How long should it take to play Vivaldi violin concerto in a minor-1st movement, almost flawlessly?
I have been playing the violin for a little over two years, and am currently working on Vivaldi's violin concerto in a minor-1st movement. I have started working on it about two weeks ago but realised that I wasn't making any drastic improvements over those two weeks. If I normally practice around 2 hours each day, how long should it take to be able to play this piece almost flawlessly?
This piece can be done by Asian method within a year, I have seen four-year old kid playing this, but normally it will cost about two years to
What is the "Asian method"? Do you mean Suzuki?
This post says that the OP has been playing a little over a year. In another post, he says "I have started playing the violin about two years ago, and from then I have always wanted to play the violin for a living." And in yet another post he says that he wiped down his violin with baby wipes. Notice also he does not come back to the discussion stemming from his posts. Sorry for being cynical, but I'm starting to get the feeling that we have someone here who knows how to write (fake) posts that will generate lots of "discussion" (i.e., argument) among our membership.
At least they're interesting posts that don't seem deliberately troll-ish. Even if he never comes back to the thread, each contains good discussion. :-)
Oops, my bad for saying that it's been a little over a year. What I meant was "I have been playing the violin for a little over two years". Thanks for finding it out though. Also, I am fairly new to Violinist.com so bear with me not being so willing to reply and come back to discussions. :/
Have you been working through the Suzuki books?
There is no "should" about this. Each person comes into the ability to play different things in their own time after appropriate preparation.
It really depends on what you call "flawlessly". If this is your first "real" concerto and you're clearly below the level it takes to do it easily, it's going to take you more than a year to start dominating it. Of course, if you already play very well the violin, then you're not gonna learn a lot out if this concerto. I think this is one of the firsts "real" concertos beginners learn, so they normally don't know how to do vibrato very well, neither staccato, they have intonation problems, there are 2 parts of tough legatos where it's really difficult to make a balanced and constant sound, etc...
It may not be particularly relevant to this discussion, but the eminent soloist and teacher Simon Fischer mentioned in a recent blog (http://www.violinist.com/blog/simonfischer/201712/23553/) that some years ago he took 90 hours spread over 3 months to prepare the Tchaikovsky concerto for a special performance. This was someone who was
Why "almost flawlessly?"
Brian, I think you need a really solid base of technique to play almost any nontrivial piece truly flawlessly. The piece itself is a red herring.
The short answer is, it varies from person to person depending on abilities, guidance and study habits.
Yeah, I am using the Suzuki method, and I guess this is my first "real" concerto if you don't really count Seitz concertos as "real".
I have been playing for two and a half years. I could probably work on this piece and get it to sound "good" with a lot of work and not focusing on too much else...but why? I have so much technique to work on and so many other pieces that are fun and amazing and beautiful that I could play and I have many, many technical things to work. Why skip that so that I can say I played a concerto when in a few years of more technical study I will be able to sight read this piece and play it much better with the same amount of work I would put in now?
Jeff, Thanks - I like it too. For some reason I was not playing with that orchestra (even though I was the CM) for Annie's first two performances (probably had work travel commitments) but I did see, either the weekend concerts or the dress rehearsals (can't recall which). But I was the CM when she played the Mendelssohn with us - so I had the best seat in the house! She was still pretty small, but the thought that entered my mind at the dress rehearsal and performance were "BIG TIME!" She was amazing!
Scott I interpreted "almost flawlessly" as a sign of reasonable humility. The likelihood that a student for whom the Vivali concerto is appropriate will play it as well as a top professional soloist would seems unlikely. And had he said "flawlessly" instead of "almost flawlessly" probably even more people would be picking on him for that too.
I think a phrase such as "to the best of my ability" or "as well as I can" covers the eventualities without causing unwanted feedback. Anyway, there's no such thing as a "flawless" performance if you dig deep enough!
Well, I can already play the Bruch concerto as well as I can (i.e., the first line of the prelude. Kind of.) :-)
Is this the one that goes “mi la la lA LA LA DOTI LA DOTI LA”?
My take... You may be able to play each notes relatively in tune and tempo in a matter of weeks to the limit of your current abilities, but after only two years of learning to play the violin, short of being a prodigy, it may take several years to develop your tone and bow control to the point of being able to perform this relatively simple piece to what many would consider “flawlessly”.
Yes - depends what you call "flawless".
It seems it's not all that easy to find professional level (or near) video performances of Vivaldi Op 3 No 6 on YouTube (as opposed to professional audio performances). Here are two live performances that I managed to find:
I've now found a good performance by Roman Reiner who is also directing The Chamber Orchestra of Cracow Music Academy:
In my view "flawless" is about technical mastery. Inherently means 'without flaws' and things like musicality & emotional expression can't really be measured in that way. Obviously you can go beyond that, which is what makes a true master.
This discussion has been archived and is no longer accepting responses.