Classical or Pop Piano?

[rainedrop]

hi! i wanna learn piano but im not sure if i shld take up the classical or pop one.. basically i just wanna learn how to coordinate my hands and be able to play through pieces decently. not really aiming for gradings and stuff.. just, playing for fun was wondering if pop piano will be more suitable for my case, but does anyone know if pop piano lessons cover the basics well? lke coordinations and stuff? it seems lke pop piano'll be better off for me if i already know the basic stuff and just wanna learn songs, but the thing is i dun even know the basics =x

would love to hear opinions from u all. thanks! =)

 

[Cheez]

Learning to coordinate hands etc is about technique. And both types of playing will need technical skills. The question to ask is: what type of music do you want to play eventualy? If you intend to play pieces like Bach and Debussy etc, then you'll want to learn classical. If you want to play contemporary music, then learn pop.

 

[pf]

What songs would you like to play?

If it is pop song then learn pop piano. Also, if you want to learn to play a SIMPLE pop song SIMPLY, say in a week or 2, then go for pop.

But if you would like to play classical songs, then go for classical training.

The basics of pop piano is not the basics of classical. Different technique.

Both requires you to coordinate your left and right hand. Just that classical would require you to play both left and right according to the score that states how to play the left and right hand. But for pop piano, using fake books and lead sheets or even chord charts, you'll either be comping (playing something more rhythmic with both hands and doing fill-ins) on chords for the pop songs or playing melody on the right hand and a left hand pattern using broken chords.

There are some links floating around for music schools in Singapore in SOFT, but mostly pop such as SOMA, Play By Ear, Northwood,etc. I'm sure you know where to learn classical, eg. Yamaha, Christofori, etc.

Can do a search. Some of the music school's websites have got demos on them. Can even call the school and ask if they can give you a demo on what they teach. That'll be pop schools to my knowledge....probably classical piano schools will have no time to do that for you. They will be busy raking in money from the tons of little children sent by the parents. Hahaha....

 

[pf]

Whoa....I'm just a minute after you Cheez! Good morning!

 

[mandric]

i personally feel you should go for classical training first, to build your technique and foundation. but at the same time hone your skills in the pop area by yourself. once you're more confident with you playing, you may progress to pop piano or even jazz piano.

 

[Cheez]

I differ in opinion from Mandric. It all depends on the commmitment level and the end-goal. If one decided to go the classical route, then he/she should stay away from pop. As pf said, they require different skills. Playing pop while learning classical may be detrimental to the classical technique.

If the person is never going to play classical but want to play pop, then go pop. The person can still learn scales. However, if the person wants to learn PROPER piano technique, then indeed, classical is the way to go. But the person need to know that once on classical, stay away from pop.

 

[mandric]

with response to cheez,

i was once a dumbass classical pianist who was crippled without a score until i found happiness in playing improvisational piano.

however, i did not forget the fact that classical piano did hone my skills for better improv skills which i developed and am still developing.

everyone has their different perspectives but in the end, it is up to you (threadstarter) to make the decision.

cheers!

 

[rainedrop]

thanks for all the replies! =)

mandric

i'd want to build a good foundation for techniques and stuff so.. yeah i think this is quite a nice idea =) anyone knows the current prices in schools? tia!

 

[pf]

rainedrop,

I think you really need to consider what Cheez said about considering your commitment before choosing between Classical and Pop.

This is because learning classical takes a longer term commitment than pop to be able to play anything decent. As I said before, if you wanna learn to play a simple song simply, pop is the way to go. Simple pleasure comes that way. Just that you might not have that much icing on the cake compared to people like mandric who have the privilege of having both classical and pop background.

As said earlier by mandric, the proper piano technique builds great foundation. But it really takes a very long time. There is only one concern that you will find it boring and give up before you see any results.

If you are an adult learner, there is the issue about finding time to practice due to work commitments such as travelling. If there is a lack of time to practice, picking up the skill and techniques would be much slower. The slow pace might cause the boredom. Unless, you already have or builds up the passion in music along the way to persevere through the learning.

I'm saying this because I see a number of people who finished Grade 8 classical exams because their parents put them through the lessons but never touch the piano again after that.

But I started learning when I started working. There was an urgent need for someone to play the keyboard at that time for church worship service, so me and another friend took it up. No time to practice the scales and stuff. Need to start off by anyhow whacking! The commitment in playing for my church worship service motivates me to practice seriously and despite the difficulties. If I were to learn just for myself, I probably won't be so disciplined.

The discipline paid off and I'm enjoying myself tremendously. At first, I learn for the sake of service but now I learn for the sake of service and also for my own pleasure.

So, it really depends on how much commitment you have on learning. Because if you were to go for classical training, giving it up in the earlier stages would just amount to waste of time and money. If you go for pop, it will definately scarifice on building a proper foundation. But the good thing is that once you learn the simple comping and chords, you can apply it to any song. Its about having more or less icing on the cake. Probably it would seem to be less waste of time and money.

Seriously consider your commitment level and your passion towards music. Playing either classical or pop very well takes a lot of commitment and passion!

 

[pf]

Cheez, why did you mean by playing pop while learning classical may be detrimental to classical technique?

Would it be possible to learn pop and classical at the same time?

If one decided to go the classical route, then he/she should stay away from pop. As pf said, they require different skills. Playing pop while learning classical may be detrimental to the classical technique.

But the person need to know that once on classical, stay away from pop.

 

[joashchee]

Let me chip in my two cents here

I agree with the general sentiment here that going the pop route should give you 'quicker' returns, but returns that really cannot match up with what you would eventually get if you did persevere with the classical method.

When I was young, my parents started me off on classical. After completing my grade 1 with what was probably just a marginal pass, I felt that it wasn't really going the way I wanted it to, so I told my parents I'd rather stop.

A couple of years after that, I was spurred on by a church musician to consider learning music on my own. At that time, around 10 years old, I wanted to create a mindset and theory set that would allow me to play the music I wanted (which was mostly christian and whatever I heard over the radio and TV) simply by listening to it.

I am an analyst by nature, and in time I derived a basic theory of how such music worked. People thought that I was basically exhibiting the ability to 'play by ear' and was maybe just gifted or talented, and for the longest time , that's what I thought too. But now I know better and that really anyone with perseverance can do just about the same thing.

One of the things I did to 'force' my mind to work out a method was to learn to play without looking at my hands. What I did was simple. I made sure that it was the time of day when my room would be pitch black when the curtains are drawn and lights are off. Then in such a pitch-black condition, I forced myself to play pieces that I usually played and while doing so, paid very careful attention to how my body/fingers was trying to cope. Then I developed another method set just for playing without looking at my hands.

Eventually I realised this. I'm not an advocate of playing music by ear. I'm really an advocate of playing music by instinct. My biggest disagreement with people who are locked down by a score or sheet of any sort is that their focus is on it and not on something else that would help their playing (or enhance it).

Like if you're in a band, your awareness of your band members should be one of the most important things. Or if you're playing for church, you mind should be on God and not the sheet in front of you.

So I am now advocating a learning method that should eventually make the learner realise how they can play music (albeit not the classical kinds) almost effortlessly, like walking and breathing. When you walk, you hardly ever look at the ground unless you're anticipating something, like stairs. Then you glance to gauge the stairs but immediately move on to other things while your body follows thru with the execution. It's that kind of mental process, instincts, that can be developed and honed.

That's how I believe it can be for musicians and wannabe-musicians of the non-classical kind.

 

[Cheez]

Mandric, no offense friend!

There are 2 important factors to take into consideration here: learning from scratch (beginner), and the age of starting to learn.

No doubt, classical piano gives good foundation. But you cannot build piano skills on 2 different foundations, especially for a beginner. There needs to be proper finger and hand technique. Hence, Mandric, you starting with classical helped you later. But when you were learning classical, I'm pretty sure your piano teacher didn't let you play anything else.

When I was learning classical piano, my teacher not only did not let me play anything else (I almost got into trouble for playing Richard Clayderman without her notice), she also didn't let me play any other instruments like guitar or violin etc. I was playing trumpet, and that was OK. I also noticed that when I started playing the keyboard (synth action), my fingers technique changed almost overnight. So I couldn't touch any other thing or play any other thing except classical during the learning stages.

Of course, once the person had reached a certain level, he/she can venture out. That, as pf said, will take a few years at least. Although I play the synth and various keyboards, I make sure I go back to my Debussy and Chopin etc to keep my fingers going. I also made sure I do Joplin etc to keep the jazz mindset going. And of course, I need to make sure improvisation gets it's excercise.

But at the beginning stages, if one is to go classical, then he/she better hold on first. I'm not saying not to go the classical way, but the person needs at least a few years of commitment to get the right technique. If the person has enough commitment to do that (like our friend Doubleblade), then go ahead. It's the best way.

If not, then I would say just go pop. I have friends who play pretty well on the pop piano without any classical training whatsover. They could do arppegios and scales etc. Oh one thing - scales are necessary for both type of playing. Can't escape that.

Another thing. What Joash is mentioning is about the theoretical aspect of playing. That's comes under a separate category, which I feel is also crucial to playing improvistion and playing by ear. I'm bias towards learning theory no matter whether the pianist is classically trained or not, just because of the benefits of it. What Joash developed actually stemmed from classical background with roots in harmony writing. However, it does not affect the practical playing aspect, which eventually is still about correct finger techniques.

Pf hit it home when she said that taking up classical (at the adult age group) without commitment will eventually lead to giving up and losing money. As adults, getting the right classical finger technique is already very tough considering that the fingers are pretty stiff and the brain doesn't learn complex fine motor skills as well as a child. So unless with great commitment, I would suggest practicality - learn whatever the end goal is. I used to suggest to ALL who wants to play piano to start with classical. But with the older age groups, I see too many giving up that I'm re-thinking about the real benefits of it. Not everyone is like Doubleblade. For a child, there's no argument. ALWAYS go classical.

And no doubt, there will be different opinions. Maybe ex-piano should chip in here considering he's the most classically trained amongst us all!

 

[joashchee]

As Cheez said, it's true that what I'm proposing is mostly seen as an alternative theory approach to music but I'd like to also point out that when you've internalised certain theoretical aspects and your mind is thus free to focus and pay attention to other things, you are in a much better position to 'learn from your mistakes'.

Too often, I've heard keyboardists play awkwardly and are totally oblivious to it. I understand that what Cheez is establishing is good foundational disciplines for practical sake, but one cannot neglect the issue of really listening to yourself as you play and be aware of your mistakes only to correct them the next time round.

For instanct, walking and talking is a practical application we all do on a daily basis. Imagine if your mind was completely preoccupied with every step you take. You won't have enough 'mind' to actually carry out a decent conversation. So we all automatically relegate certain things to the instinctive level while our minds focus on things that require more attention.

I do disagree that what I'm proposing is purely on the theoretical level. What I'm proposing is a foundational theory that will allow a person to move certain things to the instinctive level so that their minds can focus on the more needful things which make big impact on the practical level.

While it does not start from the 'discipline' way of doing things (being forced to doing the right thing from the start with threats of being a failure in the future), I believe it's a healthy mode for continual learning for a person who does not have the luxury of a teacher / coach relationship for the rest of their lives.

I personally believe that are things that every performing musician need to be aware of, theory and technique is placed at the bottom since it should be mostly by instinct. Awareness of the piece you're playing, awareness of yourself and what you're actually doing, awareness of the people you're playing with (if at all), awareness of the people you're playing for (audience / congregation)... these things should take up more of your mind as you're making 'conversations' with your playing.. which is just like the talking part when you're walking.

 

[joashchee]

What Joash developed actually stemmed from classical background with roots in harmony writing. However, it does not affect the practical playing aspect, which eventually is still about correct finger techniques.

Actually, I do believe there's more to the methods I teach than just that. I might not be using numbers quite the way you think I am.

 

[Cheez]

Hey Joash, I'm keen to find out more about your numbering system. I'm using my own numbering system as well. Perhaps we can exchange ideas. Let's start another thread on this. Keen to learn from your system as you may have a different insight into it.

Back to main topic...

I see what you mean now. I would agree with you, that proper theoretical foundations does expand a person's capacity in playing, in particular contemporary and improvistional style. Actually, that also works for "practical" technique in the strictest sense of the word. As a beginner, one is concerned about how the finger is placed, how the finger should move etc. Once that gets ingrained, the person doesn't think about that but focuses more on the music proper, which is more than just notes. I guess this is similar to what you saying about theory. And again, I could never stress more about the importance of theory. It shapes almost everything I do musically - from playing to writing.

 

[joashchee]

Sure! We could do that before we spiral this thread outside of it's proper scope. Apologies for the slight sidetrack.

 

[wjvocalist]

Ok...this is coming from me ... a beginner in piano as an adult.

First of all, u need to ask yrself some qustions.

1. Do u hv enough sufficient basic music theory to get u going to play pieces???
If not, u may want to buy a theory book/piano teacher to teach u the basic music theory. This is important as if u don't even have the basic foundational theory, u wont be able to understand the time value, note names, major & minor scales in order to play yr songs.

2. What fav. style do u prefer? Is it Jazz, classical, pop???
Follow yr heart. Don't learn music for the sake of pleasing people. Rather learn it becos u enjoy it. For me, it's definitely jazz. But however to build on my foundation, I need to start off with basic pop keyboard with my teacher before moving into the more advanced aspects of jazz. Haha...but then again, I still like the lyric pieces of mozart, romantic pieces of Chopin and the modern pieces of Proferiv (oops..I forget how to spell correctly).

3. Find the right teacher for yrself.
That's one of the most difficult answer. Everyone have different learning systems. Good teachers are suitable for different students. Some just learn better with certain teachers. A good teacher would teach u the basic foundation of yr skills and motivate u to play music well. Learning to play scales are just as important. I am talking from experience that if u know yr scales well, it wld help u a lot in terms of improvisation and coordination.

I also believe that both classical and pop/jazz piano have its own different benefits. These are the benefits I can think of.

Benefits
a) Classical - Sightreading, technical ability to play running fast notes and "acrobat" piano tricks, music phrasing, basic understanding of music periods(from baroque to modern period),
solo playing/playing with orchestras, quartets and in places like concert halls & recital studios, compose piano pieces/songs (well orginal songs are quite rare since I guess not many people really would compose songs in neo-classical style?)

b) Pop/Jazz - Learning Improvisivation, understand chord progression, play solo/jam with bands, trios and orchestras (playing with orchestras and concert halls wld be most likely happen in the field of jazz) and in places like hotels, clubs, pubs and concert halls, compose piano pieces/songs.

AJ

hi! i wanna learn piano but im not sure if i shld take up the classical or pop one.. basically i just wanna learn how to coordinate my hands and be able to play through pieces decently. not really aiming for gradings and stuff.. just, playing for fun was wondering if pop piano will be more suitable for my case, but does anyone know if pop piano lessons cover the basics well? lke coordinations and stuff? it seems lke pop piano'll be better off for me if i already know the basic stuff and just wanna learn songs, but the thing is i dun even know the basics =x

would love to hear opinions from u all. thanks! =)

 

[pf]

Hiyo....some parts I beg to differ....

For sightreading, you can try it with pop as well. Although we only using the melody line and chords on fakebooks, but hey hey....sightreading is sightreading anyway....just seeing the notes and play it out. I train myself to sightread. Just pull out a song from my gigantic fakebook and play. Although I'm doing it very slowly, and making mistakes here and there, it's a good habit to have. I also force myself to do the harmonization.

Once you know the song well enough, you can play fast.

Playing in a band is a different ball game altogether. Shall not talk about that here as the thread starter seem to want to learn for individual pleasure.

For song composition, I guess it depends on what style you learn. If you learn classical songs, you compose classical songs. If you learn pop/jazz, you compose pop/jazz. But I think song composition really depends on what you have that is within you and needs to be expressed outward.

I can whack some chord progressions and make it sound melodious that my cousin thought it was a song that she heard somewhere before. My pastor gave me smiles of encouragement when I was doing the same yesterday. I was just hanging it in there for the people to finish praying and the altar call session to end.

But the only song I ever composed is half done and on the shelf. :mrgreen:

Benefits
a) Classical - Sightreading, technical ability to play running fast notes and "acrobat" piano tricks, music phrasing, basic understanding of music periods(from baroque to modern period),
solo playing/playing with orchestras, quartets and in places like concert halls & recital studios, compose piano pieces/songs (well orginal songs are quite rare since I guess not many people really would compose songs in neo-classical style?)

b) Pop/Jazz - Learning Improvisivation, understand chord progression, play solo/jam with bands, trios and orchestras (playing with orchestras and concert halls wld be most likely happen in the field of jazz) and in places like hotels, clubs, pubs and concert halls, compose piano pieces/songs.

AJ

 

[pf]

Oh dear....Cheez, I was thinking of learning classical piano sometime later. I'm interested to learn the techniques. Learning pop was a matter of firefighting for me then.

Can I still learn or am I "messed up" already?

 

[wjvocalist]

Of course u can still learn classical piano. But just make sure u stick to it long enough...to know the stuff well. Or else end up like me...lol...learn to master playing mozart pieces but after a while,it's all left in the shelf when I don't "memorize" it.

Do classical pianists get really stuck to the score and render helpless when they didnt memorize the piece and have no score on hand???

AJ