Curious does anyone play the piano

[turbo]

Turbo-I knew you had been in music, but didn't know in what way. That is very cool! Thanks for sharing.

I worked my way through college in large part by playing frat parties on weekends, and buying, refurbishing, and reselling guitars and tube amps. Shiftwork (pulp and paper) and consulting (lots of flying) screwed my chances of playing in an established band, so when I stopped traveling and got 9-5 in-state jobs, I started playing open-mic jams. $125 cash plus free drinks for ~3 hours of work on a weekend day. Pretty good job. Plus, I'd get bands together to play biker parties and corporate BBQs.

The best band I ever cobbled together included two guitarists and a bassist that were regulars at the open-mic jams, a very talented drummer, and a female vocalist (my sister). It was a short-notice deal to fill an unexpected vacancy at a local night-spot. We called ourselves "to be announced" because that's what it said on the placards. As the owner paid us, he begged us to stay together and be his house band, with storage space, practice facilities, etc in that old hotel. My youngest sister was tending bar that night, and she told me that the bar had its most profitable night of the entire year, including New Year's Eve. We would have had to break up 4 bands in order to stay together, and I would have had to give up my open-mic jobs or risk losing all my spare time on weekends. Still, it was fun.

Apart from playing stuff at the open-mic jams, we had zero rehearsal time, and we pretty much winged it all night. Very live, fresh stuff.

 

[Pythagorean]

Piano was my first instrument but I ne'er really liked it until after I learned theory. Now I like any instrument with strings.

 

[turbo]

Piano was my first instrument but I ne'er really liked it until after I learned theory. Now I like any instrument with strings.

I never warmed up to piano because there were too many variations in patterns involved in key-changes. Guitar, banjo, mandolin are a lot more forgiving. Learn to play barre chords, and transpose instantly with no hassle.

I never owned a mandolin. One night, I visited a friend at his apartment and he showed me an old Gibson melon-back that he had bought, and told me that he was taking lessons from a well-known local blue-grass musician. He went into the kitchen to fix a few snacks, and I started playing his mandolin. He came back out of the kitchen and asked how I knew how to play it, and I told him that I had never played one before. Then he said "I hate you!".

 

[elabed haidar]

Sure it is. You wouldn't be playing note for note what Elton John did in the studio version, but he doesn't play it exactly that way in his live performances either. You have freedom to play what you want, as long as it fits within the chord structure. Here is a brief example: (two measures only due to lack of time)

D minor (two counts, F Major two counts, G Major 4 counts. C Major two counts, E minor 2 counts, F Major 4 counts.

Can you pick the song out? I have been singing that song since I read this thread. :D He doesn't play those CHORDS, but what he plays fits within the chord sequence. And I doubt that is the right key... but that isn't the point I am trying to show you.

You will not be playing Elton John note for note, but it is an interesting concept to learn, and gives you a lot of freedom for your own interpretation. I think this is how studio musicians play?

Does this help?
I am willing to go more into depth if you want, but I just got a HUGE pile of work dumped on my desk. *scowl*

give me what ever you want i really care about piano

 

[elabed haidar]

Playing by ear is listening to a piece and then playing it.

I understand what you have described above (give someone the chords for a piece and they can play along to someone with the melody).

However, it is impossible for you to play an Elton John (or any) piece - the melody/accompaniment piano part - without hearing it first. How would you know you're playing it? How would you know what to play?

So it's one or the other. You are either just playing the chords along to the melody, or you are trying to improvise the melody - the latter requiring a prior hearing of said melody.

I'm not entirely sure what you're arguing here. To improvise an Elton John song (or any) is to play by ear.

i couldn't agree with you more

 

[Ken Natton]

i couldn't agree with you more

Well, I would suggest to you that it is not what is generally meant by ‘playing by ear’. Usually, someone who is described as ‘playing by ear’ is someone who cannot read music at all, and would not have the faintest idea what was meant by ‘a chord of C major’ or ‘a chord of A minor’. All they do is work out how to play something that sounds like the piece that they have heard. I have encountered some people who are astonishingly good at it, and for someone who learned more formally, it is always a mystifying ability.

Although playing a designated chord sequence is not playing from sheet music, neither is it playing by ear. Nor is it improvisation. Just because you are not reading from a manuscript, you're still playing a pre-planned sequence. And again, I would suggest to you it is the way that a fair proportion of pop musicians operate. They learn one chord sequence for the verse, shift to a second sequence for the hook, and possibly a third one for the middle eight. And that’s it. Put a Mozart sonata in front of them and they wouldn’t have a clue. But it is still not playing by ear. Or not what is usually meant by that term.

 

[Pythagorean]

I never warmed up to piano because there were too many variations in patterns involved in key-changes. Guitar, banjo, mandolin are a lot more forgiving. Learn to play barre chords, and transpose instantly with no hassle.

I never owned a mandolin. One night, I visited a friend at his apartment and he showed me an old Gibson melon-back that he had bought, and told me that he was taking lessons from a well-known local blue-grass musician. He went into the kitchen to fix a few snacks, and I started playing his mandolin. He came back out of the kitchen and asked how I knew how to play it, and I told him that I had never played one before. Then he said "I hate you!".

mandolin is fun. I got one last christmas and have since learned blackberry blossom, cattle in the cane, and super mario bros. I'm kind of working on 'midnight on the summer deep' (tony rice unit version), but I've been distracted lately playing electric guitar with a drummer-slash-fellow-neuroscience-student.

 

[Jonathan Scott]

In a lot of popular and folk music styles, it is possible to guess without any form of notation at all what chord is coming up next even the first time through, and certainly possible after the first iteration of some chord sequence. If one isn't quite sure, it's often possible to play notes which fit with part of a chord anyway, and if one really isn't sure, one can just listen first and play a little late. Also, there are often rhythmic or melodic patterns which repeat a lot, so you only need to pick up the pattern once to cover a lot of material.

Occasionally I come across piano works which similarly have so much pattern that they are very easy to learn by memory, even if difficult to play. Chopin studies Op 25 No 11 ("Winter Wind") and No 12 ("Ocean") are examples of such works. In the "Ocean" study, almost every bar (measure) of music is simply based on one chord, but contains 32 notes.

I play mainly piano, violin and viola. (I'm just an amateur - my day job is writing IBM systems software). Of those, at a given standard, piano is by far the hardest to sight read because of the number of notes. On a good day, I've been known to sit in front of a full orchestral score and give a reasonable approximation on the piano, but transposing instruments (especially French Horns) usually manage to trip me up as soon as the texture gets too crowded.

I'm currently warming up the first movement of Rachmaninoff's 2nd piano concerto for an informal concerto play-through evening in June where members of the orchestra (including myself on the piano and my wife on the cello) are playing various concerto movements and allowing the public to pay to watch us making fools of ourselves. Should be fun!

 

[JaredJames]

Well, I would suggest to you that it is not what is generally meant by ‘playing by ear’. Usually, someone who is described as ‘playing by ear’ is someone who cannot read music at all, and would not have the faintest idea what was meant by ‘a chord of C major’ or ‘a chord of A minor’. All they do is work out how to play something that sounds like the piece that they have heard. I have encountered some people who are astonishingly good at it, and for someone who learned more formally, it is always a mystifying ability.

Although playing a designated chord sequence is not playing from sheet music, neither is it playing by ear. Nor is it improvisation. Just because you are not reading from a manuscript, you're still playing a pre-planned sequence. And again, I would suggest to you it is the way that a fair proportion of pop musicians operate. They learn one chord sequence for the verse, shift to a second sequence for the hook, and possibly a third one for the middle eight. And that’s it. Put a Mozart sonata in front of them and they wouldn’t have a clue. But it is still not playing by ear. Or not what is usually meant by that term.

Why are people arguing this?

Playing by ear: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_music_by_ear

You either have none of, or some of the music and you listen to the piece and try to recreate it. There is no requirement not to know music notation.

If you have no music at all and recreate a piece, that is playing by ear.

If you have the chords only and recreate the melody part, that is playing by ear (melody not chords).

You seem to be saying that the moment you have a hint of notation in front of you, it is no longer playing by ear. Which is nonsense. How would you describe listening to and then playing the melody? You're not improvising and you're certainly not playing from a set notation. You are listening to a piece and then recreating it - playing it by ear. The only bit you're not playing by ear are the chords.

My music teacher was fantastic at it. She could listen to a piece a few times and then after only a few attempts could emulate it to a very good standard without any music.

 

[Hurkyl]

Why are people arguing this?

Because you're arguing a strawman. You are talking about trying to faithfully reproduce a performance you heard. The people you are arguing with aren't.

 

[JaredJames]

Because you're arguing a strawman. You are talking about trying to faithfully reproduce a performance you heard. The people you are arguing with aren't.

Firstly, the OP wants to play Elton John songs. Without sheet music it is "trying to faithfully reproduce a performance you heard", even with the chord pattern you are playing the melody by ear.

Secondly, I described listening to a song and attempting to recreate it as above (whether the whole piece or part of) and yet people have turned around and said that isn't playing by ear.

I understand what they are saying (for the third time now), however I disagree when they say listening to and then recreating a piece isn't playing by ear (chords or not).

There is no strawman, there is simply a concept (definition even) which they are happily applying in one case but not another for no valid reason. You wouldn't accept it in physics, so why here?

 

[Ken Natton]

Firstly, the OP wants to play Elton John songs. Without sheet music it is "trying to faithfully reproduce a performance you heard", even with the chord pattern you are playing the melody by ear.

Secondly, I described listening to a song and attempting to recreate it as above (whether the whole piece or part of) and yet people have turned around and said that isn't playing by ear.

I understand what they are saying (for the third time now), however I disagree when they say listening to and then recreating a piece isn't playing by ear (chords or not).

There is no strawman, there is simply a concept (definition even) which they are happily applying in one case but not another for no valid reason. You wouldn't accept it in physics, so why here?

Well, clearly Jared, your understanding of the term differs considerably from mine. And it really is not about anything so precise and scientific as physics. It’s about a term and how it is normally used. My understanding of the usage does not accord with yours. But what ever our respective understandings of the term, you still seem to me to be missing the core point about how popular songs are often created. Of course there are some with greater sophistication that are created by composers with a genuine understanding of tonal theory. But an awful lot of them are created by people who have no such understanding. Their talent is for creating sound sequences that connect with their target audience. They don’t need a deep knowledge of tonal theory to do so. But then neither do the people who wish to play those songs themselves need to put in the same amount of effort that they would to play a Mozart sonata or a Chopin waltz. Once you have grasped that they really are just simple chord sequences, those chord sequences are very easy to learn to play. And as I say, if you do that, it usually follows on quite naturally that you start to make up some of your own. It really isn’t very difficult.

 

[JaredJames]

Well, clearly Jared, your understanding of the term differs considerably from mine. And it really is not about anything so precise and scientific as physics. It’s about a term and how it is normally used. My understanding of the usage does not accord with yours.

We'll agree to disagree then, however I would be very interested how you would describe someone with a chord pattern for a piece, listening to said piece and then trying to play the melody, if not by the use of "playing by ear"?

But what ever our respective understandings of the term, you still seem to me to be missing the core point about how popular songs are often created. Of course there are some with greater sophistication that are created by composers with a genuine understanding of tonal theory. But an awful lot of them are created by people who have no such understanding. Their talent is for creating sound sequences that connect with their target audience. They don’t need a deep knowledge of tonal theory to do so. But then neither do the people who wish to play those songs themselves need to put in the same amount of effort that they would to play a Mozart sonata or a Chopin waltz. Once you have grasped that they really are just simple chord sequences, those chord sequences are very easy to learn to play. And as I say, if you do that, it usually follows on quite naturally that you start to make up some of your own. It really isn’t very difficult.

Again, for the fourth time, I understand all of this. For those unaware here, I studied music for most of my life both in and out of teaching environments (holding various qualifications and all that nonsense that goes with it). This stuff above and previously, I do not disagree with.

 

[Hurkyl]

I understand what they are saying (for the third time now) however I disagree when they say listening to and then recreating a piece isn't playing by ear (chords or not).

There is no strawman,

If you think they are talking about "listening to and then recreating a piece", then you really don't understand what they are saying. Ms Music, for example, already explicitly clarified what she was talking about:

... create a chord chart ... they should be able to play along (without ever hearing the song) ... Without the studio musicians ever hearing the song.

 

[Pythagorean]

Usually, someone who is described as ‘playing by ear’ is someone who cannot read music at all, and would not have the faintest idea what was meant by ‘a chord of C major’ or ‘a chord of A minor’. All they do is work out how to play something that sounds like the piece that they have heard. I have encountered some people who are astonishingly good at it, and for someone who learned more formally, it is always a mystifying ability.

I think that's a bit of a generalization though. I play by ear, but I also know theory. Technically, I can read music, but I can't sight-read (and I haven't practiced sight-reading)

but I went through several periods of musical development

1. very young, piano lessons, hated it (monotonous)
2. high school, guitar, learned a couple chords, then started studying theory and technique on the internet. But mostly, I was always jamming with a friend of mine who got me interested in guitar. We'd just play. I eventually learned that the scale I had diddle in that i liked was called E minor harmonic and learned about triads and arpeggios and the harmonic series. Picked up the violin and the accordion a couple times, but never purchased my own. I love the breathing rhythm of the accordion though. During this phase, I would also fill cups up to different levels and try to get them into an A minor scale. I also remember using a microphone and a wah-wah pedal on my piano. I was very experimental with tonality and timbre at the time.
3. college, started my physics degree with a minor in music (later went from BA to BS in physics and dropped music, but not before getting through a year of theory and ear training; aced the theory, couldn't sing or sight read in the ear training, but never really practiced it and still don't have much interest. I actually think classical musical notation is terribly unintuitive and out of date. I still use tabs.)
4. musical death (physics degree took-over for a couple years)
5. mandolin bluegrass revival + drummer to jam prog rock with. Miss having a rhythm guitarist though.

wouldn't the circle of fifths and the way it all comes together be much more elegant in a mathematical formulation rather than letters with sharps and flats?

 

[JaredJames]

If you think they are talking about "listening to and then recreating a piece", then you really don't understand what they are saying. Ms Music, for example, already explicitly clarified what she was talking about:

For the fifth time, that part of what they are saying I understand. My comment on "listening to and then recreating a piece" was nothing to do with that. So not sure why you combined them. In fact, I'd consider that misinformation on your part. My original statement (emphasis mine):

I understand what they are saying (for the third time now) however I disagree when they say listening to and then recreating a piece isn't playing by ear (chords or not).

I did not say that what they described in the latter posts was playing by ear. I said that the following is playing by ear:

If you are familiar with his music, it is easy to imitate his "artistic flourishes." (what I called "flowery") Unless you WANT to play it note for note like he does in studio, then you want the notation. But it sounded like the original poster was having a tough time finding good sheet music. You can find basic guitar tabs online, which aren't much different than a chord chart. Then pretend you are Elton John, and voila!

If the original poster is talented enough to play Elton John, (and it sounds like you have also) then that person (and you) would probably be able to figure out how to play Elton John's music by using chord charts. It just requires some thinking outside of the box, as you don't have sheet music in front of you. It was extremely awkward for me to learn in college, even if you looked at what classical music I was able to play all ready.

I don't know about others here, but to me that reads as "if you like Elton John but can't get sheet music, get a chord chart and then try and recreate the piece (possibly in your own way)." with the obvious requirement of having heard the EJ song you want to play. This would come under playing by ear.

If you've never heard an Elton John song, the chance of you sitting at a piano and playing one of his pieces is slim to none, chord chart or not. In order to do the above, you must have listened to it, which makes what you are doing playing by ear - aka, listening to the melody and trying to reproduce it with the assistance of a chord chart. I'd be very interested in seeing a studio performer play the melody of a lady gaga song without ever hearing it and only having a chord chart.

 

[Hurkyl]

If you've never heard an Elton John song, the chance of you sitting at a piano and playing one of his pieces is slim to none, chord chart or not. In order to do the above, you must have listened to it, which makes what you are doing playing by ear - aka, listening to the melody and trying to reproduce it with the assistance of a chord chart.

If you're trying to reproduce the specific notes, then yes you are playing it by ear. If you're merely trying to reproduce the style, then no, you are not playing it by ear.


I was going to use "Symphony for the Devil" as an example of the sort of thing. All you really need is chords, melody, and "woo woo", and are playing the song. (And you probably don't even need all three to be recognizable) I picked this because I remember being at a friends house and a CD with a dozen variations of the song was playing quietly in the background, even in very different styles, and it was still clear what the song was. (at least once "woo woo" started)

Then I fired it up in youtube, I was still surprised at just how utterly generic the piano part was. If the video on youtube had a completely different piano part with the same chords in the style of 60-70s rock, I'm not certain I would have consciously noticed.


That's what I took Ms Music's comment to mean after she clarified -- that Elton John is very similar. I just fired up one song at random in youtube (Sorry Seems to be the Hardest Word), I agree.

I think that if you had given be a chord chart and told me to "with the right hand, play on each beat without much variation", I would have a good chance of having played nearly the same right-hand part I heard in the youtube video, despite having never heard the song before. I think the biggest random factor is whether or not I guess correctly at what pitch to keep the top notes of the chords hovering about. (so that I get the inversions right)

 

[Ken Natton]

I think that's a bit of a generalization though. I play by ear, but I also know theory.

Yeah, I didn’t mean to say that it is proscribed that anyone who plays by ear must not know any musical theory, I was just saying that it is more normally the case, because the very reason that they play by ear is because they have no other access to being able to play.

Whatever, let’s take this conversation in a more positive direction.

wouldn't the circle of fifths and the way it all comes together be much more elegant in a mathematical formulation rather than letters with sharps and flats?

I always think that it a key thing to understand about Mozart that he was someone with an exceptional mathematical ability. The cycle of keys and relationships between keys is all very mathematical and it is something Mozart understood at an instinctive level. He had an extraordinary ability to make several modulations that you don’t even notice until you suddenly realize that you are somewhere very distant from where you started. But I am not among those who criticize Mozart’s music as something that is too mathematical. I believe his music to be among the most profound. I studied the G minor symphony for ‘O level’ and it remains a piece that speaks very deeply to me.

Chopin studies Op 25 No 11 ("Winter Wind") and No 12 ("Ocean") are examples of such works. In the "Ocean" study, almost every bar (measure) of music is simply based on one chord, but contains 32 notes.

The thing with Chopin is that that he is famous for his unusual harmonies and his unusual and complex harmonic sequences. And what he was the absolute master of was keeping the rhythmic left hand part constant while taking a right hand part that started as a simple melodic sequence of just four or five notes and steadily making it ever more complex until you get a sequence of something like 23 notes played in the time of five where the original five note sequence is still audible within the long and complex sequence. And of course, the technique required to play it well is something that takes hours and hours of hard work to develop. Let me be clear, it is an ability I do not have.

 

[JaredJames]

If you're trying to reproduce the specific notes, then yes you are playing it by ear. If you're merely trying to reproduce the style, then no, you are not playing it by ear.

Oh, of course the style isn't. See what you're on about there.

But as above and in the context of the OP, I took it to mean trying to play a specific song of his.

Anyhow, bit of a busy day ahead (what with the rapture and everything ) so must shoot off for a while.

 

[Awesomesauce]

Well, I would suggest to you that it is not what is generally meant by ‘playing by ear’. Usually, someone who is described as ‘playing by ear’ is someone who cannot read music at all, and would not have the faintest idea what was meant by ‘a chord of C major’ or ‘a chord of A minor’. All they do is work out how to play something that sounds like the piece that they have heard. I have encountered some people who are astonishingly good at it, and for someone who learned more formally, it is always a mystifying ability.

Although playing a designated chord sequence is not playing from sheet music, neither is it playing by ear. Nor is it improvisation. Just because you are not reading from a manuscript, you're still playing a pre-planned sequence. And again, I would suggest to you it is the way that a fair proportion of pop musicians operate. They learn one chord sequence for the verse, shift to a second sequence for the hook, and possibly a third one for the middle eight. And that’s it. Put a Mozart sonata in front of them and they wouldn’t have a clue. But it is still not playing by ear. Or not what is usually meant by that term.

Someone who is described as playing by ear does not necessarily mean they cannot read music. Playing by ear simply means someone who listens to a piece (however many times), and can recreate the melody without any sheet music. There are many people who can play both by ear and read from sheets very well. It's not always disconnected.
That's it.

 

[Pythagorean]

I always think that it a key thing to understand about Mozart that he was someone with an exceptional mathematical ability. The cycle of keys and relationships between keys is all very mathematical and it is something Mozart understood at an instinctive level. He had an extraordinary ability to make several modulations that you don’t even notice until you suddenly realize that you are somewhere very distant from where you started. But I am not among those who criticize Mozart’s music as something that is too mathematical. I believe his music to be among the most profound. I studied the G minor symphony for ‘O level’ and it remains a piece that speaks very deeply to me.

I don't like most of Mozart's pieces either, much like I don't like most Jazz pieces. Mostly because (it think this is another perspective of the same thing you're saying) it lacks a holistic glue.

Of course, when the holistic glue is there, Mozart's pieces are fantastic! And there's some neat little riffs that come out of his pieces like in Piano Sonata No.12 in F Major K.332 he demonstrates a circle of filths progression that sounds very ahead of his time.

it's around 1:17 on this video

88Golzb39Mo [/youtube] I think ...n about mastering modulation (any tips, heh?)

 

[atyy]

Firstly, the OP wants to play Elton John songs. Without sheet music it is "trying to faithfully reproduce a performance you heard", even with the chord pattern you are playing the melody by ear.

Secondly, I described listening to a song and attempting to recreate it as above (whether the whole piece or part of) and yet people have turned around and said that isn't playing by ear.

I understand what they are saying (for the third time now), however I disagree when they say listening to and then recreating a piece isn't playing by ear (chords or not).

I agree.

BTW, sure sounds like flowery chord charts to me!

 

[turbo]

Someone who is described as playing by ear does not necessarily mean they cannot read music. Playing by ear simply means someone who listens to a piece (however many times), and can recreate the melody without any sheet music. There are many people who can play both by ear and read from sheets very well. It's not always disconnected.
That's it.

I could sight-read for brass instruments, but never learned to sight-read for guitar. That's all "by ear". As Chet Atkins said "I'm confessin' I never took a lesson. All my notes are a matter of guessin'"

I took a music theory course in college, and for one particular assignment, I had to compose a piece, write the proper notation for the piece, and perform the piece in front of the class. I wrote a snappy little finger-picking piece for my 12-string guitar in about 15 minutes or so, then spent all the rest of Sunday afternoon transcribing it. When I performed it, the instructor said "wait right there" after the first run-through, and went out to find another instructor who was more familiar with guitar, then had me play the piece again, to see if my notation appeared to be accurate - the guy nodded and left. Of course, I was playing the piece from memory. There is no way that I could perform that piece from sheet music.

 

[Hurkyl]

There is no way that I could perform that piece from sheet music.

I can't play piano from sheet music either. I use it to learn the piece, of course, but to really be able to play it it has to be memorized.

 

[Jonathan Scott]

I can't play piano from sheet music either. I use it to learn the piece, of course, but to really be able to play it it has to be memorized.

There's a bit of difference between the "learning it into your fingers" level of memorizing and the "being able to play without the sheet music" level.

I'm still trying to decide whether my memory is reliable enough for me to play the Rachmaninoff without the sheet music next month. I've performed the first movement of the Grieg and the last movement of Tchaik violin concerto from memory, but the Rachmaninoff is closer to my limits!

 

[elabed haidar]

Playing by ear is listening to a piece and then playing it.

I understand what you have described above (give someone the chords for a piece and they can play along to someone with the melody).

However, it is impossible for you to play an Elton John (or any) piece - the melody/accompaniment piano part - without hearing it first. How would you know you're playing it? How would you know what to play?

So it's one or the other. You are either just playing the chords along to the melody, or you are trying to improvise the melody - the latter requiring a prior hearing of said melody.

I'm not entirely sure what you're arguing here. To improvise an Elton John song (or any) is to play by ear.

who said I am with the idea of playing by ear?? I am with you here , i just want to play elton john. I just want to know if there is a paino sheet for him , i know it takes time but i really like his songs

 

[turbo]

Just Google on "Elton John sheet music". There are tons of resources.

 

[Ouabache]

I play piano. Before doing so I already had sight-read training in classical and jazz styles on wind instrument, chord & finger pick styles guitar and banjo and flat picking mandolin. Having had previous musical training, made it much easier to learn piano. I am glad to hear others memorize pieces or at least use muscle memory to play fluently. I was worried I wasn't learning to read properly by relying more on memory.

 

[elabed haidar]

I play piano. Before doing so I already had sight-read training in classical and jazz styles on wind instrument, chord & finger pick styles guitar and banjo and flat picking mandolin. Having had previous musical training, made it much easier to learn piano. I am glad to hear others memorize pieces or at least use muscle memory to play fluently. I was worried I wasn't learning to read properly by relying more on memory.

niceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

 

[ThomasT]

I play a bit. Just an amateur who doesn't sight read. After playing guitar in the classical style, and a bit of violin and flute for a few years, I spent a few years getting comfortable on the keyboard. It's my favorite hobby.

At the risk of offending anyone's musical sensibilities here's some links to a few of my tunes:

Incongruent Configuration III

For Dixie on a Cool Summer Night

The Tying Run Is On Bass

 

[CRichard]

Hey guys, I just stumbled on this thread. ThomasT, those pieces sound fantastic! You sound great on the piano, and the melodies are really cool too.

Elabed Haldar, if you want free Elton john sheet music, I would recommend the website, Elton John's Music Cafe. It has the sheet music that this guy transcribed by ear off of many of Elton's live performances. All the sections are great, but the "Dessert" section has great arrangements of some of his classic songs. And you can really see how much his music is based fancy, interesting variations on simple chord sequences.

I would also recommend the Elton John keyboard book if you want to play what Elton himself played in the studio recordings. It has the vocal part, but only on the top line, so if you play the bottom 2 lines of piano without singing, it can sound kind of empty. I like it, though, because you can really appreciate Elton's playing.

 

[elabed haidar]

thank you man very very much Crichard ,that was exactly what i was looking for

 

[ThomasT]

Hey guys, I just stumbled on this thread. ThomasT, those pieces sound fantastic! You sound great on the piano, and the melodies are really cool too.

Thanks CRichard. But let's be honest ... they're pretty sloppy. Anyway, it's a great hobby and I have lots of fun trying to come up with stuff that I at least don't consciously copy from other stuff I've heard. But everything is derivitive in some way or other.

You have any stuff you can link to? Let's hear it. I hope others will post some of their stuff also.

My next project is going to be learning some Debussy and Bach stuff. The easier stuff of course. But it's all good.

Keep playing

 

[ThomasT]

It would be interesting to hear what others are playing on. Currently, I only have a Casio WK 210, 76 key portable. I'm getting back into it so will probably get a Yamaha dgx or something similar in the next few weeks. These keyboards are not exactly like playing a real piano, but they have lots of capabilities and they do have touch control and of course you can hook up a sustain pedal to them.

I'll post some organ stuff later when I get time.

Let's hear some of your stuff!

 

[Jonathan Scott]

It would be interesting to hear what others are playing on. Currently, I only have a Casio WK 210, 76 key portable. I'm getting back into it so will probably get a Yamaha dgx or something similar in the next few weeks. These keyboards are not exactly like playing a real piano, but they have lots of capabilities and they do have touch control and of course you can hook up a sustain pedal to them.

I'll post some organ stuff later when I get time.

Let's hear some of your stuff!

My main piano is a Young Chang (same as Weber) G-157 (5 foot) grand. It has a slightly weightier touch than the average grand piano, but that's not bad because it helps ensure that my finger strength is well up to handling any piano I'm likely to play in concert. It is unfortunately not very portable.

I have recently bought a Roland FP-7F as a digital keyboard which has a realistic touch with weighted keys and fairly realistic piano sound (or so they claim - they call it "SuperNatural"). It is portable enough - about 36kg (79lb) including its stand - for me to be able to pick it up on my own and put it in the car, although it isn't as well protected for transport as my old keyboard. The idea is mainly to provide a usable piano for rehearsal purposes in the rehearsal hall for the two orchestras in which I play.

The FP-7F has built-in 12W speakers which are adequate for home use and for quieter classical stuff but for a full grand piano sound I also have a pair of Mackie SRM350v2 powered speakers, which produce a little bit of background hiss all the time but otherwise seem very promising. I tried four other sets of speakers first - the first two pairs weren't powerful enough and distorted too much on bass notes; the third pair (QSC-K10) was really compact but gave excellent power and sound quality for the first few seconds but then an intolerably loud fan cut in; the fourth pair had persistent noise and both of the pair had faults (but different ones), but I finally settled for the SRM350v2 pair. I'm still not yet sure what this will be like in practice, but on Friday I will be rehearsing the 1st movement of Rach 2 with the orchestra, so I guess I will find out.

I also have an old (1992) Technics Digital Ensemble PR-350 keyboard which has a slightly weighted keyboard but not enough to be realistic, and more powerful built-in speakers. It has a hard keyboard cover and is more robust in many ways for moving purposes. However, it is so heavy (84kg / 185lb) that I couldn't move it on my own. I've kept it for now - it means that the kids can both practise keyboard in the same room at the same time on headphones.

I used to have a Welmar upright piano from the 1930s as well, which was the instrument on which I learned to play 50 years ago, but that had to go to make space for the FP-7F.

 

[elabed haidar]

I only have a Casio AT-1 , it has been in my hous for 8 years and its still works very well

 

[ThomasT]

My main piano is a Young Chang (same as Weber) G-157 (5 foot) grand. It has a slightly weightier touch than the average grand piano, but that's not bad because it helps ensure that my finger strength is well up to handling any piano I'm likely to play in concert. It is unfortunately not very portable.

I have recently bought a Roland FP-7F as a digital keyboard which has a realistic touch with weighted keys and fairly realistic piano sound (or so they claim - they call it "SuperNatural"). It is portable enough - about 36kg (79lb) including its stand - for me to be able to pick it up on my own and put it in the car, although it isn't as well protected for transport as my old keyboard. The idea is mainly to provide a usable piano for rehearsal purposes in the rehearsal hall for the two orchestras in which I play.

The FP-7F has built-in 12W speakers which are adequate for home use and for quieter classical stuff but for a full grand piano sound I also have a pair of Mackie SRM350v2 powered speakers, which produce a little bit of background hiss all the time but otherwise seem very promising. I tried four other sets of speakers first - the first two pairs weren't powerful enough and distorted too much on bass notes; the third pair (QSC-K10) was really compact but gave excellent power and sound quality for the first few seconds but then an intolerably loud fan cut in; the fourth pair had persistent noise and both of the pair had faults (but different ones), but I finally settled for the SRM350v2 pair. I'm still not yet sure what this will be like in practice, but on Friday I will be rehearsing the 1st movement of Rach 2 with the orchestra, so I guess I will find out.

I also have an old (1992) Technics Digital Ensemble PR-350 keyboard which has a slightly weighted keyboard but not enough to be realistic, and more powerful built-in speakers. It has a hard keyboard cover and is more robust in many ways for moving purposes. However, it is so heavy (84kg / 185lb) that I couldn't move it on my own. I've kept it for now - it means that the kids can both practise keyboard in the same room at the same time on headphones.

I used to have a Welmar upright piano from the 1930s as well, which was the instrument on which I learned to play 50 years ago, but that had to go to make space for the FP-7F.

Wow! I enjoyed reading that. It would be great if you could post some examples of your playing. Then, maybe you could field some questions regarding various aspects of it? Thanks.

I might go ahead and get one of the hammer-action, weighted digital keyboards. Something that feels more like a real piano, but still light enough to cart around easily. It'll be a few hundred more, but well worth it considering that I haven't played in several years and will require months of just building the strength in my hands and fingers again.

Found this at youtube ... what a supernice keyboard.

cZweKdIw-iQ&feature=related[/youtube]

 

[ThomasT]

I only have a Casio AT-1 , it has been in my hous for 8 years and its still works very well

That's a cool keyboard! Post some of your music. Thanks.

I found this at youtube:


Au-z44NHWQ0[/youtube]

 

[Ms Music]

1st movement of Rach 2 with the orchestra

*envy envy envy*

 

[ThomasT]

I just finished reading each and every post in this thread. There are lots of pianists/keyboardists at PF whose stuff it would be greatly entertaining to hear. So let's get crankin' on posting your links.

Hey, I'm not going to be shy about presenting some of my tunes. Here's a few more:

The Complementary Muse

October Passage

Summer On The Seine

Suite Organic Prospects II

Interlude For A Fallen Friend

 

[Ken Natton]

Here’s the story of my piano. I lived alone in a terraced house. Don’t know if the American’s on this site will quite understand what a terraced house is, but the essential point is that any kind of serious practice would have been highly likely to annoy the neighbours. At least, that was my excuse for not doing any. I even did look seriously into soundproofing one of my rooms, but apart from the prohibitive cost, the real problem was just how much it would have reduced the size of the room. Then I went to the Leeds Piano Competition in 2006, and in the program for that event was an advertisement for a Yamaha silent piano. My immediate reaction was that they couldn’t really be all that good. So I went to a local piano show room and played one, and here’s the news. They really are just that good. With the silent mechanism disengaged, it is a normal upright acoustic piano, and actually a very nice one. But you have the option to engage the silent mechanism, which simply stops the hammers striking the strings, then switch on the electronics and don your headphones. And the result is superb. Just as touch sensitive, just as expressive, and actually sounds like you are playing a big grand piano in an echoey concert hall. They are just wonderful, and I should stress that I have no shares in Yamaha nor any family or friends that work for them.

Of course, it was only because I was single at the time that I could justify the expense of buying one. Now, as a family man, there is of course no way I could possibly have afforded to buy one. And now I live in a detached house and there is only my family members to annoy I don’t often use the silent mode. So now I do hours and hours of serious practice, right? No, of course not. But a huge pleasure to have such a nice piano.

 

[ThomasT]

Here’s the story of my piano. I lived alone in a terraced house. Don’t know if the American’s on this site will quite understand what a terraced house is, but the essential point is that any kind of serious practice would have been highly likely to annoy the neighbours. At least, that was my excuse for not doing any. I even did look seriously into soundproofing one of my rooms, but apart from the prohibitive cost, the real problem was just how much it would have reduced the size of the room. Then I went to the Leeds Piano Competition in 2006, and in the program for that event was an advertisement for a Yamaha silent piano. My immediate reaction was that they couldn’t really be all that good. So I went to a local piano show room and played one, and here’s the news. They really are just that good. With the silent mechanism disengaged, it is a normal upright acoustic piano, and actually a very nice one. But you have the option to engage the silent mechanism, which simply stops the hammers striking the strings, then switch on the electronics and don your headphones. And the result is superb. Just as touch sensitive, just as expressive, and actually sounds like you are playing a big grand piano in an echoey concert hall. They are just wonderful, and I should stress that I have no shares in Yamaha nor any family or friends that work for them.

Of course, it was only because I was single at the time that I could justify the expense of buying one. Now, as a family man, there is of course no way I could possibly have afforded to buy one. And now I live in a detached house and there is only my family members to annoy I don’t often use the silent mode. So now I do hours and hours of serious practice, right? No, of course not. But a huge pleasure to have such a nice piano.

Thanks Ken, that piano sounds like it would be great for all sorts of urban living situations. Still, it would seem that there are more compact and inexpensive solutions available -- though they wouldn't provide the same real piano feel. Close though.

I've never been in a terraced house, but I can imagine the privacy issues.

Can we hear some of your playing?

Found this on youtube -- Yamaha makes great instruments:

 

[JaredJames]

Then I went to the Leeds Piano Competition in 2006, and in the program for that event was an advertisement for a Yamaha silent piano. My immediate reaction was that they couldn’t really be all that good. So I went to a local piano show room and played one, and here’s the news. They really are just that good. With the silent mechanism disengaged, it is a normal upright acoustic piano, and actually a very nice one. But you have the option to engage the silent mechanism, which simply stops the hammers striking the strings, then switch on the electronics and don your headphones. And the result is superb. Just as touch sensitive, just as expressive, and actually sounds like you are playing a big grand piano in an echoey concert hall. They are just wonderful, and I should stress that I have no shares in Yamaha nor any family or friends that work for them.

That sounds horrendously over engineered. If it sounds exactly like an acoustic whilst using the electronics, why not just stick with them and cut out the need for strings and tuning?

I have a Yamaha (can't remember the model) and it's electronic. It's full size, weighs a fair bit and has a fantastic sound to it. Personally, unless I had plenty of room and knew full well I'd never have to move it, I wouldn't bother with an acoustic. Although I really would love a grand piano.

 

[turbo]

Although I really would love a grand piano.

My cousin had a baby grand until he had to move to Australia to manage a defense project. Since he was with GE at the time, they might have paid for storage during his 5+ years in OZ. I'll have to ask him next time he comes back to visit his parents. It was a fantastic-sounding instrument.

He started taking lessons as an adult, and he progressed quite quickly, IMO. His teacher was my old music teacher in elementary school, and i mean OLD. Her first real job was playing piano for the silent movies at a local theater. Even into her late 90's she played piano for the Rotary Club and gave lessons. She passed away in 2002 at the age of 100.

 

[ThomasT]

That sounds horrendously over engineered. If it sounds exactly like an acoustic whilst using the electronics, why not just stick with them and cut out the need for strings and tuning?

I have a Yamaha (can't remember the model) and it's electronic. It's full size, weighs a fair bit and has a fantastic sound to it. Personally, unless I had plenty of room and knew full well I'd never have to move it, I wouldn't bother with an acoustic. Although I really would love a grand piano.

Good point(s) Jared. Still, it's cool to have the 'exactly' genuine acoustic sound and feel when you want it. Sitting down to a regular size acoustic piano puts me into a playing mood or mode that's sometimes difficult to get to with just the smaller digital instruments. Nevertheless, I'm sure I'll not buy anything but digital from here on out.

Do you have any of your music on the internet that you can link to?

 

[JaredJames]

Do you have any of your music on the internet that you can link to?

Nothing I'm aware of. Haven't played much recently due to being away from home, so don't have much chance.

 

[Pythagorean]

I love the exact pressure sensitivity of acoustic stringed pianos. Even the weighted, electronic emulators can't do it right.

I wish I had some music recorded. I mostly only have rifts though, no official pieces. I just kind of string them together and improvise.

 

[JaredJames]

I must say, I do prefer the feel of an acoustic. However, as per above they are just too awkward to own.

 

[Jonathan Scott]

I love the exact pressure sensitivity of acoustic stringed pianos. Even the weighted, electronic emulators can't do it right.

Even though the keyboard on my expensive Roland FP-7F feels quite realistic, I have difficulty balancing the sound between the fingers in the same way as on my real piano. I tend to get "bumps" of over-loud notes, especially on the black keys. I get the impression that the digital keyboard is somehow more sensitive to the speed of pressing a key than to the weight behind it. I know that the two should be closely related, but for example I can play fast but quietly more easily on the real piano.

I also suspect all of my digital keyboards have always had a special feature that makes wrong notes sound much louder than right ones!

 

[Ken Natton]

If it sounds exactly like an acoustic whilst using the electronics, why not just stick with them and cut out the need for strings and tuning?

Well the first point about maintaining the acoustic option is if you want to have a social sing-song at the piano. Not very common these days I know, but sometimes my wife and I have a little sing together – guaranteed to make the kids scramble for their iPods and headphones. Also, even if you just wish to perform for anyone it is better with the acoustic piano. You can connect external speakers to get the silent mode to play out loud, but it isn’t as good as the proper acoustic sound – that of course can be a question of the quality of your speakers. If you want to perform for just one other person, the silent electronics does have two headphone sockets – but then of course you need two pairs of headphones. Headphone quality is another issue and it would make no sense at all to pay the kind of money you need to, to buy a silent piano and then get a cheap low quality pair of headphones.

Ultimately, as others have suggested, where the option is there, I always prefer to play acoustically, but it is nice to have the option to play late at night, or even just to practice something without anyone hearing my clumsy efforts. But I must reinforce the point that it is nothing like playing any electronic keyboard that I have ever played. Even when the silent mechanism is engaged, the hammer mechanism still operates, the hammers are just prevented from hitting the strings. That means that the weight feel is exactly the same as when you are playing acoustically. And the tone generator is very responsive to your touch. There is some very clever technology to detect the speed of your key press as well as the weight.

I have the U3 model, it does not have the range of sounds demonstrated in the video clip ThomasT linked to. Neither does it have the facility to record. But what it does have is a MIDI interface, so I can connect it to my computer and record that way. I am making no promises ThomasT, but if I get some time soon, I may try and record something and post it here.