is this way too much for an 8 year old??

[hugsarealwaysneededhere1]

Son is learning guitar and vilion at school with some practise (not enough I'm sure) at home.
He goes to Cubs once a week
Fencing once a week.
Life Guarding once a week

At the weekend he has a swimming lesson and tennis.

He loves guitar, cubs and fencing. He is a good swimmer but now needs to stop lessons and either join the squad (train 3 times a week) or just swim once a week as part of a fun junior team. He would rather just play than swim seriously.

It all feels quite a lot! With homework too.......or is this just the norm??

I understand, thank you. He sounds like a very bright boy, and so don't despair that the piano didn't work out, it really is a awesome instrument to master, and he sounds like he's used to quick wins.

Good luck with finding an alternative, whether it's musical or physical, especially given advice and support is low in your area.

And in spite of my debating the rights and wrongs with posters on here (which is what MN is for!), use the skills from the likes of Twinkle, or posters on the musical thread that runs every term...teachers, parents (non-musical like you and me) and musicians on their to provide support too!

Good luck.

It is more than most, but not an impossible program. Why not drop the violin if he loves the guitar but doesn't practice either instrument enough? He might be able to do one of them well rather than 2 not great. Agree with pp, no practice, no lessons.

Our 8yo does 2 instruments, choir and 3 sports, but all of them just one session a week plus daily instrument practice.

I have been chuckling muchly at all the poncetastic nonsense about levels of playing and quantifying enjoyment etc.

Like it or not, for schoolchildren, music exam grades are a way to ascertain a rough level of competence.
Of course exams have limitations - don't they all, whether music, sports gradings, or academic? - but they do establish a broad level.

As I said earlier, I went through school not practising my exam pieces. As pointed out, they were boring, and I can't think of anything worse than hours of running through scales, or repeated going over and dissecting pieces. But that's me, and yay! for me, I never needed to. I just 'did it', and to a good level.

What I also did, of course, was play my main instrument (oboe) far more often than in just my instrumental lessons.

I played in the school orchestras (so 3 separate sessions a week, usually, more at performance times), as well as in a quartet (another session plus more if necessary at performance times). All in school time, so it didn't 'count' for me, at the time as extra curricular. I played for a while in a church music group with another instrument. I tootled around at home in my (rare - usually school holidays) spare time with various recorders, or with my brother clarinet, and later his guitars, just for fun.

All this added up to a lot of playing, but none of it was 'practice'. I can honestly say I could count on two hands the number of times I actually practised at home, after the age of 10ish.

Maybe I could have gone a lot further, who knows? I played to a level which satisfied me, and which pleased those around me (relatives watching concerts, judges at music competitions, music teachers - happy enough with the outcomes even if a little frustrated that I rarely practised), and which has left me able to pick up an instrument should I choose to and toot/strum/tap out a tune, and with a bit more time and concentration (a rare happening, sadly) play adequately enough.

And with enough knowledge to now be supporting my (considered gifted) musical child, as well as enough knowledge/expertise to be able to deliver some musical tuition to my severely disabled yet musically talented child (not an easy task, given her needs).

I lay no claims to being a fabulous musician, btw, but I don't scare the horses, don't sound like a cat being strangled, and am competent enough to still bring enjoyment and pleasure to anyone subjected to my efforts. And overall, music has been a part of a rounded education for me, as well as being a good balance for some of the other more serious (to me) things I have done with my life.

"Bert said he's 'only grade 6 so far'. Which means either a) he's grade 6 standard whether or not he's taken the exam; or b) that was the last exam he took which doesn't tell you his standard. She seems a bit confused about the whole thing tbh."

Not confused at all. The last exam he took was grade 6. He does not want to take any more. I did write a long post somewhere about how music enriches his inner life, his social life and his bank balance!

Heh, Panda, you sound just like me - was far more enthused about playing in orchestra/with other people than practicing on my own (and also managed to get through all my exams on minimal practice).

I suspect I'd probably be technically more proficient/"have reached my potential" if I'd actually done more hard grind work. On the other hand, I'm still playing music now at 43 (in public, even!), and enjoying it immensely.

Also on the original topic, as a kid I did clarinet, piano, choir, dancing, and swimming as outside-school activities.

ealingwestmum Sorry if I sounded tetchy. It was a good suggestion, and I've been gratefully paying attention to all the good suggestions on this thread. He's just got in from the school run and I suggested he may like a go at the recorder again. He looked at me as if I had grown an extra head.

I suppose it is normal for a parent - trying to do the right thing even though it's hard.

MrSlant she was extraordinary. (Just not that great a singer ....) First time I heard her I was rolling on the floor, simultaneously laughing very hard and crying in agony at the same time. "Der Hoelle Rache" just doesn't sound the same anymore now.

P.S. I can hit the high E flat too. No dogs here. I'm not that cruel....

Elegantlygrey, if I were in your shoes I'd be forcing the piano too. But I genuinely think I'd be wrong. Why shouldn't he just enjoy this period in his life when everything come easily? Making artificial hurdles isn't going to teach him how to face challenges- that would only work if he really, really wanted to play the piano but found it difficult. This way he's just finding it difficult and doesn't want to do it anyway, so it's a lose lose. Just a horrible slog that makes everyone unhappy. And (sorry) he'll never learn to play the piano well in that environment. So he'll never get the sense of achievement that overcoming a challenge brings. I'd stop it now,nit I were you. So much better that you do it than he wears you down and it stops on his terms.

Ds1 is also 8 and he does Judo, Cubs, football and swimming. I feel like that is enough for him although he is an incredibly active child. The late night at Cubs followed by football the next day pretty much makes for a hideous Friday evening!

ealing

From the conclusion that Bert's son is 15 and roughly grade 6. Whether he's grade 6 standard or that's simply the last exam he did isn't clear. But it's not a very high standard for a 15 year old, which is a shame as he clearly enjoys it. Many children that age are playing in really good orchestras and bands.

it should not negate those children that may just learn for pleasure, and that pleasure is not measured by the complexity of the piece, or by a grade level alone

I've never said it did, indeed I pointed out the limitations of grades. But learning for pleasure doesn't contradict daily practice. And I have never said pleasure is measured either by the difficulty of a piece or a grade level. What I said was that it's more enjoyable to do something well than badly, and that if you like something, being good at it according your ability range brings satisfaction and enjoyment.

I never learnt the cello but I can saw through the Swan mainly in tune. But it would be much more fun if I could play it properly.

"What I said was that it's more enjoyable to do something well than badly, and that if you like something, being good at it according your ability range brings satisfaction and enjoyment."

But Twinklestein, that doesn't really take into account people like me who are perfectly happy at the level they're at. I'm good at music, I know I could be technically better, but I play stuff that I can play, and I enjoy it a lot - I have a reasonable level of proficiency that gives me the basic tools I need to make the sounds I want to make when playing with others, and I get a lot of joy from that. Not to mention the fact that I simply don't have time (nor the inclination) to spend hours a day practising, and I didn't as a teenager either.

You seem to be suggesting that the only way to really enjoy something is to be as technically proficient as you can possibly be at it, even if it takes an enormous amount of work, and I really don't think that's the case. Otherwise I'd be going round being unhappy because while I can play my own stuff I'm not able to play Beethoven piano concertos. (I do occasionally dig out my old sheet music from when I was a slightly better pianist and do a bit of work, but that's more "wanting to recover the skill level I previously had because I quite liked being able to play four-part fugues", rather than a burning desire to excel.)

Twinklestein- I just thought I'd repost something I said earlier- it might just make you think a bit. You seem incredibly rigid in your view of music- I do hope you weren't a teacher, or involved in youth music at all.

"The point is that it doesn't matter. He loves playing. He loves composing and noodling. He loves busking and playing and singing in a band. Grades and formal practice are for him completely irrelevant. Music is part of his social life and a way of earning extra money. And a way of having fun. Could he play better technically if he spent more time in formal practice? Undoubtedly. Would it make any difference to the pleasure and benefit he gets from music? Undoubtedly not. And it would mean he wouldn't have time for the sort of music he is currently doing and enjoying"

BertrandRussell Wed 24-Feb-16 11:43:12: point is that it doesn't matter. He loves playing.

Twinklestein Wed 24-Feb-16 12:14:44: It does matter. Because if he really enjoys it he deserves the support to attain a level that's really satisfying.
And of course your level makes a difference to the pleasure and benefit you derive. It's much more enjoyable to play well than badly. A repertoire of concertos, symphonies and chamber music at 15 is a lot more fun than scraping away on basic pieces with more enthusiasm than technique.

And I have never said pleasure is measured either by the difficulty of a piece or a grade level

Mmm. Confused. Although my assumption has been based on your words verbatim. Which I guess is wrong of me.

x-post.

BetrandRussell He currently gives up at the first problem with eg puzzles or model making. He gets a lot of slack.

Twinkle

I'm sorry but you are sooooo wrong.
You can't tell a level from an exam passed.
At my dd school there are highly gifted children in 6th form who haven't done grade 6 yet.
Grades aren't only not important to the teachers, but not considered as mark of the level or potential of the child.
There are highly gifted musicians who have never taken a grade in their life.
I do agree with your satisfaction comments though, most definitely.

Bert - I've never not got that he loves playing. That's what I say what I do. It's a shame he's not better, & I've no doubt that he could be with the right input. Then he could enjoy it even more.

So many people who enjoy music deeply regret when they're older, that they didn't put the time in when they were young, or they didn't have parents who understood what was required. I know so many. And I know I was one of the very lucky ones.

"Bert - I've never not got that he loves playing. That's what I say what I do. It's a shame he's not better, & I've no doubt that he could be with the right input. Then he could enjoy it even more"

Gosh. I think I need to leave now- the colossal arrogance of your posts is leaving me somewhat speechless. As I said, I do hope you are not involved in youth music.

Poor OP probably been scared off for life after all this music talk.

Just coming back to your son's swimming, amongst all the other stuff he does ...amongst the things he loves, he can still enjoy swimming, at a level that is right for him.

Likelihood is that he will not progress to be the best (using the music analogy), but if this does not matter, he can still enjoy swimming. And specialising early at the expense of other activities can lead to early burn out in some, or frustration when the growth spurts effect training progress due to re-adjustment.

Giving up a regime 90 to 120 mins sessions of technique drilling, cardio, anaerobic/aerobic breathing, laps, sprint/long distrance twitch muscle development in galas at local, county, regional levels will not deter him from enjoying swimming in the fun junior team, if this is what he wants to do at 9!

Its a bit silly to suggest that children shouldn't bother with learning things unless they are going to be dedicated to them and become brilliant. Surely thart of the fun is trying out different classes, picking up new skills and working out what they want to follow more seriously as they get older?

My 7 yr old is a 'do-et'. She has a club or class every week days because she has a low boredom threshed and gives me an hour off when I am not being asked to make something with her, or having to get the paints/craft set / baking kit out.

She does gymnastics (she is good, but not good enough to join the squad), contemporary dance (purely for fun and exercise), football (dont tell her I said it, but she is useless, its just for exercise and team spirit and she loves it), swimming (she is very good, but doesn't want to do it more than once a week, so no squad), and piano (she is OK, but practises every other day for as long as she wants to, and its just been fun for her to learn to read music, really). She did ballet from age 3 yrs, but recently dropped it as she didn't want to go for the grading and competitions.

All of these classes are fun hobbies which enrich her life. Who cares if she is never going to be an olympic swimmer or gymnast, or get into private school on a piano scholarship?

To the OP, I'd say fit in as much as your child is happy with and you can afford and juggle with the rest of your life. But unless he has a real talent in one area, I'd say 3 or 4 fun and different classes per week are better than intensive practice in one area every day.

Mine wouldn't have a snowball in hells chance of coping with all that. 5 nights/days of activity plus homework and 2 instruments to practise? I'm not surprised he doesn't want to join a swimming squad! I'm tired just thinking about it.

Mmm. Confused. Although my assumption has been based on your words verbatim. Which I guess is wrong of me

I don't know why you're confused. I said you can't measure pleasure by difficulty of a piece or grade level. But your ability level makes a difference - as I said it's more enjoyable to play well than badly. It's not particularly fun to play a piece badly that's too hard for you.

The point about repertoire for a 15 year old is by that age intellectual and emotional appreciation of music is quite sophisticated. It's frustrating for people to hear lovely pieces but not be able to play them. It's a lot more fulfilling to be able to be involved in concertos, symphonies, chamber music than stuck on scales and The Two Grenadiers.

Actually, I've realized what the issue is.

Bertrand's son has and maintains the level of proficiency he needs to play the music he wants to play (playing in bands with his friends, writing his own tunes, etc.). Not necessarily the level of proficiency required to play in a high-standard youth orchestra, but enough to do what he wants, so he is happy. Probably by playing with his friends etc. he's already improving his skill, stamina, etc.

So I can imagine Twinkle feeling frustrated when she tries to play a difficult cello piece because she doesn't have the proficiency she needs to play this music she wants to play. The problem is in the assumption that everyone wants to play the same type of music/music that you simply can't express yourself in adequately without a high standard of technical ability, or that that is the type of music that musicians get maximum enjoyment from playing. Hence Twinkle's suggestion that 15 year old musicians would be happiest if they were playing serious/difficult classical repertoire.

Clearly it's useful to have some basic proficiency (and God knows I've seen some people performing who didn't), and I'm glad that I played enough in my youth to have it, but the idea that in order to properly enjoy playing music of any sort you essentially need to have an elite classical level of technical ability (or at least worked as if that was your aim) is just risible.

Bertrand's son also plays the guitar. Which I suspect would make Twinkle draw back her skirts in distaste.

"It's a lot more fulfilling to be able to be involved in concertos, symphonies, chamber music than stuck on scales and The Two Grenadiers."

Again, though, it's a remarkably narrow view of what constitutes good/satisfying music, or even "being good at music". As it happens I did spend my teens being involved in concertos, symphonies, etc. (I may not have worked that hard but I was certainly adequate... :) ), and have friends who did hours of piano practice a day. I have other friends who spent their teens in punk bands, or playing folk music. They're all now excellent musicians in their own way, despite not all having gone through rigorous training.