Struggling to Get a Tricky Passage up to Tempo? Why Slow, Accurate Practice May Actually Be the Problem.

Subscribe to the weekly podcast via iTunes | Spotify | Google Podcasts | Stitcher

It’s been said that we must learn to walk before we can run.

And I’m guessing there’s probably a lot of truth to this. But have you ever noticed that getting better at walking doesn’t necessarily help you get better at running?

Because while walking and sprinting both involve using your legs to move forward in space, the biomechanics of each are quite different. And no matter how awesome you may be at walking, so long as one of your feet remains in contact with the ground at all times (one of the defining characteristics of walking ), your top speed is going to be severely constrained. It’s only when you allow both feet to leave the ground for a moment, and go from walking to running to sprinting, that you begin to see how much faster you can move.

A similar thing can happen in music too. For instance, have you ever encountered a speed plateau in a piece you’re working on? A section that you can play perfectly at about 80-90% of the final tempo, but no matter how hard you try, you keep hitting a wall, and can’t seem to get over the hump?

This can be super frustrating. And make you wonder if you just don’t have it in you to make your muscles move quickly enough.

But there are some indications that the problem isn’t necessarily one of talent or ability. That the bigger problem may be related to how you’re approaching this tricky passage during the learning process. Where you may inadvertently be trying to get better at walking, instead of trying to get better at sprinting.

Heh? What does that mean, exactly?

The speed-accuracy tradeoff

Back in the 1950’s, a psychologist named Paul Fitts wrote an influential paper about the relationship between speed and accuracy. Namely, that there seemed to be a proportional relationship between the two. Want to move faster? No problem, but your movements will be less accurate. Want to be more accurate? Ok – but you will need to sacrifice speed.

This tradeoff between speed and accuracy makes intuitive sense, and also reflects the experience we have when learning something new or technically challenging. I mean, when was the last time you tried learning a big concerto at the marked tempo from Day 1? Sure, we might be able to play parts of it at tempo, but with the more challenging parts, the typical plan of attack is to set our metronome at a tempo at which we can play the notes accurately, and gradually work things up one or two notches at a time (an approach that we’ve talked about in the past – right here). In essence, to prioritize accuracy over speed.

This makes a lot of sense, because when we repeatedly slop through a passage at a too-fast tempo, we run the risk of developing all sorts of bad habits that we’ll eventually have to unlearn.

But going back to the walking vs. running analogy, is it possible that we could be developing bad habits by trying to learn a tricky passage too slowly as well?

Is the speed-accuracy tradeoff really a thing?

Most of the early studies looking at the speed-accuracy tradeoff used contrived lab-friendly skills like finger tapping or wrist rotation that were easy to study and measure, but don’t look anything like actual sport skills, which are generally more complex and take longer to master. So some researchers decided to see if the speed-accuracy tradeoff held true in the real world – with skills like serving in tennis, or batting in T-Ball.

As suspected, real-world skills seemed to operate differently, and in many cases, the researchers found that accuracy didn’t suffer as much as expected, even as speed increased. Hmm…so could emphasizing speed in the early stages of learning actually be a good thing, heretical though it may seem?

Let’s take a closer look…

A hockey study

In one study (Belkin & Eliot, 1997), a team of researchers recruited 16 children aged 6-11 to learn some basic hockey skills (none had any previous organized hockey experience).

The kids were randomly assigned to two different groups, and given some basic instructions on how to hold a hockey stick and how to stand. Then they were placed 25 feet away from the gym wall, and instructed to hit a street hockey ball at the wall – but each group had a slightly different objective.

One group hit against a wall which had a vertical line of masking tape placed on the wall. This was their “target” which they were instructed to aim for. After each shot, they were given their accuracy score1, and encouraged to improve their score on the next shot. This was the accuracy group.

The other group of kids was simply asked to shoot the ball as hard as they could. Their wall was totally bare, with no target to aim for. So they basically couldn’t miss – they just had to hit the ball against the wall with maximum velocity. These kids also received feedback after each shot, but theirs was given in miles per hour – the speed of their shot as measured by a radar gun. After each shot, they were encouraged to shoot even harder. This was the speed group.

When either speed OR accuracy matters…

Over the course of two days, both groups improved. The accuracy group improved their accuracy scores by about 34% – from 95.975 cm on Day 1 to 65.375 cm on Day 2 (lower scores is better, indicating that they hit the ball closer to the target).

And the speed group improved their speed scores, going from from 18.275 mph to 21.188 mph (an increase of about 16%).

Neither of which is especially surprising, of course. And then Day 3 happened.

When both speed AND accuracy matters…

On Day 3, everyone was tested on both speed and accuracy. Unlike the previous day’s tests where each group was asked to focus on either speed or accuracy, this time both groups were being scored on their ability to shoot as accurately and as fast as possible. They were told that one wasn’t more important than the other, and that they both mattered equally.

As you can imagine, the speed group hit the ball significantly faster than the accuracy group – more than twice as fast, in fact (21.725 mph vs. 10.063 mph). And when it came to accuracy, the groups were no different. If anything, the speed group was even more accurate than the accuracy group (56.588 cm vs. 66.300 cm – though this difference was not statistically significant).

So after the same exact amount of practice, the group which was instructed to focus on speed (and where accuracy was de-emphasized), ended up performing substantially better than the group whose initial focus was on maximizing accuracy.

What?! How can that be?

The development of different shot mechanics

The researchers note that even over a very brief 2-day period of practice, the two groups developed very different shot mechanics. The accuracy group seemed to shoot with a tighter, more constrained set of motions. Their shot loosely resembled a putting stroke in golf.

The speed group, on the other hand, swung much more freely – with a longer backswing and follow through. A much more efficient and effective motion which was a closer approximation of what the shot should actually look like.

In other words, the stroke mechanics that were developed to maximize accuracy, worked ok for accurate shooting. But the same movements were no longer effective when speed was also important. Conversely, the mechanics that were developed to maximize speed, not only worked well for maximizing speed, but were much more easily adapted to successfully account for accuracy too, when that became an important factor.

A similar study with fast-pitch softball players

Another study (Engelhorn, 1997), conducted over a 6-week period with 10 and 11-year old fast-pitch softball players reported similar findings. And in a way, their findings were even more compelling.

As in the hockey study, they found that instructions which emphasized accuracy led to the girls throwing more slowly than those whose instructions emphasized throwing faster. So then they took away the accuracy criteria, just emphasized speed, and the girls did begin to throw faster. However, a certain amount of damage had already been done to their learning. Specifically, the excessive focus on accuracy in the early stages led to the development of poor throwing mechanics, which ended up impeding their overall development.

The effects on short-term vs long-term skill development

These results suggest that in the early stages of learning a skill, emphasizing accuracy can absolutely lead to more accurate results in the short term – but this may come at the expense of long-term development. Which actually makes a lot of sense.

Because whether you play the harp, guitar, piano, or harmonica, when you play a passage slowly, the efficiency of your motor movements doesn’t matter so much. You can still play pretty accurately even if you’re doing things with your hands/fingers/arms/embouchure that won’t work at faster tempos. Maybe that means you are using excessive finger pressure, or lifting your fingers higher than necessary, but either way, you may be developing “slow habits” that will hold you back as you begin to increase the speed. Habits and mechanics that will eventually have to be discarded or unlearned, in favor of more efficient and speed-friendly mechanics which do work at the final tempo.

But…only engaging in fast practice and missing all the notes can’t possibly build great habits either, right? Indeed – being able to play something super fast is great, but not if it all sounds like a hot mess.

So what are we to do?

Well, there are a few approaches that I’ve heard musicians describe over the years. But there are two in particular that might be fun to experiment with.

Approach #1: Rhythm practice – or note groupings

Sometimes this is called rhythm or dotted rhythm practice, where the idea is to alternate between fast notes and slow notes.

But rather than trying to explain it in words, which will make it seem way more complicated than it really is, I’m going to defer to Nathan Cole, the First Associate Concertmaster of the Los Angeles Philharmonic, who will show you how it’s done.

For more, check out Nathan’s website, where he maintains a blog and other nifty resources.

Approach #2: At-tempo practice via chaining

The other approach is to play a passage at the goal tempo from the very beginning, but by building it up one note at a time, instead of trying to play the whole passage through at once.

Once again, rather than me trying to explain it in words, I’m going to defer to trombonist Jason Sulliman, whose background in motor learning enables him to explain not just how to do this, but the underlying rationale for why it works.

For more details on this strategy and various types of chaining, check out this podcast episode with Jason, as well as his website, where you can find all sorts of handy tips and resources.

NOTE: The original version of this article was posted on 7.3.2016; revised and updated on 11.28.21.


References

Belkin, D. S., & Eliot, J. F. (1997). Motor skill acquisition and the speed accuracy tradeoff in a field based task. Journal of Motor Behavior, 47, 144-152.

Engelhorn, R. (1997). Speed and Accuracy in the Learning of a Complex Motor Skill. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 85(3), 1011–1017. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1997.85.3.1011

Footnotes

  1. i.e. the distance between the target and where their ball hit the wall

Ack! After Countless Hours of Practice...
Why Are Performances Still So Hit or Miss?

It’s not a talent issue. And that rush of adrenaline and emotional roller coaster you experience before performances is totally normal too.

Performing at the upper ranges of your ability under pressure is a unique skill – one that requires specific mental skills, and perhaps a few other tweaks in your approach to practicing too. Elite athletes have been learning these techniques for decades; if nerves and self-doubt have been recurring obstacles in your performances, I’d like to help you do the same.

Click below to learn more about Beyond Practicing – a home-study course where you’ll explore the 6 skills that are characteristic of top performers. And learn how you can develop these into strengths of your own. And begin to see tangible improvements in your playing that transfer to the stage.

Comments

14 Responses

  1. I am sending this to my students to remind them to practice (properly) over the summer. Back in undergrad, I had my biggest technical breakthrough after reading similar advice in Efforless Mastery by Kenny Werner. He has three categories: speed, accuracy, and playing the whole passage. Great stuff – thanks for posting!

  2. Thanks for sharing your expert wisdom. Although my interest in the topic of practice relates to athletics, your site is a perfect addition to my “library” of resources. I was wondering how “grouping” and “slow-motion” practice reconcile. It appears these would somehow “cancel” each other.
    Regards,
    Sai

    1. Good question, Masai. It can seem at first that slow practice and grouping are in conflict with one another, but I think the two go together. When you know what fast is supposed to feel like, I think it makes slow practice even more valuable – in that you can slow things down to think through and figure out what exactly your muscles need to do to achieve the end goal in the most efficient way possible, thereby improving accuracy and consistency as well. The grouping is like a hybrid of fast practice and slow practice, helping you to speed things up, and work out the coordination in smaller chunks, then larger chunks.

      1. This technique has been around for years in other performance arts. Ham radio operators (I know this sounds weird) have used the “Koch Method” (devised by an obscure German psychologist in the 1930s) to learn Morse Code. The theory, pretty much verified by experimentation, is that you learn Morse Code at the speed you want to send it but that you do it in packets that are slowly introduced. Dash-Dot-Dash (the letter “K”) sound much different at five words a minute than it does at twenty words a minute and Koch found out that going from a slow speed to a faster speed required relearning. The same is true with almost any skill as later studies have shown.

        MJK

      2. Dr. Kageyama, the value of your reply cannot be emphasized enough. If in slow practice we aren’t figuring out what to do when things go full speed (and developing efficiency in our technique), we’re training ourselves to operate suboptimally once things speed up. The point of many practice techniques is to reduce the amount of information the brain has to process in a given moment (ex: for pianists, separate hands) or to give it more time (ex: slow practice or grouping, which allows the brain to take extra time to think through the next group before throwing itself in), but if we don’t practice processing the information the way we want to process it in full tempo, it’s like practicing an etude focused on a challenge other than the ones that are most important in whatever passage is under study.

  3. I love this tip for grouping the notes! Reminds me of exercises I did learning to type years ago. I will definitely start doing this on my violin. Thank you Noa!

  4. Love the research, love the video. I used to constantly reach speed walls growing up, and it was always frustrating. I finally figured out what was wrong while working on grouped notes. This is just not taught enough! I never actually heard this suggested by any of my teachers. I was taught mostly dotted rhythms, which is a step in the right direction, but it misses the main reason why we do them at all. Grouping notes like in the video is the only way I teach now that I’m a teacher.

    Another way to talk about the groups being played as fast as possible is to think about the notes played at the same time, which would actually be infinite speed, and then slowing it down from there.

    The idea can also be taken one step further I think though. Originally in school when I was applying this I would take a passage and do every group imaginable. That ends up wasting a lot of time though. I’m a pianist and at least on the piano there are parts of passages that really don’t need practice at any speed because they are simple, even in a difficult passage.

    As a simple example if there is C D and E played with 1 2 3 as a part of a larger more difficult passage, I just don’t need to play that group of notes, I can already do it. What I like to do is go through a piece or passage and first find the movements that are the most difficult and circle them or make some mark reminding me to practice them. For piano it might be a jump, or thumb under, or odd fingering. Then I’ll start there with a group of two and expand it as needed to play it a little in context. These marked groups are usually just two notes.

    I’ve also found that learning these motions isn’t a one day fix. So the first thing I’ll do for the day is go directly to these marks and practice them in groups expanding out. Depending on how many sections there are that need practicing, it can often be done in just a few minutes for an entire piece. Working through it that way every day for just a week or two fixes the passages as if by magic.

  5. What i also found: it is really useful to try to go for a higher tempo then needed and then go slower to your actually aimed tempo. That way your aimed tempo will feel well inside your comfort zone. Can be combined with the groupings and so.. it’s a nice effect 🙂

  6. Do you think that this should be taught early on? It seems like a more advanced player concept. Students should at least have the right notes before they work with this concept.

    1. Hi Becky,

      I think it can be introduced fairly early on, but it may also depend on the student, as you don’t want the student to get overwhelmed. So long as it’s presented and implemented in a way that doesn’t feel overwhelming, I think there can be some real benefits to experimenting with these strategies alongside other approaches.

  7. Great post Noa,

    Note grouping and at-tempo chaining are very effective.

    I’ve also found that younger students really enjoy at-tempo chaining. In general it seems to boost their focus by a huge factor, which makes it even more likely they are engaged with practice.

    I have a strong suspicion that the benefits of note grouping/at-tempo go beyond motor learning and also provide benefits in terms of audiating the music we’re learning.

    We know the phonological loop is only able to store about 2 seconds worth of sound in working memory. I think playing in these speed bursts helps the mind compress melody etc more efficiently into memory.

    I highly encourage teachers to use these methods with beginners and not just more advanced students!

  8. Your podcasts are all good, but this is one of the best. Thank you for doing this! I definitely have the experience of hitting a wall as I gradually increase my tempo. You have shared some excellent ideas.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Get the (Free) Practice Hacks Guide

Learn the #1 thing that top practicers do differently, plus 7 other strategies for practice that sticks.

Do you know your mental strengths and weaknesses?

If performances have been frustratingly inconsistent, try the 4-min Mental Skills Audit. It won't tell you what Harry Potter character you are, but it will point you in the direction of some new practice methods that could help you level up in the practice room and on stage.

Share1.2K
Tweet1
Email