicing MP, you naturally acquire the pitch skills! Thus, you do not only play music in your mind, but you must always play it at the correct pitch. This makes perfect sense because, without playing at the correct pitch, you lose so many of the benefits of MP. Conversely, MP will not work well unless it is done in AP, because MP is a memory function, and memory is associative and AP is one of the most important associations – AP is what gives music its true melodic lines, color, expression, etc.

                                  *He's referring to the Memorizing section.

                                  It's not necessary to have absolute pitch to do MP. Absolute pitch is probably helpful in memorizing a piece, but is rarely mentioned in articles about memorization probably because so few people have absolute pitch. Most people think absolute pitch cannot be learned but is inborn.

                                  In addition, I think the paragraph from the book you quoted is an example of his unclear and poor writing.
                                  Absolute and relative pitch are very different but he uses them both in the same paragraph sometimes together, sometimes separately, switching back and forth.

                                      • Kaydia

                                      • Post #21
                                      • Edited

                                      Nightowl That looks like an interesting book, I took a quick look at the contents and there is a section called "Can we all be Mozarts?" which has piqued my interest.

                                      I'm going to check out more of his book. As @pianoloverus said, there's some good stuff in there, which I did get a taste of during my skimming.

                                      Nightowl I have a similar mindset about the pieces I'm capable of playing, in that I'm happy to play simpler pieces and have no aspiration to play complex pieces that students might study for a grade 8 exam. More than that, I actually dislike listening to pieces involving masses of notes played at crazy speeds, such as Flight Of The Bumblebee - they make me feel ill! I like simple melodies and slow romantic pieces, which is fortunate because I doubt that I'll ever be able to play fast moving pieces.

                                      I'm so glad to hear other people say they also prefer simpler pieces. I've always felt "simple-minded" about it, like not sophisticated, or whatever. I think for me it's the density of a piece, or as you put it, "masses of notes" that I don't care for. And while really fast pieces don't make me feel ill, they do make me feel tense. And, yep, I don't need to worry about playing pieces to fast for me. There're plenty enough slower pieces I'd love to play.

                                            From the book:

                                            Once you are deeply involved with mental play, you will discover that it doesn’t really work without absolute pitch.

                                            I am pretty sure absolute pitch is not necessary to play piano well. Maybe at the very top level for professionals, but not for the rest.

                                            I also wonder how much the author understands what qualifies as absolute pitch. Rick Beato did a series of YT videos that explains and demos absolute pitch, like this, this, and this.

                                            Also there is a compelling argument against the need of absolute pitch for musicians.

                                            On the other hand, musicians really need accurate relative pitch for many things they do. Unlike absolute pitch which you are either born with or not, relative pitch can be attained by most people via training.

                                                pianoloverus It's not necessary to have absolute pitch to do MP. Absolute pitch is probably helpful in memorizing a piece, but is rarely mentioned in articles about memorization it was so few people have absolute pitch. Most people think absolute ditch cannot be learned but it's in born.

                                                In addition I think the paragraph from the book you quoted is an example of his unclear and poor writing.
                                                Absolute and relative pitch are very different but he uses them both in the same paragraph sometimes together, sometimes separately, switching back and forth.

                                                On that page I linked, he explains why he believes AP is necessary. I'm not saying I agree with him. I don't have a desire to memorize my pieces, so it's not relevant to my learning process.

                                                    ranjit Basically, he's talking about pitch memory. At an advanced level, it is when someone can recall, say, the opening note of Fur Elise, and figure out the other notes using relative pitch. I have experienced this on occasion but have never managed to be consistent with it. I know several people without perfect pitch who can do this.

                                                    Right, that's just the ability to recognize intervals and is a very useful skill to have. But as you said, that too doesn't require perfect pitch. My dad had near perfect pitch and when he was asked for an A or whatever, he could almost always hum the exact note right away. Definitely not the same thing as having relative pitch, so I fully agree with you there.

                                                    Interesting discussion you started here @Kaydia - but I dare say that for us (near) beginners (with less than a few years of learning behind us), none of this is relevant just yet. It doesn't mean we can't passionately discuss it all the same 😄

                                                        ranjit This is kind of true. Basically, he's talking about pitch memory. At an advanced level, it is when someone can recall, say, the opening note of Fur Elise, and figure out the other notes using relative pitch. I have experienced this on occasion but have never managed to be consistent with it. I know several people without perfect pitch who can do this.

                                                        Yes, that makes sense. I can do that somewhat with very, very simple tunes, like a nursery rhyme, or something popular like jingle bells. I'm sure it wouldn't be perfect, though.

                                                          iternabe I am pretty sure absolute pitch is not necessary to play piano well. Maybe at the very top level for professionals, but not for the rest.

                                                          That's why I skipped over that and started skimming. If I thought AP was necessary I might as well give up learning piano now. 😄

                                                              ANDRE PREVIN has it; Willie Nelson does not. Nat King Cole had it; Vladimir Horowitz did not. About 10 percent of students at the Juilliard School of Music have it but most musicians don't.

                                                              "It" is perfect or absolute pitch -- a cluster of abilities relating to identifying and recalling musical notes from memory, without hearing another note as a reference.

                                                              Source: NYT - Perfect Pitch: The Key May Lie In the Genes

                                                              Kaydia I'm so glad to hear other people say they also prefer simpler pieces. I've always felt "simple-minded" about it, like not sophisticated, or whatever.

                                                              I think that many people share this love of simpler pieces, as they like tunes that they can hum along to, or simple songs that they can sing along to - maybe this explains the popularity of Country and Western music, which is often described as "three chords and the truth". That said, I do love some classical music, especially pieces by Tchaikovsky and Chopin, but I accept that I'll probably never be able to do them justice. Also, many wonderful classical pieces were composed for a full orchestra, so when they are played as solo pieces on the piano they can sound a bit incomplete.

                                                              "Don't let's ask for the moon, we have the stars." (Final line from Now,Voyager, 1942)