Is This a Feasible Order of Pieces to Play?
I have been playing the violin for quite a while now and am studying the Accolay Concerto #1 in A minor. However, I started playing the piano and drums from a very young age, resulting in high musical knowledge within myself. In spite of this, I would like to know if the following is a feasible order to play certain violin pieces:
Accolay no. 1, Bach a minor, Sicilienne and Rigaudon, Allegro Brilliante, Haydn g major, Tchaikovsky Canzonetta, DeBeriot no. 9, Viotti 23.
Do certain pieces need to be moved or added? I feel as if the DeBeriot is too high on the list. Any other pieces that would be good around these piece levels would be appreciated.
I'm not totally sure, as I don't know some of the pieces, but it's generally feasible. Sorry I can't give a definite answer.
I know people sometimes teach the Canzonetta (2nd movement) from the Tchaikovsky concerto early, but I'd suggest actually waiting to learn it when you're ready to play the whole concerto; you'll play it at a totally different level of artistry if you wait. It can be very difficult to re-learn a work that you learned at a lower level; your instincts are just all wrong for it.
I learned Viotti 23 before DeBeriot #9.
I have not learned some of the mentioned pieces, but I almost never will. I personally use repertoire, exercises and scales to build technique (I almost never get assigned etudes, but exercises and scales, along with appropriate repertoire, make up for them).
I think I went from Accolay to Kabalevsky, Bach A minor, and Mozart G major (and I think I might have been working on at least two of these simultaneously). In hindsight, the Mozart really should have been Haydn–and I probably could have used a little more polish before tackling the Accolay too. While playing these I also worked on Mazas, Dont Opus 37, Kreutzer, and Flesch scales. Also Bach D minor Partita (the first two movements).
I think this grouping of pieces is well chosen, and the exact order should best depend on your technical and musical advancement in consultation with your teacher. You can see from the comments that there are many ways to do them.
I remember my intermediate years (from about age 9 through age 13) as a kind of hellish purgatory of repertoire, in which I did a Haydn G, a huge pile of Viotti concertos (21, 22, 23, and one more whose number I have now obliterated from my head), DeBeriot 9, DeBeriot Scene de Ballet, Rode 8, a pile of Kreisler pieces, and a bunch of other things like the Allegro Brillante.
Nobody can play *everything*. The great thing about skipping some "important" pieces is that in ten years when you're a blithering virtuoso you can come back and just sight-read them for pleasure -- or learn them whilst teaching them to your own students!
That's true. Pieces I did not study in childhood but that I currently teach include Accolay, Kabalevsky, Czardas, P &A, and the occasional Ten Have.
I was and still am an intermediate player. As such, I have done
David, Accolay is nice, give it a try. I like to play it sometimes, although very easy to get trough it is always possible to do something better and I just like it. The recording of Perlman shows some of the musicality in this piece.