Suzuki vs traditional for piano

I sometimes wonder if learning by ear has something to do with perfect pitch...

I taught my DC (about 4yo onwards) with a mix of Suzuki and traditional. By ear first for a while and then notes. But they are both readers of everything (including toilet paper packaging) from a young age. Five years down the line they learn by ear as well as read notes. Better than me - I'm not great at learning by ear ...

Hi again Manoxlon - thank you for clarifying the situation regarding DD and her piano 'performance'!

Can you clarify a bit further: are you starting from scratch yourself, or had you played a bit previously?

Is it an acoustic piano, or an electronic/digital one?

And, yes musical 'games' are an excellent way of getting a young child involved. Depending on your level of proficiency, there are probably tunes that would be suitable for YOU to play, and for DD to add a contribution. "Pop Goes the Weasel" springs to mind, and she could either have a prescribed note (or group of notes for the POP), or if she has a little drum or tambourine that could be used.

There must also be 3/4 waltzes that could be suitable for DD to add her part to (though I can't think of examples off hand!)

I have looked at some people's Suzuki vs Traditional evaluations, and most that I saw favoured Traditional. But you could always buy the first Suzuki book, and adapt it to your own requirements. Also, I like the John Thompson series of books, his "Easiest Piano Course" or his "Teaching Little Fingers to Play", rather than the Usborne Sam Taplin one, which seems to use colour-coding, which I don't like.

The main thing however, is that you both ENJOY learning and playing.

I saw this in bookshop today, this is smth I would start with
www.amazon.co.uk/First-Keyboard-Book-Sam-Taplin/dp/140958240X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1438705491&sr=8-1&keywords=Usborne+my+first+keyboard

All children are getting keen on instrument and making sounds at some point but I would not use it as a reason to start formal lessons. The fact you have started to play sets up a positive example for your dd and will keep her interested. You can use her interest to introduce basic concepts and play the games as suggested by Alice.
Sorry, I understand you did not mean theory at 3 yo, but what I meant was that depending on her maths skills theory exam may not be on agenda in a foreseeable future.

Another thing to consider - if she progresses quickly you may get stuck at some point as her physical and emotional development may be behind the complexity of pieces. Something my dd experiences now with her piano lessons.

Essentially if you are just letting her play on the piano without "lessons" at this point, she is learning "by ear."

3yo is really young to start any piano training, but you can always start preparing her in more play based ways.

• show her that the higher sounds are on the right and the lower sounds are on the left and let her experiment using the whole keyboard, not just the middle

• play simple melodies on the piano for her to sing along so she connects the piano with familiar and fun music, rather than something she "has to learn"

• teach her the do-re-mi song, as a way of introducing the idea of different notes. She'll just look at it as a fun song with actions, but the concept will still be there.

• play clapping games and use them as a fun way to introduce rhythm

Another thing to consider - a teacher - there may not be many teachers around who are keen to teach 3 yo, therefore you may find yourself in a situation where you don't really have any choice....

If your 3yo can read and count go for traditional as he/she will be able to sight read too. But as a parent, whose child started lessons soon after 4yo being a fluent reader and counted very well, I don't recommend to start so early. Personally would not do Suzuki because of tiny repertoire and absence of sight reading though I have heard that some teachers deal with this problem.
My understanding that theory exam involves a lot of maths concepts (like child presumably has to understand fractions?), so it may not happen for a while too.

Our DS started on electronic organ aged two, when DW and I were both learning ourselves. By five he was starting to read notation, and was getting to understand chords; (organ and electronic keyboard use chords in a different way from piano, and there were illustrations of the fingers for each chord, making it easy to learn.)

But we never really 'taught' him; the organ was there, and he absorbed it for himself. I would agree with others that 'teaching' at three, unless it is very gentle and informal, could put a child off.

There is a 'pictorial' system, Dogs and Birds, for introducing piano, but personally I don't like these gimmicky sort of things. I don't know anything about Suzuki really, but I will look up more and come back sometime.

As a primary TA I taught informal music for twenty-five years, keyboard, recorder and percussion, but only in a 'fun' way, not for Grades or anything. The danger is some parents, who 'failed' at music themselves when young, want their children to succeed better than they did, and I am tempted to wonder if you might fall into that category?

Agree, three is to young and seven is probably the best age in terms of ability to control finger movements precisely and be able to read music.

3? Theory exam? are you for real.
Just let the child play with the piano like a toy until older , starting them younger can only put them off or if they take to it, become little robots taking grade after grade.
Give it a few years and start at about 7, then the child will be ready to read music and take it more formally after having 4 years of learning about music, the sounds, the rhythm. Maybe having composed some little things first will give a far better musical education than reading music at 3.