Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Where to Buy Digital Versions of Suzuki Violin School 1–10 by Shinichi Suzuki?


Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Carl Stross said:

Excellent. Could you then articulate what the "Suzuki method" consists of ?

I am pretty sure I have not stated that I teach the Suzuki method.  I have only taught out of the books and from my experience as a student.  Having said that, I am also pretty sure I have not stated that I could "articulate" what the "Suzuki method" consists of, therefore, I cannot.  Sorry. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 107
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Just now, violinnewb said:

I am pretty sure I have not stated that I teach the Suzuki method.  I have only taught out of the books and from my experience as a student.  Having said that, I am also pretty sure I have not stated that I could "articulate" what the "Suzuki method" consists of, therefore, I cannot.  Sorry. 

And indeed, you did not. But that's not why I asked. You used the books with good result, you definitely seem to be competent and I am curious if you could figure out what the method consists of.

I don't seem able to find anybody who can do that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Carl Stross said:

And indeed, you did not. But that's not why I asked. You used the books with good result, you definitely seem to be competent and I am curious if you could figure out what the method consists of.

I don't seem able to find anybody who can do that. 

Ok.  That is an entirely different question.  I think I already answered what I think the method is.  The way I see it, the Suzuki method is a standardized (yes Philip, standardized) method of violin playing designed to capture a large audience of students' and parents' attention and curiosity for classical music as a way to create a common appreciation of the arts.  

Now look, if anyone here thinks that the Suzuki method is to be taught in isolation and exclusion to other techniques and methods, that is simply silly.  If anyone thinks the method is an all-inclusive and total package to teaching a student to become a world-class performer, that is also silly (lol the method ends with Mozart 5--couldn't be the end all).

I take issue with bits and pieces, and maybe more than just "bits and pieces" of the method, but overall, the Suzuki method provided me with a solid platform of books and resources to introduce to beginner violinists.  Lastly, I am nowhere technically proficient enough to teach to the level of Paganini Caprices (have not played any), but I have enough credentials to be a reliable beginning violin teacher.  So, my two cents really mean nothing. LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ Carl

I'm not sure what you're asking.

The "method" is intended to teach young children to learn to play the violin (or other instrument) in a matter similar to learning language. They listen to the music, learn the instrument (with the help of a parent) and engage with others in groups. Then they are introduced to notation (speak first, read later).

It can be adapted to teach older kids/adults.

It's a good approach as long as it's applied properly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@violinnewb

Just to clarify, I appreciate that it is a method, and I appreciate That it is standardized.

And I as I have said almost every time I bring up the subject, the Suzuki method-whatever it IS- does many things that I love, And I have more than adequately articulated the problems I have with it.

I do not think you will find, anywhere in the Suzuki literature, anybody saying,”make sure you check other methods!” Im pretty sure they don’t expect or want anybody to do anything like that, and that is certainly fine.

Regarding what the “method“ IS, I’m not really sure that’s a meaningful question. It uses repetition, but so does everything else, developing the ear, but so does everything else, and so on.

I think the original question is best solved by not using any method at all. Instead, figure out how to convey the information of playing violin to your students. I don’t use any methods, I just use a couple of scale books and a bunch(a vast bunch) of cello Music from easy to less easy to mind boggling, and I teach everything needed for all the things that the music requires. I teach kids how to think, be independent, design their own fingerings, and to identify and solve technical problems. No method helps with that. Most methods ignore those things entirely.

So go out and play music. Find music evaluate music choose pieces, talk shop with colleagues. Ask each how they do this or that. Ask why they do a thing. Why use tapes? Why elevate the wrist? What are you doing with the shoulder? What SHOULD you be doing with the shoulder? How do you adjust for different finger size, or-my own term- spear point fingertips?

Take every answer you get, even those which seem silly or illogical, and ponder them. Try them. See what you think. Even discarding something helps you clarify your own reasons for doing or not doing a thing.

Edited by PhilipKT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, violinnewb said:

Lastly, I am nowhere technically proficient enough to teach to the level of Paganini Caprices (have not played any), but I have enough credentials to be a reliable beginning violin teacher.  So, my two cents really mean nothing. LOL

On the contrary your two cents mean quite a bit. Teaching beginning violin is the hardest thing in the world. Any fool can teach advanced violin if the student is dedicated and talented enough.

The hard part is with the beginners. Nurture ability Avoid developing bad habits, and maintaining interest. Hard to do! 

Whether you are aware of it or not, you have designed your own “method” and you focus on certain things, you sequence a certain way, you prioritize certain things, and you approach technical issues a certain way, and that’s fine. That’s great, that’s exactly what everybody should do. That happens over time with any competent teacher who is constantly trying to improve herself.

The goal of any beginning private teacher should be to get the necessary experience as quickly as possible. Methods, any Method, won’t help. It’s just the template on which we drape our expertise.

I would actually be very interested in talking shop with you, even though you’re a violinist. I bet I would learn something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, violinnewb said:

Ok.  That is an entirely different question.  I think I already answered what I think the method is.  The way I see it, the Suzuki method is a standardized (yes Philip, standardized) method of violin playing designed to capture a large audience of students' and parents' attention and curiosity for classical music as a way to create a common appreciation of the arts.  

Now look, if anyone here thinks that the Suzuki method is to be taught in isolation and exclusion to other techniques and methods, that is simply silly.  If anyone thinks the method is an all-inclusive and total package to teaching a student to become a world-class performer, that is also silly (lol the method ends with Mozart 5--couldn't be the end all).

I take issue with bits and pieces, and maybe more than just "bits and pieces" of the method, but overall, the Suzuki method provided me with a solid platform of books and resources to introduce to beginner violinists.  Lastly, I am nowhere technically proficient enough to teach to the level of Paganini Caprices (have not played any), but I have enough credentials to be a reliable beginning violin teacher.  So, my two cents really mean nothing. LOL

No, I think your two cents mean quite a lot. The fact you might not have the technique to play Pag's Cs means nothing. My teacher didn't, he could barely scratch Mend. but he had two Pag winners under his belt and quite a few Tch "almost there". But then Tch was basically a trade conference...

Thank you for the reply. I am starting to understand that the SUzuki method is but a collection of "pieces" and some extraneous motivation. Doesn't mean that with a competent teacher can't work. I thought it's built around some deep core of violin pedagogy and it seems it isn't. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, PhilipKT said:

On the contrary your two cents mean quite a bit. Teaching beginning violin is the hardest thing in the world. Any fool can teach advanced violin if the student is dedicated and talented enough.

We were posting in the same time. But I strongly disagree with your "any fool" and I suggest you replace it with "any con-man or woman". Which is what some of the Top Luminaries are.... 

The way one becomes a Top violin pedagogue is by elbowing to professorship at a good school and then taking only the top students. Who would do just fine w/out him or her anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carl Stross said:

And indeed, you did not. But that's not why I asked. You used the books with good result, you definitely seem to be competent and I am curious if you could figure out what the method consists of.

I don't seem able to find anybody who can do that. 

The hilltop view of the method in my experience is to expose ear and brain to listening. For those who can be ear-trained or made aware of the sounds by an instructor, the by-product is that sound can be manipulated with the use of hands.

The violin family is somewhat different from other stringed instruments in that striking a piano key or strumming a guitar can produce about 75% of what an instrument can yield in tone quality. While a bow might yield 25% of the possible potential by a non-musician, and a beginning woodwind student might yield 0% sound at their 1st lesson.

For those who have some understanding of a bowed sound, the rest of the process is an investment, mostly in the development of taking orders and paying attention, within a limited amount of time. When some creativity and flexible thinking, within the given structure ( discipline ) converge, there is a sequence of sound that occurs. 

Rarely do pre-teen and teen students in the past decade try to please me in anyway. I tell them that most anything can be taught if they would listen carefully and execute the tasks that are offered to them. Granted, teaching Proko or Shosti 1, the Bartok or even the Walton viola concertos are not easy to pre-college students but fortunately the amount of literature available makes it possible to teach other interesting or significant works. Pre-college students do have an immense amount of stress and it is often a mistake on my part when a student requests such masterworks.

SO if Suzuki literature is approached by de-stressing the difficult but encouraging the possible, it is fairly successful. If listening and visual pattern recognition is familiar in education, it far easier and more reliable for those students ( and parents ) who are patient and good listeners. 

But that's my take. Pre-internet, Suzuki with any number or supplemental books by Paul Herfurth, Barbara Barber, and so many more could help students along their path. Many kids with game stations have very strong and very weak fingers in the same hands. This makes for very bad piano and string students.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rue said:

@ Carl

I'm not sure what you're asking.

The "method" is intended to teach young children to learn to play the violin (or other instrument) in a matter similar to learning language. They listen to the music, learn the instrument (with the help of a parent) and engage with others in groups. Then they are introduced to notation (speak first, read later).

It can be adapted to teach older kids/adults.

It's a good approach as long as it's applied properly. 

But it is not a method. It is ( from what we are told ) a collection of pieces/etudes etc.  Sevcik is a method. Beriot is a method. etc. The reason Beriot was so popular and so good was because teachers KNEW it well and after years and years of experience could effortlessly figure out "where" a student was. But I do not see Beriot being workable today. There is also an excellent American method. But I can not remember the name of the author. Of course we ( "you" and I ) are free to call "method" anything we wish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "student" is changing and we are learning to adapt. Parents do not "parent" and teachers no longer "teach" as they did fifty years ago, with consequences better and worse.

Certainly providing any instruction, especially in the musical arts, is more expensive for the average parent. I still draw, and a sketch can cost less than $10 usd with better paper and graphite. But the entire set up of tools, fixatives, erasers table. and an assortment of paper might cost $250.

Adapting is necessary. But Dogma has its benefits and in that, I would choose to teach many of the Suzuki pieces simply because it is something that the students have in common.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GoPractice said:

The hilltop view of the method in my experience is to expose ear and brain to listening. For those who can be ear-trained or made aware of the sounds by an instructor, the by-product is that sound can be manipulated with the use of hands.

I agree 100%. But this is absolutely NOT how violin was taught in the past. The French/Russian/Eastern European system was intended to start by doing a lot of solfege and treat violin playing like piano playing. The advantage was that it produced excellent orchestral players. And there was a big need for those for a while. I confess being an admirer of that system. Regrettably, that was not at all the way I was taught. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm...so we need to define "method", so that we're all on the page (Miriam Webster):

1 : a procedure or process for attaining an object: such as. a(1) : a systematic procedure, technique, or mode of inquiry employed by or proper to a particular discipline or art. (2) : a systematic plan followed in presenting material for instruction the lecture method.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Carl Stross said:

I agree 100%. But this is absolutely NOT how violin was taught in the past. The French/Russian/Eastern European system was intended to start by doing a lot of solfege and treat violin playing like piano playing. The advantage was that it produced excellent orchestral players. And there was a big need for those for a while. I confess being an admirer of that system. Regrettably, that was not at all the way I was taught. 

How were you taught?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GoPractice said:

The "student" is changing and we are learning to adapt. Parents do not "parent" and teachers no longer "teach" as they did fifty years ago, with consequences better and worse.

Certainly providing any instruction, especially in the musical arts, is more expensive for the average parent. I still draw, and a sketch can cost less than $10 usd with better paper and graphite. But the entire set up of tools, fixatives, erasers table. and an assortment of paper might cost $250.

Adapting is necessary. But Dogma has its benefits and in that, I would choose to teach many of the Suzuki pieces simply because it is something that the students have in common.

 

You are absolutely right. Lucky me, I do not teach and I stopped playing decades ago. I do not need to adapt. :)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rue said:

How were you taught?

Directly on the repertoire starting in 3rd position. I had a very old fashioned German or Hungarian ? teacher. He would not teach girls and was very selective when it came to the ethnicity of his pupils. Very competent, no nonsense. He would test each pupil at serious length for "musical ear" :) and reject less gifted ones. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, GoPractice said:

The "student" is changing and we are learning to adapt. Parents do not "parent" and teachers no longer "teach" as they did fifty years ago, with consequences better and worse.

Certainly providing any instruction, especially in the musical arts, is more expensive for the average parent. I still draw, and a sketch can cost less than $10 usd with better paper and graphite. But the entire set up of tools, fixatives, erasers table. and an assortment of paper might cost $250.

Adapting is necessary. But Dogma has its benefits and in that, I would choose to teach many of the Suzuki pieces simply because it is something that the students have in common.

 

I must say, this is an excellent post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Carl Stross said:

Directly on the repertoire starting in 3rd position. I had a very old fashioned German or Hungarian ? teacher. He would not teach girls and was very selective when it came to the ethnicity of his pupils. Very competent, no nonsense. He would test each pupil at serious length for "musical ear" :) and reject less gifted ones. 

Sounds like quite the character!

How old were you? And what previous learning/experience did you have (if any)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rue said:

Sounds like quite the character!

How old were you? And what previous learning/experience did you have (if any)?

Three and had him as a teacher until seven, I believe.  I did have a bit of instruction from my g/father before. He might've taught me to play a very simple tune. He could play a bit of violin - Normal School.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Normal School" is what was known, around here, as "teacher's college" before a B.Ed. was required. ^_^ 

Congrats on being a very talented 3-year old and succeeding with the method your teacher employed. Looking back, what do you think worked best...and what was the worst? What would you have changed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carl Stross said:

We were posting in the same time. But I strongly disagree with your "any fool" and I suggest you replace it with "any con-man or woman". Which is what some of the Top Luminaries are.... 

The way one becomes a Top violin pedagogue is by elbowing to professorship at a good school and then taking only the top students. Who would do just fine w/out him or her anyway.

I think we are saying the same things,And I think we are in agreement

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Rue said:

"Normal School" is what was known, around here, as "teacher's college" before a B.Ed. was required. ^_^ 

Congrats on being a very talented 3-year old and succeeding with the method your teacher employed. Looking back, what do you think worked best...and what was the worst? What would you have changed?

Yes, that sort of Normal School. Vienna. 

Thank you for the congrats but I wasn't talented. I have no talent. Zero talent. I had very good ear and excellent memory. Could reproduce practically any song or rhythm. I was a very manic child - all I wanted to do was practice violin.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rue said:

Hmm...so we need to define "method", so that we're all on the page (Miriam Webster):

1 : a procedure or process for attaining an object: such as. a(1) : a systematic procedure, technique, or mode of inquiry employed by or proper to a particular discipline or art. (2) : a systematic plan followed in presenting material for instruction the lecture method.

 Well, yes, of course, but that leaves out all the specifics. By the definition that you have shared anything that is not random is a method. My comment to,I think,@violinnewbpointed out that with repetition comes refinement, so regardless of what a person‘s individual approach to teaching is, over time they will refine it. If they are fundamentally good teachers, they will also adapt it, discard the chaff and grow the wheat.

I have a method, and it’s a good method, and I am writing it down bit by bit so I can share it, because I’ve had a lot of former students come tell me that they want to make some extra money by teaching on the side. I’m always flattered when they do so, because I have made it look so easy, when it isn’t, but that’s the same of any good teacher, they make it look easy, Because they’ve been doing it long enough that they have refined their method, whatever it is.

As Carl has said, A lot of famous teachers don’t teach at all, they play, and because they play, it is assumed they can also teach, although the skillsets are completely different. And their reputation rests on the ability that the students have already acquired before arriving at the Conservatory.

And before you say, “what about X?” Yes, There are definitely exceptions to every rule, but there are also multiple instances of the rule…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, PhilipKT said:

...

As Carl has said, A lot of famous teachers don’t teach at all, they play, and because they play, it is assumed they can also teach, although the skillsets are completely different. And their reputation rests on the ability that the students have already acquired before arriving at the Conservatory.

...

You mean players/performers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...