online piano lessons

Instrument lessons are not very effective... they are just a stimulus for the "deadline". Not to mention conducting lessons. The story is different for composition; online is even better (paper permitting).

Thank you for the answer.

By stimulus for the "deadline," do you mean approaching conservatory exams or concerts?

That is not my case. I did about a year of lessons but without great results. I feel like I have to start over almost from scratch, but with another teacher. What matters most to me is first and foremost acquiring good basic technique. I am studying solfeggio, theory, and a bit of harmony. One can manage quite well as a self-taught person. But when approaching the piano, there must be a guide, because in the best-case scenario, one runs the risk of picking up wrong habits.

The deadline is also the lesson. They are small study milestones. Then there are certainly exams, but also recitals, concerts, and competitions which are "greater" milestones.

Thinking that only the instrument involves implications for habits is very common. The mental patterns of aspiring composers are often lethal as they too can be reduced to habit. Regarding technique, the same applies... developing a good gesture requires "good" habits.

I fully agree with Frank. The instrument teacher must be close to the student. Observation and suggestions must be made in the presence of the student, and the student, while playing, must have the presence of the teacher. Furthermore, online listening is poor and does not educate the ear regarding sound! If we consider a piano that doesn't work, a distant virtual teacher, and bad sound, we can clearly imagine what results might be obtained. The teacher must also have the possibility to give examples on the piano the student is playing on, even to evaluate the quality of the instrument and check if there are "compensations" that the student implements in case the instrument does not function well. Auditory, visual, and kinesthetic elements must be realized and proposed live. These means of communication, if online, are very "hidden" and, sometimes, even altered.

It seems to me that the main way to approach studying the instrument is to take in-person lessons.

As previously mentioned, some time ago I took piano lessons at a music academy in my city for almost a year. The human relationship with the teacher was truly good. Nothing to complain about. I am left with the memory of a kind and always available person. I remember that often the lesson would extend beyond the standard hour, without objection.

From a didactic point of view, however, I would say there were lights and shadows. I do not have the experience to objectively evaluate a teacher's preparation. However, even the most inexperienced student can form an opinion.

Listening to him play was a pleasure. I remember he insisted heavily on "sound," even when in the early days I could barely "hit" the right keys. At the time, it seemed bizarre to me, but later, thanks also to some considerations read here on the forum, I understood that producing the right sound is essential, and that this skill must be refined from the very beginning.

Yet, what was missing in the teaching was a deeper exploration of "the way" to reach a certain goal. I remember we resolved mistakes in less than one lesson. Regarding scales, we mainly focused on the aspect related to music theory. However, at the moment when I had to execute them using weight, the "how" of achieving it was not explained to me.

The teacher never mentioned musculature to me, therefore the issue regarding antagonist muscles and the need to make them work alternately. No mention of basic gestures. No reference to how to distribute weight between the shoulder, arm, and forearm. Or how to achieve a good legato (but perhaps the timing wasn't right).

To avoid tension, the instruction was to keep the wrist "soft"... and to articulate.

I believe that a good teacher must explain the correct movements, then "demonstrate" them practically, and finally have the student apply them with the exercises/studies they deem most appropriate.

Hearing someone repeat "... stay relaxed, keep your wrist soft and articulate!" is meaningless if adequate teaching on the concept and application of relaxation is not provided. This requires a base of anatomical knowledge and proper exercises to achieve relaxation in the shoulders, arms... etc.

I insist on this aspect, perhaps wrongly, because I think that approaching piano technique correctly is fundamental even for the simple piano "amateur." If nothing else, to avoid running into tendonitis and such. I think a student can either take flight over time or remain stuck. The variables are infinite. However, in both cases, when sitting at the piano, one must do so with the correct posture and in the absence of tension. Otherwise, it is better to give up, even if the piano level is modest.

I repeat, these are my debatable considerations.

And here we get to the point:

If I want to resume my piano lessons, I was wondering (and I kindly ask you), if there are criteria to follow when choosing a "good" teacher. Or should one simply rely on word of mouth and try for a certain period to see if there is the right feeling?

Given that a good teacher will have an appropriate fee, I would kindly like some suggestions on how to make a good choice. What references to ask for, for example.

Thank you in advance.

Jack wrote:

9 hours ago, Jack said:

I was wondering (and I am asking you kindly), if there are criteria to follow in choosing a "good" teacher.

... is equivalent to asking: "are there criteria to follow in choosing a 'good' doctor?"

I always say: "in the end, a doctor is whoever heals"; I know it is not an answer, but if I really had to give a parameter, I believe that a "good" teacher is seen most in the less gifted students. When a student with "normal" talent achieves good results... there is a good teacher behind them (let's say a didact, because that is the ability put into practice). With the prodigies, we all sound good... and it often happens to hear them ruined (by poor didactics).

There is no single type of teacher. The right one is the one that is right for you. Many even talented pianists may lack pedagogical training. One becomes a teacher. A good teacher must always exemplify and contextualize what they suggest. Principles, as in all practices and Arts, are few, but they seem so difficult and unnatural. When one is "ahead" and looks back, one observes how it is necessary to do only a few things. For example, playing "without tension" is not easy. Exploiting the co-participation of different muscles is not even easier. Even sports are based on a few healthy principles. When observing a good pianist or a good athlete.... it seems as if they are doing nothing. In reality, they learn to "deconstruct" and abandon the belief that the body, arms, and hands are merely slaves to training. Concentration and the resolution of difficulties through the understanding of the "gesture" enable the artist, the athlete, etc., to grow more and more in a microworld made of attention, micromovements, and rapid small decisions. This is why I believe it is not necessary to "build muscle," but to know how to resolve that transition once and for all. Of course, it is not advisable not to study for long periods, because small and large muscles lose some ability in coordination during micromovements and more, and therefore the energy they must develop without tension. Even the "cantabile," the most difficult thing to achieve on our instrument, will suffer from this. That natural proportion between intensity and duration of sound (which achieves the legato cantabile) will have to be rediscovered. However, everything that has been technically understood deeply will be recovered in a short time.

The teacher must supervise and develop all of this and more, in proportion, as one can understand, to the ability and talent of the student.

I am only now reading Frank's response, which I fully agree with. It would be worthwhile to hear a recital from this or that school. That was my experience. From a very young age, until a certain age, I couldn't understand the basic principles at all and I wasn't "making progress." I was constantly changing teachers. They all told me very little or even just listened!

As luck would have it, not because of her, that my grandmother broke a leg. She ended up in a room, in the CTO, with an elderly lady, the mother of a pianist. The pianist held a recital of her students in a small auditorium on via Teulada in Rome. I made sure to go there. My goodness! They all played well.... even the less talented ones (a concept expressed by Frank).

That unknown pianist, now almost fifty years old, had been a student of the great Bajardi and, subsequently, of Carlo Zecchi and Alfredo Casella.

She was my teacher until my diploma. In her memory, I owe her everything!

She was very tough (but very kind at the same time!) and she did well, because I believed I knew how to do many things... which I actually didn't know how to do! Many times she sent me home with the book under my arm! A few days before she left, she called me to her house and gave me, with a dedication, Chopin's complete works, which contains Zecchi's red and blue pencil marks on the sonata op. 58 in B minor. The sonata that was a milestone in her study life!

Thank you for sharing the beautiful memory of your teacher, Paolo.

Sometimes it can be decisive to meet the right people who know how to value our talents.

I thank you for the precious advice.

I will take the opportunity to ask one last question. And also a small curiosity.

The question:

I am not an expert in conservatory programs. I believe there is a pre-academic period of 5 or more years, then an academic period of 3, and a two-year "specialization." All this to obtain a diploma that is equivalent to a degree in another field.

In all these many years of conservatory, one must pass exams related to various subjects/courses. Exams in theory, harmony, music history, composition, solfeggio, accompaniment, and various other subjects that I cannot even imagine.

These are, however, "theoretical" subjects.

But, in the case of our instrument, what are the conservatory subjects that draw from piano practice? That is, which are those subjects/courses where there is a teacher who teaches you and then shows you how to "put your hands" on the piano? Who knows... fundamentals of piano technique...?

Finally, the curiosity:

I am addressing this mainly to those who have done or still do concert activities. And, to a lesser extent, public performances.

The thing that in some ways "unsettles" me about piano concert activity is that it is imperative not to make mistakes. There are some old videos online of renowned pianists (for example, Cortot) in which one can appreciate some small imprecision. But this seems unacceptable to me for today's performances. I believe that if a Lang Lang were to miss a note or have a memory lapse... he would have gambled away his reputation.

All of this is, in some ways, "unnatural."

It is not even a matter of study, preparation, application, or talent. You can practice 24 hours a day, but if you perform concerts for years and years, the time comes when you freeze up. To err is human. Errors are expected in all human activities. Even a cardiac surgeon who makes a small mistake can remedy it. An engineer can revise a project. A sprinter who misses the start tries again at the next Olympics.

Staying within the musical realm, an orchestra member who makes a small imperfection can "get away with it" because their instrument is "covered" by the others. Perhaps they will pay the price among professionals, but the audience will not notice.

But for a soloist, for a pianist, error is not contemplated. That is why many pianists today seem like machines to me.

And I cannot fathom how one can handle the tension of having to always be "perfect"... on every occasion.

Besides talent and technique, a top-level pianist must also have an "iron head"... and a good dose of luck.

My teacher used to tell me (though I don't know if it is true) that this obsessive search for perfection, this maniacal and totalizing symbiosis with the instrument, has led some concert performers (he mentioned the name of a living concert pianist) to alienate themselves a bit from everything else.

Regarding the issue of conservatory programs, you can explore the educational offerings through institutional websites. See, for example, that of Milan:

https://www.consmilano.it/it/didattica

As for the issue of errors, let's just say we have become accustomed to increasingly perfect performances from the perspective of the number of errors, making it difficult to break the habit (man is a habitual animal by definition). However, the issue is a bit broader; on average, in these types of discussions, there is a tendency to think that performances are only those of the most well-known pieces, where we like to win easily in terms of "error searching," but there are unpublished works, less beaten repertoires, etc. ... here the listener's habit is not the point. As a composer, I can tell you that I appreciate my pieces being delivered as I wrote them and not with invented notes because, since historical recordings do not exist, the risk is creating a wrong memory of the pieces.

In any case, recording is an accomplice; as long as an error is heard in a concert, it "passes." But a record, with all the recording techniques that exist today, leads the performer to want to leave a perfect idea of their interpretation, and this feeds the listener's habit of perfection. Are we sure this is a bad thing?

Not missing notes does not automatically mean not being musical. Therefore, if one succeeds, there is only benefit to be gained.