Why would a teacher ban the metronome altogether?

Question

So when I was a kid I had this piano teacher who was completely against even owning a metronome.

He was adamant that using a metronome to practice was a bad habit and insisted that pupils always count "internally".

In retrospect, several years later, this seems to me like unorthodox advice.

I recently started playing again, and after playing through a new piece I am even finding it very helpful to practice it at different tempos with a metronome, going from incredibly sloooow to faster to super uber fast, and then sloooow again: I can play with increased confidence and I can iron out all the parts that don't quite work - and afterwards I can concentrate on expression, rallentando, accelerando, crescendo as I please.

So: I'm confused.

Can anybody show me what are the pros and cons of practicing to a metronome and why would a teacher ban it altogether?

Answer 1

It sounds to me like you are using the metronome in an effective manner.

Your teacher might have been concerned that you, as a young student, would have seen playing in perfect time as an artistic objective. Of course it is rarely such. The musical artist is expressing emotion and other aesthetic insights. Variety of all kinds should be deployed for that purpose, with the test of effectiveness almost never perfectly consistent rhythm, but rather appropriately expressive rhythm.

However, to do this well, you must establish control over your sense of time, so you deploy it appropriately. The sort of drill you describe sounds great for this purpose.

When it comes to preparing for performance, however, turn the metronome off, set it aside, go forth and express thyself. Be steady when you need to be steady, speed up and slow down as the piece and your process of breathing life into it dictate.

Answer 2

I think I can understand what your teacher was trying to say. He wanted to make you feel the music.

Music needs to breathe. If a computer and a human play the same song, it will sound different; the human version will be more natural; the computer version will be more mathematically correct.

Your teacher might be worried that if you kept practicing with a metronome, you might end up playing the songs mathematically correct, and not naturally.

This is correct up to a point, but I don't believe it is entirely true. It is not that simple to keep the tempo steady all the time; this is something you need to work with a metronome. My point of view is that it is really good to be able to keep the tempo steady.

After you have the ability to keep it steady, you can make it slower or faster at certain passages, according to the feel (of the song or yours).

But, if you cannot keep the tempo steady, it will sound like a cardiogram. Which is good if that is the desired effect, but it is also frowned upon by many people.

Answer 3

While it is possible that your metronome banning teacher was just a bad teacher (Such a thing is clearly possible), because as a rule metronomes are good, I often save metronome work for intermediate and advanced students. This is primarily because in the beginning it can be frustrating to achieve music on an instrument. Metronome work can compound that frustration, and delay the gratification of initial success for many students.

Having near perfect rhythm can connect a certain beauty to your playing, and yet as others have mentioned, it is good to be able to break away from the strictest of rhythms in many circumstances. It is rare, however, for a metronome to turn a student into a inhuman robotic player full time. I have never seen it personally.

I will add that not using a metronome is like not using a clock. We won't and shouldn't constantly consult a clock to know what time it is (a watched pot never boils), but if we never look at a clock (use a metronome) it is possible that we will never know what time is (have good rhythm). I myself expect I will never be so good that it wont be worth having a look at a clock once and a while.

Answer 4

See this section of a Wikipedia article criticism of metronome use

Here is a brief excerpt:

"[...] using the metronome as a constant guide to ramp up the speed or to keep the rhythm. This is one of the worst abuses of the metronome. [...] If over used, it can lead to loss of your internal rhythm, loss of musicality, and bio-physical difficulties from over-exposure to rigid repetition" —Fundamentals of Piano Practice by Chuan C. Chang

What did they recommend as an alternative? You can go a long way, practicing along to records with great human grooves :)

TBH... metronome practice is about training your reflexes to phrase notes evenly, in time, developing reflexes that display innate musicality, timing and timbre. The metronome lets you hear when a note is sluggish... so, pull it into time... wow, now it's loud DONT HAVE THE S-TR-ENGT...THHHHH

So it's a litmus paper red flag... but like anything else, you can over-rely upon it.

Today, the wide use of click tracks for recording means you have to be comfortable with metronomic time (again, the use of metronomic click tracks is controversial - for the same reasons!)

Answer 5

Actually, I would guess the reason for banning a metronome from piano students to be similar to banning ruler and compass from technical drawing classes of engineering students. And yes, there was a professor at the university who did that here, including and specifically in written exams.

The idea presumably being to avoid a dependency on tools you cannot rely on having in the field. Now an engineer is definitely more likely to be able to avail himself of a ruler and compass in the field (at worst by always carrying one) in order to make on-site changes to plans.

A pianist isn't going to crank out a metronome in concert, and a metronome has a rather coarse scale. Arriving on the beat does not guarantee a smooth journey there. And some music has a life not quite on the beat even discounting an individual leeway at interpretation: a properly executed Viennese Waltz will have its second beat trail the metronome, for example.

Answer 6

It sounds fairly strange that a teacher would disallow the use of the metronome for beginners. For the more mature player, one could argue that being too dependent on the metronome is a bad thing. Before we walk, we crawl though, and in order to get a good internal rhythm, one must be familiar with what a steady rhythm is.

It also seems to be a misconception that it's not possible to "swing" with a steady beat. I believe the best drummers are very good at keeping a fixed tempo, but manage to create a flowing and non-mechanical feeling non the less.

When one begins, having a metronome removes the need to keep track of one more thing (the beat), when there's already a lot of stuff to keep track of.

Answer 7

It seems to me such a teacher is attempting to have all his students play music in only one way. In my experience I find a metronome can help some students while others seem to learn just fine without one. Why insist on using or not using a metronome? Why should it be a hard enforced rule either way? I personally appreciate more flexibility. I also like having the ability to play to a steady beat, but not having to do so if the music calls for variation. I think a balance of some metronome practice and some without the metronome would be the best answer to the question, from a students perspective.

Answer 8

Since everyone jumped down my throat about my previous answer, I wanted to share this:

http://www.creativitypost.com/psychology/8_things_top_practicers_do_differently

And note how many of these simply do not work with a metronome running.

2. Practice was with inflection early on; the initial conceptualization of the music was with inflection.

Metronomes prevent inflections in tempo.

4. Errors were preempted by stopping in anticipation of mistakes.
5. Errors were addressed immediately when they appeared.

Metronomes insist that you keep going.

7. Tempo of individual performance trials was varied systematically; logically understandable changes in tempo occurred between trials (e.g. slowed things down to get tricky sections correct).

This is what I was saying in my previous post.

Answer 9

A teacher would ban the metronome, if he/she is clever enough to realize that, playing or practicing according to the metronome destroys the music, and turns that player into a brainwashed, boring, run-of-the-mill player... as so many players (esp. classical players) are today.

Not using the metronome displays an intelligent, humanist, anti-mechanical, anti-preconceived, anti-factual stance, that treats the human as what he/she really is: capable of going beyond stupid regurgitation of notes according to preconceived metronome-ticks; way way beyond: to a personal involvement with music, to actually touching the listener and sharing one's soul.

The following is a wonderful way of understanding the concepts better:

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Metronome#Quotes_critical_of_the_metronome

Throw the metronome out of the window, and fight for something worth fighting for: humanity and intuition (and against mechanization and suppression of the human soul, [which are unfortunately being propagated under the guise of academia and professionalism])

;)