Q. Can a pianist play the harpsichord well just like a violinist playing the cello ?
Just wondering if perhaps harpsichord is harder than piano, in terms of dynamics, control of articulation.I was just looking through the Piano exam syllabus and the Bach Italian Concerto was in the Grade 8 exam syllabus for Piano, whereas the same Bach Italian Concerto is in the Syllabus for Harpsichord Diploma Exams. The same goes with the French Suites.
Anyone knows why is this?
A. Organists (I am one of these) are slightly more able to play a harpsichord than are Pianists.
Learning muscular restraint, achieving an audible 'accent', building to a climax, responding appropriately to an increase in 'passion', and many other things need to be constantly in mind when an organist is playing this now-redundant instrument.
Even an Organist finds good results at this instrument are impeded by lack of familiarity, but this is to be expected, surely?
Because constant attention needs to be given to these parameters, and that these aspects of performance are not what perhaps should best be exclusively occupying the attentions of a player, it is rare for an experienced organist to be happy with a performance on a harpsichord.
Only somebody exclusively devoted to the harpsichord is comfortable with performance on the instrument. This is incontrovertible. Your analogy, violin to 'cello, would perhaps be better if expressed as :- 'cellists adapting to playing the gamba'.
Even after several years of 'trifling' with the harpsichord, I have never been really comfortable whilst playing it.
Organists, I would guess, are slightly more familiar with keyboard music of the long-extinct Baroque style than are Pianists, whose instrument didn't even exist during the Baroque Era. Like the organ, the harpsichord is
[i]slightly bass dominated (the bass is 'brighter' than the treble, a situation that actually coincides with what physics describes as 'appropriate', incidentally)
[ii] there is no damping whatsoever
[iii] accenting is achieved through attention to legato verses staccato
[iv] manipulation of 'stops', playing on another keyboard, 'coupling' one keyboard to another, etc., on both Organ and H'chord can be used to alter sound texture, volume, etc.
[v] genuine improvisation is found to be easier than at a Piano
[vi] etcetera
As I don't like pretending to confine my music making to the past (literature of about 300 years ago!), I doubt that I could ever confine myself to the harpsichord. [Should I wear a powdered wig, travel by horse carriage, seek to contract syphillis, etc?]
Almost no new music is being written for this instrument, and that, to me, is its fatal flaw.
"Who would enjoy being a 'museum musician'?" This attitude applies to most really musical people that I know, and possibly explains the fact that most who play the instrument in public are playing their 'second' instrument, or even their 'third' instrument!
The rather precious lovers of the old don't even seem willing to countenance any 'improvement' to the harpsichord, a rather silly attitude, and this probably confines this instrument to the 'consciously fossilised past'.
People of this type willingly spent other people's money on building museum organs for churches and public buildings a few decades ago, and their 'power' to make these retrograde decisions is worrying - if one is interested in art music having a future.
( I am ashamed to admit to once have been one of these meddling fossils!)
Thank you for such a stimulating question...
How do you learn to play piano by ear?
Q. I have been playing for a long time. I used to take lessons, but I stopped taking them. I know how to read sheet music, but I think playing by ear would be more meaningful. The problem is, I don't know where to start! Can somebody please help?
A. Book yourself a private lesson with a teacher, I think that a lesson or two, will teach you the basics you need to go on by yourself.
It's not that complicated but it's hard to explain by text, near a piano it's a matter of a hour or two (listening to chords roots and so)
Does learning to play the piano help with learning to play the violin?
Q. I am a high school student and am wondering if learning the piano first would help me learn the violin later.
A. Yeah, I learned piano first and then violin. Learning any musical instrument will teach you principles that carry over.
Piano is a good one because with piano you generally play lots and lots of notes at the same time and learn about chords and the 'big picture', and that helps somewhat when you're playing the violin because usually you only play one or two notes at a time then, but you understand the music more if you know about chords and can sense where it's going.
I was in the public school orchestra program in my town, and so everybody started at the same grade (4th) and continued through high school. I didn't really practice more than anybody else (I didn't practice at all outside of class), but I did learn faster than them because I played the piano too, or at least that's my theory.
But all things considered, somebody who spends 200 hours learning the piano and then 300 hours learning the violin probably isn't going to be much better a violinist than somebody who spends 500 hours just practicing the violin. (those are just random numbers, but you get the principle)
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
Title : Is Harpsichord more difficult to play and learn compared to Piano?
Description : Q. Can a pianist play the harpsichord well just like a violinist playing the cello ? Just wondering if perhaps harpsichord is harder than p...