> This shows that with using unrepresentative, hand-picked examples, you can prove anything. True, but the pianist in the article still makes good points. > "

> This shows that with using unrepresentative, hand-picked examples, you can prove anything. True, but the pianist in the article still makes good points. > "The mistake most weak pianists make is playing, not practicing." as I understand it, means that the pianist found repeated confrontation with difficult parts was beneficial versus sessions repeating the music in full from beginning to end. What he says is about seeking mastery first. To be a great musician, first you need to have taste, that cannot be downplayed. If you have the right taste and an idea of what the music should sound like, then there are mostly technical traps you need to tackle to achieve a great performance. The pianist doesn't mean to say that once you have done the hard parts you shouldn't enjoy playing the music in full—that's would be stupid. No great performer ever stops in the mid of a piece and get along with it being great. But it is much easier to find "flow" or whatever you call it, once you have mastery. And one is not exclusive of the other, that's maybe Cal Newport's interpretation or simplification to match the goal of his article. > "Weak pianists make music a reactive task, not a creative task." and > "In performance, weak pianists try to reactively move away from mistakes, while strong pianists move towards a perfect mental image." ring particularly true and are useful tips.