Soft Mozart or Piano Wizard: My Decision

Yesterday I finally made up my mind and placed an order for Soft Mozart (Home Version).

Although my initial intention was to test both programmes and pick the one best suited for LM, I decided not to try out PW and simply went for SM.

The reasons for this decision are numerous. First of all, LM seems to have made a very good progress with a demo version of SM, which, no doubt, would not be possible with traditional lessons in LM’s case. She can now play a passable “rendition” (well, for a four-year-old!) of “Ode to Joy” on the third presentation (both hands and no assistance from me) and, now that she is getting comfortable navigating the game herself, she has been insisting on playing it on the sixth presentation, which shows the piece in an equivalent of conventional notation. This has been going quite well too and although at this stage she is probably relying on her memory, she does appear to refer to the screen and follows the notes with her gaze. Since this method seems to be working, I feel discouraged to try an alternative. Even if PW is a superior method, trying it now would probably cause confusion since LM has got a good hang of SM’s approach.

Secondly, there are many things I came to liking about SM, which I could not find in PW, at least not in the available videos, and which I would be very likely to miss in PW if I tried it. Please correct me if I am wrong and have misinterpreted the videos, as I have never actually tried PW. For instance, even at the most basic level SM prominently shows the lines of the great stave coloured in such way that it leaves no room for confusion as to which part should be played by which hand. In PW these lines are quite feeble and I can see how that might be somewhat confusing to LM.

In SM each piece can be presented in six ways of gradually increasing difficulty. In PW the levels are four, and I feel that the transition from level 3 to level 4 could be too steep for LM. Although this might go easily with pieces she would have practiced and partially memorised, I think overall it would take her longer to come to the stage where she could sight-read unknown pieces at that presentation or even from sheets, which is the ultimate goal of both approaches. Also, as I have mentioned before, having same colours representing different notes and different colours representing same notes, would not help the transition, neither would it make it easy for her to differentiate between notes lying on the lines and those in the spaces between the lines of the staves when learning to read sheet music.

SM lets you stop and think before playing each note and would not move until you get it right, while in PW notes keep scrolling up and if you did not hit the correct one at the correct time, you have missed it. As much as I agree with Chris that a “note played out of time is not a correct note”, in my very modest layman opinion, if I wanted to learn to read music notation, I would want to be able to be more in control of the flow, at least initially, and to stop and see how each key relates to the staves, just as I would want to stop and think when reading a text-book. I do, however, realise that with SM, I would need to do some additional work to help LM understand rhythm and note duration.

SM places a lot of emphasis on learning solfeggio and, as someone with a few years of attending an ex-Soviet music school (although all happily buried in the past!), I relate deeply to it. I did not notice any such emphasis in PW.

Last, but not least, SM has a cheaper basic version with an option of upgrading it to the deluxe version in the future which is so much “friendlier” to our family pocket.

I have come across a few negative points mentioned regarding SM but none of these were major stumbling blocks for me or LM. SM does not have a polished and sophisticated interface, but it does the trick for LM who is completely unsophisticated in terms of video games. In the long-term the novelty of a more flashy game would ultimately wear off and, at the end of the day, it is not a game I am looking for but a tool for helping LM to learn and SM delivers in this respect. LM does not see it as a toy anyway as I have so far used SM as part of very short (5 to 15 minutes) but focused and strongly reinforced sessions. I do, however, let her navigate the game herself and make choices regarding which hand to play and on what presentation, so she does feel in control of her learning. She is also very motivated about these sessions as she always gets a small prize at the end. I feel this way I can ensure the method works for her in the long-term too.

Finally, I would like to emphasize that this decision has been made purely on the grounds of what programme I think is likely to be a better fit for LM. This does not mean that what, in my opinion, would or would not work for her, would equally apply to another child. None of the above comments were intended as criticism of PW which I have never used. Neither am I affiliated in any way with SM and I paid the full price for the product.

I do believe that both programmes are quite break-throughs and it is great that I was in  a position of choosing between the two.

Soft Mozart Demo Trial: Our Progress So Far

Having decided on “trying before buying”, I downloaded demo versions of “Gentle Piano” and “Guess the Key” games. This went quite smoothly and I had no trouble with the MIDI connection either.

Since the software creator and owner, gave her permission to copy the image of the key stickers from her website to try out the demo, I did so, but rather than using these as guides behind the keys, I coloured them in and turned them into stickers to make it easier for LM to get the idea. This is what the keyboard looks like now (after quite a bit of effort!):

I also downloaded a one-year Soft Mozart curriculum, solfeggio flashcards, as well as the first part of the solfeggio song freely available on their website.

LM has been playing these two games for about a couple of weeks now. I have so far kept our “piano playing” sessions to 5-15 minutes every day, excluding week-ends. During the first week, we started off by listening to the solfeggio song and sequencing the flashcards with solfeggio pictograms. The visual sequence “sank in” easily, and after we sang the song a couple of times, I started hiding one of the flashcards and asking LM to tell me which one was missing. The curriculum suggests prompting the child to count to the missing card, which, I guess, would be appropriate for an auditory learner, but since LM is a visual learner, she did not need to repeat the sequence and would name the missing card almost immediately.

We then played “Guess the Key” game. Being a demo version, it only has two levels covering notes do (C) to mi (E). LM quite liked “helping the elf collect fruit”, but she wanted to “feed the spider too” and would sometimes wait for him to come out and take the fruit. What I like about this game is that it automatically adjusts to your speed, so if you keep missing the notes, it slows down, lets you think without overwhelming you and repeats the same level. If you are progressing well, the game may even “decide” to skip a level. LM is doing well with it, although we still need to do a bit of work on flats and sharps. I have also started covering the screen, as this video suggests, to let her guess the key by ear, as I think it is not only a good pitch-training exercise, but, in LM's case, is a great “listening” exercise, as part of her speech and language development programme.

Before proceeding to Gentle Piano, I first prompted LM to play a five-finger exercise suggested by the curriculum, which involved playing five notes from do (middle C) up and down with the right hand, and then repeating the same exercise but from the small octave with the left hand. Somehow, having done this exercise, LM decided that these keys could only be played by these specific fingers so when we got to “Ode to Joy” in “Gentle Piano” and I prompted her to play the right hand, she would only press the matching symbols on the stickers with this precise fingering. Although the fingering was not wrong, it meant that her focus was more on choosing the correct finger than on playing the tune.

The game gives you two different scores: the one on the left side is for the number of notes you have played correctly and the one on the right side shows how close you have been to the perfect timing. While the bigger the score on the left is, the better you have performed, when it comes to the score on the right, you should strive to bring it as close to 0 as possible. This area of the game, in my very modest opinion, could be improved for young learners. While the left-hand score for hitting the correct notes is represented by flowers, and the more flowers you have got the better you have done, there is no visual representation of the score on the right reflecting your timing. Being a perfectionist, LM would get a perfect or near perfect score in terms of correct notes hit, but her timing, at least initially, was quite far from the ideal and this was not represented in a visual way to have any meaning to her. I have found it difficult to explain to her that while it is great to get so many flowers, we also need to make the number on the right smaller. So this has been of little motivational value to her.

I have, however, been using my usual “token economy” and strong backup reinforcers to incentivise LM and to ensure this activity is perceived by her as highly rewarding. She earns a token every time she plays the piece or does an exercise, and after she completes the token board, she gets a small prize.

We have so far progressed from playing separate hands on the first presentation, to playing both hands on the fourth presentation (with red and blue circles moving horizontally, no pictograms), and I have to say that her transitioning from one presentation to another has been pretty smooth and did not significantly affect her scores, which are now fairly good (that is the score on the right is not higher than the score on the left). I don’t think she is playing by heart yet as her eyes are always on the screen, so it will be interesting to see how she progresses over the two remaining levels. When she plays the piece with both hands though, she sometimes either forgets to change the cord or releases it too soon, so I still need to occasionally prompt her with her left hand to make her learning as “errorless” as possible. According to the creator, “Ode to Joy” is more difficult for little hands in terms of coordination than the other pieces of the elementary level, such as “Hot Cross Buns”, “French Song” and “Jingle Bells”. So, ideally, we should have learned to play those before “Ode to Joy”. But LM seems to be steadily getting there and she is very close to being able to play both hands completely independently.

Overall, I have been quite pleased with LM’s progress so far, which, bearing in mind her motor delay and coordination difficulties, has been pretty good. As a by-product, I have noticed her pencil grip has considerably improved over the past couple of weeks.

Discharged from ENT!

Just wanted to share some good news: LM has been discharged from the ENT (Ear/Nose/Throat) clinic! Her hearing was checked for the third time yesterday and the test showed normal hearing in her left ear and slightly below the norm in her right one (which should not be too much of a concern), and no otitis media! Two years ago she was tested several times over the period of four months and all of the tests showed mild to moderate hearing loss due to persistent otitis media, which was not at all helpful with her speech and language delay. After a particularly nasty ear infection accompanied by an ear drum rapture, she had an operation and had grommets inserted in both ears to help her hearing. The grommets have now fallen out and we needed to undertake more tests to see if another set would be necessary.

The current test results mean we have escaped the second operation as she seems to have won over the wicked moster of “glue ear”. Although it is only one hurdle cleared, I do hope, with all my heart, she will get there!

Activities to Encourage Using Two-Word Phrases

First of all, my welcome to Christine and thank you for your interest! I feel flattered that you found my ramblings worth reading, and if you want to share your thoughts or ideas, please feel free to leave your comments!

Continuing from a previous post, I will now list a few more activities LM was recommended in the past by her speech and language therapist. She was then at a two-word level in her language understanding, but still used mostly single-word utterances. These were intended to help her start using two-word phrases more often.

Basic Rules

It is important to speak in short phrases so that your child can copy you. The basic rule is still to repeat what the child says and add an extra word, e.g. “dog” – “dog eating”.

Repeat the same phrases over and over again in everyday situations, e.g. “hello daddy”, “bye John”, “cat gone”, etc. When carrying out routine tasks, such as laying the table or tidying up, use opportunities to say who the objects belong to, such as “daddy’s spoon”, “mummy’s book”.

Books

Look at pictures in books and talk about what is happening instead of reading the books, e.g. “baby sleeping”.

Shopping Game

Set up a shop and place a few items or pictures of food or toys on the table. Ask your child to buy you two things, e.g. “apple and cheese”. Then take your turn to “go shopping” and encourage your child to tell you which two things to buy. You can use this activity to practice using some essential vocabulary, such as food, toys, clothes etc.

Colouring

Get a picture of a boy and a girl, or a teddy and a dolly, or a man and a lady. You can use your own drawing or try it with any colouring books your child has. Encourage your child to tell you which parts of the pictures to colour, e.g. “the girl’s arm”, “dolly’s dress”, etc.

Teddy and Dolly

Put a teddy and a dolly (or any alternative pair of toys, perhaps, your child’s favourites) and a selection of objects (e.g. cup, plate, spoon, fork, etc) in front of the child. Ask your child to give one of the objects to either dolly or teddy, e.g. “give the plate to dolly”, “give the spoon to teddy”, etc. Encourage your child to tell you what to do next, e.g. “fork dolly”.

You can use this activity to practice some useful action words, such as sleep, jump, eat, kick, wash, run, sit, drink, etc. Ask the child to make “dolly run” or “teddy jump”, etc. The child can then tell you what to play with next, e.g. “dolly sit”.

After you finish playing, encourage your child to tell you where to put the toys, e.g. “teddy box”, “dolly bed”, etc.

This activity can be extended in many ways and made more difficult as your child progresses.

Lotto

If your child knows basic shapes, colours and “big”/”little” adjectives, you can practice these by playing lotto. Create little boards with 4 alternating pictures, for instance, red circle/blue circle, yellow triangle/green triangle, big dog/little dog, green apple/blue apple, etc. Also cut out separate pictures with the same images. Give a board to your child and keep one for yourself, then take turns picking a picture from the pile and encourage your child to say what they have and what they need to complete their board.

Hope some other mums may find these activities useful for their children,

LM's Mum

Piano Wizard or Soft Mozart?

I still haven’t made up my mind as to which programme to go for and have been busy researching these two software products. The packages offered and the prices are quite different, so I have been trying to strip these of any bonuses or extras, however valuable they may be, to be able to compare the core of each method and choose the one most likely to work for LM, taking into account her strengths and challenges. If I can get down to the foundation of each programme, I can then consider everything that comes on top of it before making the final decision. I haven’t used any of the approaches, and my research so far has been purely Internet-based.

Both systems offer a step by step approach to learning to play the piano keyboard from day one and ultimately transition learners to reading sheet music. Both of them are much more than simple “piano simulation” computer games and offer beginner-level piano curricula. Neither of them is a substitute of a good piano teacher, but they can get you as far as understanding the written language of music, learning to hit the right note at the right time, and can actually teach you to play quite a few pieces, which, I guess, is a very good start, particularly if you can’t afford a teacher. This approach would be a great tool for teaching very young kids, those with language comprehension difficulties, or simply those who learn better by seeing and doing rather than by listening and speaking, as it provides the necessary visual support and does not rely much on music theory and verbal explanation.

Piano Wizard is a multi-level game which comes with various support materials, including detailed DVD lessons taking you to PW Academy, which lays foundation of music theory, dynamics and technique.

Soft Mozart, on the other hand, is, in fact, a series of multi-level interactive games, each targeting a specific skill necessary for playing the piano. It also comes with a one-year beginner curriculum, covering some aspects of music theory, solfege, harmony and performance.

The two parts of the packages, which appear comparable and which form the basis of the programmes, are the actual PW game and SM Gentle Piano module. Both games have a similar concept of rotating the great stave vertically thus showing how it relates to the piano keys. They both let the players focus on a specific line and, at the same time, encourage them look ahead. These two videos below, in my opinion, give quite a good idea of the steps involved in each respective method.

Piano Wizard: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_o1vjXHGrc

Soft Mozart: http://www.youtube.com/user/lenkaolenka#p/u/9/6bUeNO6U7tI

As these videos show, both PW and SM start out at their most basic levels as simple matching games – you match colours (in PW) or symbols (in SM) on the stickers to those of/on the objects/circles reaching the focus line on the screen, which should be easy enough even for a very young child. Over the next few levels, they gradually transition you to the conventional musical notation. These two programmes, however, appear to use completely different support mechanisms, or, let’s call these “crutches” (not in a bad sense), which are gradually removed to allow independent “piano walk”.

PW relies solely on colours to represent each key and this support is removed after the game is flipped horizontally and the moving game objects turn into notes. Colour to colour match is very simple and would allow anyone to get started on the piano. The first two levels have a fun computer game-like appearance, with a variety of colourful backgrounds, which would be appealing to game-savvy kids who would not even realise they are practicing. In PW music keeps going whether or not you have hit the right key, to emphasise the idea that music indeed goes on whether you can keep up with it or not, and a note played out of time is not a correct note.

I haven’t, however, figured out how the game manages to get the learner over the fact that each line/space on the staff cannot be assigned one specific colour with the same ease as (all of) the keys of the keyboard, since there is no exact correspondence between the two. For instance, looking at the upper stave, A (“la”), which is assigned a specific space, would be represented either by a brown, or a blue (if flat) or a green (if sharp) note. Likewise, G (“sol”) could be a blue-coloured note too, if sharp, but it would not be in the same space on the stave, but on the line below. Unless I got it completely wrong (correct me if I did!), this would potentially confuse LM at Step 3, when the moving objects become moving notes on the actual stave and could make her transitioning to Step 4 (black and white notes) quite challenging. The programme, however, claims that learners, who reach that stage, stop relying so much on the colours and, presumably with practice, learn intuitively the underlying logic of music notation and how keys correspond to lines and spaces of the great stave.

SM, on the other hand, relies on a series of support mechanisms, which are gradually removed, as the game progresses. The stickers, with symbols representing notes (solfege or letters) and green/brown lines delineating the grand staff, are only attached to white keys. To the best of my knowledge, the beginner pieces do not involve using any black keys as they are written in do (C) major. The great stave is already prominent at Level 1, although modified and in a vertical position. Once you are comfortable with symbol to symbol matching, the symbols can be removed and you remain with either red (representing line notes) or blue (space notes) circles and match these to red/blue stickers on the keys, while having the green and brown lines on the keyboard as points of reference. These two steps are then repeated with the staves rotated horizontally after which, the circles become regular black notes moving on the staves towards the focus line, at which stage the appearance of the game becomes similar to PW’s Step 4. SM then goes one step further, to actually present all pieces in a static sheet format on the screen with green light highlighting each note as it is played. As for flats and sharps, these, if I understand correctly, are introduced in more advanced pieces by showing tiny black rectangles with flat or sharp signs to the left or to the right of the symbol picture suggesting that a black key to the left or to the right should be played instead.

Unlike PW, in SM the game waits for you to hit the note and will not move further unless you have succeeded, which allows you to be more in control of the music flow and to stop and think before hitting the keys.

Which one would be better for LM? I ask myself this question but I know the proof of the pudding is in the eating, particularly if this pudding is on LM’s plate, who has not followed the typical developmental profile, who may be challenged by what would be easy for a typical child, and, vice versa, could find very easy something a typical child would not. Additionally, both products will be different as to how they measure the progress and respond to errors, which I have left out of my research, since these nuances are difficult to appreciate and compare until you use the software.

Anyway, the good news for me is that it is possible to try both programmes before investing the precious dollars. SM offers free easily downloadable demos of all of their games, including Gentle Piano, as well as a free one-year curriculum. These should give a very good idea of the actual product as they are simply their much shorter versions.

PW, on the other hand, comes with a two-month (at least for BrillKids members) customer satisfaction guarantee, after which, if the product did not work for you, you can return the game and get your money back.

Since trying out SM seems to be an easier option, as I can start immediately and will not lose any shipping charges should I decide to return it, this is the programme I will start with. My aim is to try it over the following couple of months and see how far LM will be able to make with it, before "gambling" shipping costs on PW.

I see that this post has gone into quite an essay now, so I am going to stop here. Will be updating on our progress!