 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Sue G
Date: 2004-10-21 21:07
Hi,
I've only been playing for nearly two years and I'm a mature learner !
Just got out my Christmas music again to practice for this years carols and it got me wondering - has anyone ever done any calculations on the equation of the percentage improvement the average person might expect to achieve with a certain numbers of hours practice ?
I think I must be somewhere around 100 hours = 1% imprvoement !
Regards and a Merry Christmas !
Sue
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2004-10-21 21:20
Quantity does not equal quality.
30 hours of Christmas music doesn't begin to equal 1 hour of Baermann.
Happy Chanukah ...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rick Williams
Date: 2004-10-21 21:29
Hi:
I'm not at all sure you could begin to quantify that in any meaningful way, how do you measure improvement how do you judge the quality of practice time? However, I've seen recomendations for college music majors that state 2-4/day undergrade and 6+/day for graduate performance majors.
As an over 50 y.o. clarinet player rethread I just measure improvement by the amount of fun I'm having and ocassionally picking a piece of music way beyond my current ability and practicing until I can play it. It's a goal that I set myself and if I do it great and if not I don't lose sleep... I'll leave the metrics to others...g
Best
RW
Best
Rick
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: EEBaum
Date: 2004-10-22 00:47
It also depends largely on the effectiveness of a practice session. I've had some 30 minute sessions that are (arbitrary number) ten times as productive as some two hour sessions.
-Alex
www.mostlydifferent.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: theclarinetist
Date: 2004-10-22 04:12
It also depends on the person's ability level. Some people improve more quickly than others. And everyone responds differently to different practice regimes...
It would be an interesting experiment. You could have ten people of (approximate level) sight-read through a difficult piece, then have different people practice different amounts and record their improvements (number of mistakes fixed, etc) upon a second performance. obviously, from a causation standpoint, there are many factors that could be problematic, but it would still be fun!
DH
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Kev
Date: 2004-10-22 05:43
"Improvement" is qualitative - not quantitative - so you can't calculate it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Garret
Date: 2004-10-22 05:50
Hours of practice does not equal % improvement. If your mind is not focused on your practice, it is less productive. In other words, you can practice for 2 hours with your mind worrying about other things, and you might only end up with 10 minutes of progress. On the other hand, you might practice 45 minutes, be focused on what you're doing, without outside worries, and you might get your 45 minutes of progress. Like others have mentioned, improvement is qualitative, not quantitative. Some practices will just be more productive than others.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: buedsma
Date: 2004-10-22 10:25
or , as they also say , 80% is learned in 20% of the time , but the last 20% is learned in 80% of your time
( or not at all , or forever unfinished when we talk about mastering an instrument in general )
Nevertheless, as a serious beginner you should be able to make huge progress each week and month, because you start from a minimal level
Afterwards the progress becomes more difficult to measure because you are learning about subtle refinements in tone, technique, color changes from note to note etc
Mostly things that the average listener doesn't even hear
So why would we bother :-)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brenda
Date: 2004-10-22 11:32
FAST = SLOW.
When learning or teaching, the greatest disservice we can do to ourselves or others is to demand fast learning without taking the time to be sure that we're not reinforcing mistakes. This principle of "Fast is Slow" is highlighted in Monty Robert's book "Horse Sense for People" that illustrates how the methods he's learned of breaking in horses apply in many areas of people relationships and learning.
"The Working Clarinetist" by Peter Hadcock contains a section dealing with practicing on pgs. 185-186. There he mentions the obvious "Try not to practice mistakes" and spells out a suggested practice method that works for improving technique without reinforcing mistakes in our brain. It appears to take a long time, but how much longer would it take to learn the piece well if we keep making mistakes just because we want to play the piece fast?
Also, many of us have been taught to use a method of learning long sets of runs so that they come out right every time. Whether they're 16th note runs in a study or a particularly awkward run within a piece of music, this method is a god-send. It's been explained on this BB before. Change the rhythm of each beat (let's say 4 16th notes) to 2 eigth notes and 2 16th notes, play a small section that way 10 times. Reverse the order to 2 16th notes and 2 eighth notes, play it 10 times, then play as written 10 times. It's fascinating how much easier it is to play the third time around! and the memory stays with you. Some people are so impatient that they find this method stupid and prefer to keep banging their heads against the wall, insisting that if they only play the piece as written they'll eventually get it. Meanwhile the other students are miles ahead of them. Fast = slow.
Other recommendations are made in the Hadcock book and also in Michele Gingras' book, "Clarinet Secrets, 52 Performance Strategies for the Advanced Clarinetist" on pgs.56-61.
Try something as simple as sitting down with a cup of coffee and reading through your music before ever playing it. Again, I've found that reading Hadcock's commentary on the orchestral excerpts and marking my part helped a great deal to become familiar with the music before ever playing a note, and helped me learn much faster. Challenging yourself with a partner who's at your own level could help as well, also recording yourself while you play then hearing yourself as others do can help you make changes that make a big difference to your playing.
These are some ideas for practicing smarter, making your practice time become more productive.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: msloss
Date: 2004-10-22 15:27
Even high quality practice does not necessarily translate to achievement on any kind of linear scale. A lot has to do with native ability. I went to school with two guys who couldn't have been more different in terms of raw talent and work ethic. One guy was not a natural clarinetist, but he worked like crazy -- he would put in 6 - 8 hours of practice if that is what it took. In the end, he had a successful career. Another guy, an oboist, was as natural as could be, and hardly practiced at all. In fact, he focused on everything but music, including playing football, considering a pre-med program, or chasing girls. He is also a working musician. Some people are born to it, others can achieve it through dedication and hard work, and some will never get there.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
