I labsolutely love this discussion! I attended a small conservatory during the mid 1970's in the same state where you, Dr. M, received your DMA. During that time, that school's approach to "music theory" (which we called "Musicianship") was structured exactly like your 18th century model. They also included sightsinging (daily classes for two years). Additionally, pianists took a mandatory keyboard class, where we realized figured bass, played in seven clefs, and read open score for songs, quartets, and classical symphonies. It was all the stuff I later needed when accompanying and teaching. The harmony texts were actual scores where we analyzed the music , then derived the rules. Imagine how I felt later after reading "music theory" textbooks where all the "answers" were given with music examples of two or three measures. At the end of the sophomore year, an exam was given where our knowledge of basic musicianship was assessed. There were several parts to the exam, but the only part I remember was writing an original fugue (no parody elements). That exam determined whether a student remained at the school or were invited to leave. During junior and senior years, we were offered courses on the harmonic language of composers from the various periods. From the very beginning and throughout my school days, we were encouraged to listen, listen, listen to music of various styles. I had several friends who would then imitate and poke fun of our instructors and experiences. I mention all of this because we had the tools to improvise, but it was not overtly stated. Our goals, and I would say, the school's goals, were just different. Our training was considered solid musicianship, and I have always thought it was the way to do it. I have no idea what or how the school approaches musicianship since I left decades ago. I know the training I received has enabled me to do whatever I wanted and worked for in my career.

Reminds me of principles from the book…Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.

Everything this man just said is absolutely true, really great insight. I’m in my final year of organ performance at the Vatican conservatory in Rome and our education is more like the 18th century education he described in the video. It was really an eye opening experience for me, coming from the American system of refining technique and playing as much repertoire as possible. Which in my opinion is still very important but just as important or even less so than being able to actually improvise and create your own music. In my opinion that’s when you truly become a musician. God bless.

Absolutely correct, it is not a gift but a craft and an art that you have to work at. Some people can be "gifted" in that they have the drive and interest to take it to high levels but everyone can learn to improvise. Great video!

Thanks, thanks a lot!. I am a late beginner to music and piano (just started two years ago) and these videos are a revelation for me, as I am in a sea of doubts and your knowledge fills lots of the gaps and questions. I wish I had started on music long ago but, well, better late than never!

Music, and music theory, is great for the brain ... and we all come at it from a different angle. Also, private music teachers, if they're kind, nurture much more within their students than just music. So, no need to lament. It's all a wonderful gift, and all that matters is how receptive you are to it. 🎶

This makes so much sense.

I'm really happy to see a lot of discussion on improvisation on this channel! I come from a classical background, but on top of that, I went through the Yamaha Music Course as well, where there was a higher emphasis on aural skills and improvisation from an early age. Not many people know about Yamaha, and a lot of people dismiss it as "not being as legit as ABRSM or Trinity" but I'd argue that it's harder Essentially our graded exams consist of 4 parts: Pieces (slightly easier standard than ABRSM equivalent) Hearing: playing a melody an accompaniment as it is played to you Sight reading (these are more predictable then ABRSM sightreading) Impro: given a melody, we would need to play through it thrice First time, playing just the melody Second time, adding an accompaniment Third time, adding variations to the melody At higher "teacher" grades, there's Impro A and Impro B. I didn't go through it myself, but iirc Impro A is the same as the Impro I mentioned earlier, while Impro B is basically composing on the fly from a 2-4 bar motif

Thanx, Maestro.

This is an excelent point, and I love the humor in these videos.

"Oh, the blackmail would be spectacular." - John Mortensen, 2020 And my classmates said I couldn't blackmail them with cringey TikTok videos...

The entire piano-industrial complex is dedicated to producing human piano rolls.

Memory is important. To me, that's a gift. If you have it, then you can remember licks, pieces, scales, patterns, chords, modes.

As a baker (pastry, leavened bread, cake, crackers, flatbreads), I love the baking analogy!

I sooo... agree with everything you said! Thank you.

How would you balance adding improvisation to the fact that musicians now need to be fluent in a broader range of styles than musicians in 18th c. Europe? I totally agree with your overall points though!

I wish to know this too dear Dr.

Very right about this. The question is, how come music schools devolved this way over time. Such sadness.

So you we're a very gifted young man. All is relative!

And I "Sincerely" wish I had known that!

I'm just a few years into classical music, coming from modern styles. I'm always baffled when I hear of professional quartet players ringing a composer's phone to request a piece of music. Like, don't they know how to put one together? Is it just that they want to work with a specific author? I still don't get the whole "getting commissions" thing. And I don't get the composition college courses where they teach you essential stuff such as harmony and counterpoint and all that stuff. Like, what do all of the others learn for 10+years, if advanced harmony and counterpoint are for "composers"? I legit just don't understand

Agree. However 18th C “we” all of us were not improvisers nor composers, not all of us performers or teachers but all of us just players. Also if piano players ever knew a chord or a scale it would not matter. Many more simple folks played piano almost everyone. And all they did was read the music on a sheet and plonk away. That was it. Nothing more complicated or scary than that. Any more theory was for the serious guys not the parlour players (family folk kids and adult playing the piano in the parlour) which almost 90% were. Thanks for this. Modern players are all at a genius level and scares people off.

even Czerny wrote in his book about preluding, that it is somehow a sign of LOW skill to start performing a piece directly, without improvising a prelude first. Ironic , since he wrote that so long ago! It should be probably written on the wall of any pianist studio

If you don’t know him listen to Jaques Loussier. As a classically taught pianist he has made a career out of improvising most of the classical composers music, Bach, Beethoven, Satie, Debussy, Vivaldi, Mozart and many more. I’ve been listening to his take on music for over 50 years starting with Play Bach. If you want examples of brilliant classical improvisation do yourself a favour and listen.

I agree that music teaching is very sick right now. What can get us back on track?

Is there a course or a good book you’d recommend to learn improvisation for classical pianists?

I have seen several of your videos and I think that the content is quite valuable. I would like to suggest that one of the reasons for the decline of current music students having virtually no training in music theory is because their teachers didn't enjoy (or, God forbid, LEARN ANYTHING) in their music theory courses when they were in college. I once asked a current public school music teacher how she teaches sight-singing. Her response was that she didn't teach it at all because she wasn't very good at it herself when she was in college. Dictation? Forget it. We are now in a downward spiral where music schools (or departments) are taking ill-prepared students just to fill up their quotas for whatever school they are at. Then, those ill-prepared graduates go on to teach even (worse) ill-prepared music students to go on to study music in college. The cycle needs to be stopped. However, with college admission goals (quotas) and the seemingly safe harbor of graduates teaching music in a public school, many music students see no real need to seriously studying theory.

Out of curiosity, I know that the school you teach at is a Christian one, but are you yourself a Christian?

First :)

Alma Deutcher proves ypu wrong

Sorry to restate the obvious.. Improvisation may be a beneficial skill to learn for developmental or pedagogical reasons but within the ("modern") classical tradition it isnt valued much as an activity. Where would it be used? Its not expected as a performance skill unlike in jazz or popular music styles which typically don't use a score. Composers (who also may be performers) compose, performers perform (from scores) in the "classical tradition" - even though students may later progress to more diverse roles to earn a living.. Again, sorry to state the obvious. Maybe John is just drawing attention to impro as a neglected art bacause its so valuable in musicianship training which may be the case for some but clearly a lot of insitutions and teachers don't agree. John is a propagandist for impro. Fine.