Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum "We don't know if they'll stay interested in piano..."

"We don't know if they'll stay interested in piano..."

This is by far the #1 topic of conversation with the parents who visit our piano store. Many seem genuinely nervous and pessimistic about their child's chances of success at piano study. Needless to say, these parent's fear of making an investment results in a large number of children practicing on a poor-quality instrument, (sometimes for several years). What kind of "Top 10 Ways to Keep Them Interested" list would you give them? Your feedback is gratefully appreciated.

This is probably a fairly valid concern as the parents themselves likely lost interest, or even hated their own piano lessons as children. I hear parents say "I wish I hadn't given ip on lessons as a child, but my teacher was terrifying" or some other description for piano lessons that sound more like a weekly punishment than an enjoyable activity. It's actually a leap of faith for those who had those experiences to then turn around and enroll their own children in lessons!

For clients that I have call who have these concerns it seems to help if I share our studio's commitment to making lessons relevant to each individual child. Having a piano program that offers something unique and modern immediately gives the impression that you strive to keep students interested and that you are in touch with kids of today (our studio has a strong focus on composing and world-music exploration among other programming). If you are able to give them the immediate impression that "things have changed" since their own lessons then they are likely to begin lessons with an optimistic attitude rather than anticipating then worst. As teachers of young children now a days we can't fall into the trap of teaching in the same way we ourselves were once taught. To stay relevant and to be able to compete with the huge amount of other extracurricular activities that children have to choose from, we have to both be as innovative as possible, and be able to effectively show this to prospective clients who come to us...often with preconceived notions of what our lessons will be like.

I'll give you my list of 1:

1. Start them off on a good instrument. There is nothing more frustrating for a child learning "piano" on something that is not a piano. I explain the differences between the piano and keyboard. I also advise them that they can start on a keyboard and if after the first 2 months the child stays interested, they can rest assured that investing in an instrument (or renting) is worthwhile.

You could tell them that if their goal is to have their child lose interest, give them the cheapest digital they can find - Or better yet, a freebie acoustic from Craigslist that has broken hammers and hasn't been tuned in 20 years - at least they'll have a 'piano'!

Cue my shameless plug - It's almost Halloween so it's in good spirit

Frankenstein's Piano

Ken, I'm not a salesman, and would probably starve to death if I had that as my source of income. But obviously, there are some psychological issues involved here. I remember a friend of mine, who sold insurance, told me these are called "objections." Objections have to be put to rest somehow.

Students are going to need superhuman motivation and passion to overcome the hurdles offered by a poor instrument. It's probably a major reason I stopped violin as a HS student. The sound of my violin was horrible, and there was no pleasure in preparing music or playing in general. As a parent, I searched for an instrument I could afford, restrung it, had a technician move the post around to find the sweet spot. Result, my son had a nice sounding violin to learn on, and is today a professional violinist.

Could you use a sports metaphor to help parents understand the need for at least minimally decent equipment for learners?

As a teacher, when called about lessons, the first question I ask, always, is, "Do you have a piano? If not, when do you plan to purchase one?" If the answers to either question is negative, I tell the parent that successful lessons require decent equipment. They don't need to purchase a Steinway, although it would certainly help as motivation, but until the parent is committed, they cannot expect their child to be committed. Needless to say, most of these lid-lifters either end up with an abysmal teacher or never start lessons.

"Learn to play yourself." The late starter is under a lesser burden than the lone starter.

Don't continually ask if they are enjoying it.

"The more you pay, the more they will play!"

"Parents who project" scare me.

I always steer the topic of conversation over to the child and the child's (non-musical) interests, or how they do in school, etc...... If I get vague answers such as "...he does y'know....like, what 8 year olds like to do......" then my enthusiasm dies and I'm liable to send them elsewhere.

The existence of these digital toys is a boon in one sense: The number of families with a "musical" instrument in their house has increased, I think.

They do make teaching and learning on a real piano more difficult, sometimes.

You know, I've got to say as someone who stayed with piano for eight years as a child and who stopped to go to college for physics, who has gotten back to it after getting her MS and still has a pretty good technique for an amateur, and who has started to write music as well ... I'm glad I never met any of you as a kid. Do any of you know ANYONE for whom a high-quality acoustic piano ISN'T just a matter of not taking that European vacation and cutting back on the lattes? Jesus Christ, people. Maybe a spoiled brat can afford to stop studying music because their instrument isn't perfect, but a poor child keeps soldiering on, because poor families can't afford to give up when things get hard. If any of you had any brains at all, you'd recognize that that attitude is an asset in a student.

Otherwise, just put up a sign saying "Rich Families Only, Please." Seriously. Roll your eyes all you want, but you have no idea what you are saying to families of extremely straitened circumstances, for whom even paying their buddies $50 to move a freebie into their basement means they need to eat less that month. Sometimes I feel like the people on this board live in a separate universe from the one I grew up in.

I knew plenty of rich kids from school whose grand pianos went unplayed as status furniture after they gave up a year into lessons, contrasted with my own situation on a landfill piano that was quite literally all my family could afford. John, you gave up because your instrument wasn't perfect. I'm happy to say that I did NOT. If I'd given up when things weren't just so, I'd never have achieved a damn thing in my life, because things are never just do when your family is living paycheck to paycheck. We're not all that fragile.

I have to stay away from this board sometimes because of this sickening attitude. I no longer like to associate with people who can make those assumptions about life without realizing how unbelievably offensive they are. You might all like to kid yourselves that you are all teaching the next generations of million-dollar Yuja Wangs, but you're not. I'd sooner teach a poor kid with a weighted Casio who can't imagine giving up without a grand because they can't imagine having one than a pigtailed millionaire's kid who whines and gives up if the piano isn't a Steinway.

I know that a high quality instrument is not a necessity of sticking with the piano (or any other instrument). I've played on poor instruments for many years. Number 1, I think would be to assess the child's interest level. A child who is very interested in playing may be more likely to continue.

I also think it is important to find the right teacher for the child. Some teachers are really bad. My daughter's first viola teacher kept giving her more and more music to practice. From start to end, playing everything once it took my daughter 30 minutes to get through it all. She was only 6 and didn't want to practice any more than that, plus the teacher didn't actually teach, but assumed that if my daughter heard the music, she could play it. That doesn't work for most.

In my town it is common to buy some cheap, Chinese instrument and pay $5-7 a lesson for a high school student to teach their child. Kids don't learn to play correctly and they drop out. The school music program is really bad as well. Willing to invest money on a decent instrument (need not be the best), search for and pay for a good teacher, make sure the child practices, and be interested/involved in the child's musical education would be key factors. A lot of parents send the kid off to lesson and then just tell the kid to practice, but don't listen or watch to make sure the child is practicing correctly. Others don't even practice.

You should probably reread my post a bit more carefully. I most certainly didn't say what you accuse me of. I didn't stop piano because our mediocre piano was all my family could afford (4 children), I simply stopped violin because there was no satisfaction from it. Even my violin teacher couldn't make the instrument sing, so I put all my efforts into piano.


Please don't let the door hit you on the way out.

I'm tempted to do just that

Rent to own, or just renting a piano would be a nice option for a lot of people.

Problem with that is commitment from the student and the family. It suggests 'you might fail' or 'we are just testing you'. "You can quite if you like."

If one buys a nice piano, sets goals for 'stick withitness' in all areas, not just piano lessons, students do much better.

So much relies on the parent's attitude and presentation for all educational endeavors. And finding a teacher who presents everything in a positive manner and keeps students interested. There are so many ways to do this on all levels.

Then again, if there is not sufficient interest in learning to play piano from the student, I would never accept him as a student. Exposure to music or an instrument is one thing, committing to taking lessons is another.

Exposure can take many forms that have already been explored here, such as: what music is in the home, exposure to concerts, even on TV, what radio stations played, what do their piers do, do the parents or sibs play, what is offered in the community and school systems and do you particate, etc...

I'd like to add that most students I have had, at least had lessons for three years. That was the 'hump' for me. It was easy to expose them to music that would last them an interest for life for those 3 years. Then, for some reason - interest in boys, girls, commitment to sports etc, was the hurdle to cross. Those that stayed beyond 3 years, usually stayed through their HS years.

I think renting an expensive instrument is a good option. Not all kids are cut out to be musicians. I have one child who has issues. (She has asperger's.) I wasn't sure she would stick with violin, but I wanted to let her try because she said that's what she wanted to do. I rented her violin. After the first 3 months and she was still practicing, I should have returned the rental and bought an instrument, but thought I had signed up for something different, so I didn't, but that's not important now.

I have two ambitions. One - to have enough piano students that I can refuse to take on those who don't have an acceptable instrument to practice on. Two - to play guitar well enough I can teach those who can't afford a piano.

Pianos do cost - that's not my fault. It's not the only instrument in the world. £200 will buy a cheap keyboard or a rather nice guitar. Or 20 decent recorders.

My sons continue to take piano lessons and started over 8 years ago. I do, however, sympathize with many parents over the difficult choices if you introduce your children to any music lessons, especially with piano, because the startup costs for proper instruments can seem daunting. When we started, we lucked into a perfectly good, workable $500 starter acoustic (which we did keep tuned 2x/year). But we were fortunate as we could not initially afford much beyond this starter instrument (the cost of the regular lessons after all add up quickly). This was a big financial commitment for us but we did so because both my wife and I valued it and budgeted our finances accordingly. Looking back, if we did not get the inexpensive starter piano, then I think that a digital piano with weighted keys would have worked out fine (at least for maybe a year or two until you are convinced they will stick with it?). So, while the idea of purchasing a very nice and expensive initial piano may nice (with the idea of promoting 'stick withitness' as one poster suggested), it just isn't feasible for some families. If a very expensive starter instrument is "required" then this perceived, large initial cost unfortunately prevents many from even entertaining the idea of introducing their children to piano.

In the end, we were fortunate that our sons took to their piano lessons well, they have certainly benefitted from this musical training in numerous ways. It wasn't until only a couple of years ago (when my wife finally went back to the workforce) that we finally able to afford an upgrade in the acoustic piano. I just wanted to offer that perhaps if more families realize that an adequate instrument (and the right digital piano can qualify as this) does not need to be so expensive, with 'stick withitness' in the form of emphasis/support from the parents can work, then perhaps more families would try to introduce their children to piano.

-Mr. Peabody

It was perfectly clear to me, and as a person who both played brass and taught it I know very well that some instruments are unplayable.

People think that "unplayable" means that it won't make a sound, not that the sounds are all WRONG!.

My response is to turn it around and ask:

"What would you do if you thought your child might lose interest in reading or vegetables? Would you buy them cheap books and cheap food just in case it didn't work out, or would you encourage them by getting them great books and great food?"

or simply..

"What would you do if you thought your child might not like daycare? Would you send them to a cheap daycare just in case?"