I tried the single clef speed game this morning before my sight reading, and I found that I could not achieve 40 on a regular basis today. In fact I played for over an hour and only beat 40 three times. A few days ago, before I started the double clef game, I was doing it regularly. I don't know if it's because I grew used to the double clef game, or I'm just not as alert today. I'm going to do the single game again tomorrow and see what happens.
Later, when I did my sight reading there was no discernible difference from yesterday. I had some very hard pieces to start, then some easier ones after I warmed up. On the easy ones I was able to get relatively good plays after 2 or 3 tries. That's better than 6 months ago, but not much better than last week. I suspect my little bump from the games and the resulting faster note recognition may have played out. If that proves true after a few days, I'll gradually reduce the games and try to isolate another area for targeted improvement.
I believe chord recognition would be most helpful, but I also need to work on finger positions and keyboard orientation (finding notes without looking).
I do remain unconvinced that sight reading beyond a rudimentary level is possible for an older beginner, but I have nothing to lose from trying so I'm not ready to abandon 2+ years of effort just yet.
BTW -- If anyone heard me practicing SR and knew I'd been working on it over 2 years, they would crumble onto the floor in a psychotic episode of hilarity.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Instant Recognition
For a while now I've been using the Fast Keys game for a few minutes every day to build instant note recognition. On version 1 of the game, which does the 2 clefs separately, I was able to score in the 40s on the "Speed Game" with both sharps and flats turned on. The game is one minute, so it's taking me over a second to recognize and mouse to the correct note. With a lot of ledger lines, accidentals on most notes, and purely random generation, that's not as bad as it sounds, plus I've never been a gamer so I'm sort of clumsy on the mouse. Try it.
Lately I've switched to the new version, which presents notes from both clefs at once. The best I can do on that game is 30 in a minute. The reason I'm so much slower is it's much harder to achieve instant recognition when you need both a symbol and context, ie, you don't know whether the note in the middle of a clef is B or D unless you know which clef it is. When the notes come at you from a single clef, you don't have to think about context, but from both clefs, it's almost impossible to repeatedly make an instant call correctly.
There is no question that playing the games has improved my sight reading, but I'm uncertain whether doing the clefs together is beneficial. I fear it may be causing me to consider the clef context more than I do in actual reading and place a hurdle in the symbol identification process. This morning I did my sight reading after playing the game for half an hour or so, and I didn't do well. The instant recognition I thought I had gained over the past couple weeks wasn't there. After 10 minutes or so my reading improved some, but it still caused me concern. I plan to go back to the single clef games tomorrow and see if it makes a difference.
All this brings up a major pet peeve I have over how the grand staff is laid out. If they had just used "middle B" instead of middle C, there would be 2 notes from the midpoint to each clef and the note positions in the clefs would be the same. I know that various alternate note systems have been developed for years and none have taken hold, but for the sake of future generations I hope that as paper becomes increasingly rare and digitized music becomes the norm that a more logical alternative gains acceptance.
Lately I've switched to the new version, which presents notes from both clefs at once. The best I can do on that game is 30 in a minute. The reason I'm so much slower is it's much harder to achieve instant recognition when you need both a symbol and context, ie, you don't know whether the note in the middle of a clef is B or D unless you know which clef it is. When the notes come at you from a single clef, you don't have to think about context, but from both clefs, it's almost impossible to repeatedly make an instant call correctly.
There is no question that playing the games has improved my sight reading, but I'm uncertain whether doing the clefs together is beneficial. I fear it may be causing me to consider the clef context more than I do in actual reading and place a hurdle in the symbol identification process. This morning I did my sight reading after playing the game for half an hour or so, and I didn't do well. The instant recognition I thought I had gained over the past couple weeks wasn't there. After 10 minutes or so my reading improved some, but it still caused me concern. I plan to go back to the single clef games tomorrow and see if it makes a difference.
All this brings up a major pet peeve I have over how the grand staff is laid out. If they had just used "middle B" instead of middle C, there would be 2 notes from the midpoint to each clef and the note positions in the clefs would be the same. I know that various alternate note systems have been developed for years and none have taken hold, but for the sake of future generations I hope that as paper becomes increasingly rare and digitized music becomes the norm that a more logical alternative gains acceptance.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Lazy Daze
Well it's been 2 weeks since I posted so I thought I'd drop in and let my vast cadre of dedicated readers know I'm still alive and practicing diligently. I'm still working on #4 and Misty, but I've also taken a detour and added some enhancements to two of my old pieces, Nothing At All and Yesterday. For NAA I've added some "straddles" that I picked up from one of the free Duane Shin videos. (Link to be added.) Straddles are where you take a chord and play it two notes at a time moving up or down the keyboard, eg, playing a C chord as CG,EC,GE,CG moving up the board. For Yesterday I added a nice descending triad run and a descending octave pattern as fillers to the "vocal" parts, so it's like "Yesterday..." (long descending run) "... love was such an easy game to play..." (descending octave pattern) "...now I need a place...."
I don't have recordings yet because I'm still clumsy on the changes, so that means I won't have a June recording. I may try for two July recordings and post both, but I'm going to California for a week in July, so that's tentative.
Working on the changes to practiced pieces along side my new memory intense pieces got me thinking about how much piano can be categorized as physical coordination vs memory development.
The flourishes to my old pieces are virtually 100% coordination problems. There are no memory issues with performing a 3-octave descending arpeggio, but it takes many repetitions at a variety of speeds to integrate it into the song.
A song like Misty doesn't require a lot of physical gymnastics (at least not in my current version) but it's fairly memory intense because it uses a lot of complex chords. It's possible to make progress on Misty away from the piano by mentally playing it, but progress on the stylistic flourishes can only be done at the piano.
It my be possible to generally improve coordination through exercises like Tai Chi and Yoga or possibly meditation, but I haven't been very disciplined in practicing them. I wonder if more Yoga and less repetition wouldn't be more productive in the end.
I don't have recordings yet because I'm still clumsy on the changes, so that means I won't have a June recording. I may try for two July recordings and post both, but I'm going to California for a week in July, so that's tentative.
Working on the changes to practiced pieces along side my new memory intense pieces got me thinking about how much piano can be categorized as physical coordination vs memory development.
The flourishes to my old pieces are virtually 100% coordination problems. There are no memory issues with performing a 3-octave descending arpeggio, but it takes many repetitions at a variety of speeds to integrate it into the song.
A song like Misty doesn't require a lot of physical gymnastics (at least not in my current version) but it's fairly memory intense because it uses a lot of complex chords. It's possible to make progress on Misty away from the piano by mentally playing it, but progress on the stylistic flourishes can only be done at the piano.
It my be possible to generally improve coordination through exercises like Tai Chi and Yoga or possibly meditation, but I haven't been very disciplined in practicing them. I wonder if more Yoga and less repetition wouldn't be more productive in the end.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Slow Going
I am working diligently on Invention #4 and Misty, very reminiscent of December when I was doing #1 and Let It Be together. I only hope I have the same success. Both pieces (#4 and Misty) are memory intensive and progress is slow.
With #4 the problem is that most phrases work upward, then jump back a 6th, 7th, or octave to a lower note, often moving both hands together. It's very easy to jump back to a wrong note, or confuse which phrase you're on. I suspect it will be a couple of months before I'm ready to record. My 3rd Invention is not proving a lot less challenging than the first 2!
With Misty the problem is there are very complex chords that I'm not used to. I'm doing a version in Eb. Almost all chords are major or minor 7ths with alterations like flat 5ths and suspended notes. I'm learning directly off the sheets, rather than playing the chords fake book style, but even so most of the song is just inversions of the written chords with a few filler notes. I don't want to just memorize the notes without understanding what the chords are doing, because I may want to do some improvs on it someday, plus I have high hopes of doing more chord style pieces in the future.
Anyway, progress is slow, and it occurs to me we're half way through the year and I've only learned 3 new songs in '09 (#1, LIB, and my last lesson piece -- "Tulip"). I was definitely learning more pieces faster before I stopped the lessons, although some of the lesson pieces were pretty easy.
With #4 the problem is that most phrases work upward, then jump back a 6th, 7th, or octave to a lower note, often moving both hands together. It's very easy to jump back to a wrong note, or confuse which phrase you're on. I suspect it will be a couple of months before I'm ready to record. My 3rd Invention is not proving a lot less challenging than the first 2!
With Misty the problem is there are very complex chords that I'm not used to. I'm doing a version in Eb. Almost all chords are major or minor 7ths with alterations like flat 5ths and suspended notes. I'm learning directly off the sheets, rather than playing the chords fake book style, but even so most of the song is just inversions of the written chords with a few filler notes. I don't want to just memorize the notes without understanding what the chords are doing, because I may want to do some improvs on it someday, plus I have high hopes of doing more chord style pieces in the future.
Anyway, progress is slow, and it occurs to me we're half way through the year and I've only learned 3 new songs in '09 (#1, LIB, and my last lesson piece -- "Tulip"). I was definitely learning more pieces faster before I stopped the lessons, although some of the lesson pieces were pretty easy.
Friday, June 12, 2009
Observations for the Day
Here are a couple of quick observations:
1. Getting to the keys ahead of time is a critical skill, and one I haven't paid enough attention to. If I slow waaay down and, without looking, move my fingers to the keys enough in advance, I can feel each one and verify they are right before playing. When I do that, three things happen:
- I have to think before I play a note
- I never make a mistake (other than rhythm)
- I can play faster when I speed back up, because my mind and hands are ahead of the music.
2. Instant note recognition doesn't come automatically from sight reading practice. For the past few days I've been playing this note recognition game, and I'm amazed that even after pushing 3 years I still have to pause and think about what some notes are, especially with sharps, flats and ledger lines. The game caused a slight uptick in my SR ability, enough so that I'm going to scan the web for other music games. Chord recognition and instant recall of sharps and flats based on key could also be developed through games and transferred to SR. (As a related rant, our musical ancestors really screwed us over by not making the notes on the two clefs the same, but that's a topic for another time).
1. Getting to the keys ahead of time is a critical skill, and one I haven't paid enough attention to. If I slow waaay down and, without looking, move my fingers to the keys enough in advance, I can feel each one and verify they are right before playing. When I do that, three things happen:
- I have to think before I play a note
- I never make a mistake (other than rhythm)
- I can play faster when I speed back up, because my mind and hands are ahead of the music.
2. Instant note recognition doesn't come automatically from sight reading practice. For the past few days I've been playing this note recognition game, and I'm amazed that even after pushing 3 years I still have to pause and think about what some notes are, especially with sharps, flats and ledger lines. The game caused a slight uptick in my SR ability, enough so that I'm going to scan the web for other music games. Chord recognition and instant recall of sharps and flats based on key could also be developed through games and transferred to SR. (As a related rant, our musical ancestors really screwed us over by not making the notes on the two clefs the same, but that's a topic for another time).
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Rockin' Out
I've been playing great the past couple days. I don't know if it was the break, the move back to 3 hours a day, or what, but I hope it continues. One thing I'm doing different that's a lot of fun and seems to help is changing the style and rhythm of pieces without changing a lot of notes, like I'll play Fur Elise with a rock beat, or Comptine with a swing. It seems to build confidence and musicality, and when I go back to the regular rhythm I can play with more precision and fewer errors.
Another thing I'm finally starting to do reasonably well are fast arpeggios. For years I did a fairly mundane arpeggio practice of all the major and minor triads, but I could never get the smooth, fast flow that I see good pianists do. Then a few weeks ago I watched Andrew Furmanczyk arpeggio video and tried his practice technique where you slide the hand horizontally hitting each note staccato without looking at the keys. After doing that in C, C#, and D major, 3 octaves per hand, about 10 sets per day, the speed has finally come. The reason for C, C#, and D is that those 3 provide the pattern used by 9 of the 12 majors. You then only have to learn the 3 oddballs -- F#, B, and Bb -- separately. After a couple of weeks more, I'll move on to the minors. It's a relief to finally know that I'm not too uncoordinated to ever do them fast!
BTW, I really appreciate what Andrew has done. His free lessons are a great resource for beginners, but good god, that super informal, "ya know, whatever dude" style drives me up a wall. Sometimes I want to scream, "Get to the point, Andrew!"
Another thing I'm finally starting to do reasonably well are fast arpeggios. For years I did a fairly mundane arpeggio practice of all the major and minor triads, but I could never get the smooth, fast flow that I see good pianists do. Then a few weeks ago I watched Andrew Furmanczyk arpeggio video and tried his practice technique where you slide the hand horizontally hitting each note staccato without looking at the keys. After doing that in C, C#, and D major, 3 octaves per hand, about 10 sets per day, the speed has finally come. The reason for C, C#, and D is that those 3 provide the pattern used by 9 of the 12 majors. You then only have to learn the 3 oddballs -- F#, B, and Bb -- separately. After a couple of weeks more, I'll move on to the minors. It's a relief to finally know that I'm not too uncoordinated to ever do them fast!
BTW, I really appreciate what Andrew has done. His free lessons are a great resource for beginners, but good god, that super informal, "ya know, whatever dude" style drives me up a wall. Sometimes I want to scream, "Get to the point, Andrew!"
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Back up to Speed
I can hardly believe how quickly I got my practiced rep back in shape. I played the whole rep this morning and did fairly well, then went to GC to see if I could play in front of people. A teenage kid came in while I was playing Clementi and stood right beside me watching, and I hardly got nervous at all. I finished the piece cleanly, and he said something like, "that was really good, What's it called?" I told him, then played both the Beethoven Sonatina and Imagine almost perfectly. After he left I played Angie and Invention #8 with virtually no errors and a lot of emotion. I knew there were people behind me but I wasn't sure if they were listening. When I finished, a 30-something woman with her husband said, "You play beautifully. How long have you been playing?" When I told her less than 3 years, she was astounded. In fairness, she was looking at an unweighted keyboard though, so I don't think she was much of an authority.
I also got a chance to play the P155 for the first time. I was moderately impressed, but more with the feel than the sound. The touch was about as good as the CP300, but the default sound (GP1) was a little tinny and artificial. I tried GP2 and it seemed to add a lot of reverb, but still sounded artificial. Don't get me wrong -- it sounded good. Much better than the YDP 223, but not as good as the CP300. Maybe if I messed around with it I could get a sound I liked better. It's also possible I set my expectations for this model higher than are realistic for a $1200 portable.
It was fun to play the 155, but irrelevant. Between the money I spent on my house and a trip to California in July, there are no pianos on my shopping list this year.
I also got a chance to play the P155 for the first time. I was moderately impressed, but more with the feel than the sound. The touch was about as good as the CP300, but the default sound (GP1) was a little tinny and artificial. I tried GP2 and it seemed to add a lot of reverb, but still sounded artificial. Don't get me wrong -- it sounded good. Much better than the YDP 223, but not as good as the CP300. Maybe if I messed around with it I could get a sound I liked better. It's also possible I set my expectations for this model higher than are realistic for a $1200 portable.
It was fun to play the 155, but irrelevant. Between the money I spent on my house and a trip to California in July, there are no pianos on my shopping list this year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
