What age for violin lessons?

[mamandedeux]

Hi musical mamas!

DS just got a student violin for his 4th birthday. He's been interested in DH's instruments for a while now, so we thought he'd love his own. And he does! He's really keen on learning, more so than we thought, and now we're wondering whether he should have actual lessons. DH is showing him basics, but he's self-taught and struggles with proper technique and says DS should learn well from the get-go (a chance he never himself got). So my question, is just-turned 4 too young for introductory lessons?

Thanks!

[starbyfar7]

not at all! dd started cello at 6. she loves playing, but hates to practice. i would've started her earlier, but we lived overseas and it was alittle more difficult to do

[zeldamomma]

Suzuki violin teachers often start kids at 3 y.o. I really like the way the Suzuki method teaches not only good technique but also general music theory.

If you go with a Suzuki teacher, you or your dh will have to attend lessons with your ds, and act as home-teacher during the week. It takes a fair amount of time, and from what I've seen, it can be frustrating for little ones. My dd started violin at 7, and although my ds would love to start violin now, we're going to wait till he's 5, because I'm just not willing to do the necessary work to get a younger kid playing.

[elus0814]

My son began suzuki violin a few weeks after turning 3. I wouldn't say he learned a whole lot but he really enjoyed it. He learned how to hold the violin, the parts of it, and a few notes. We stopped after one semester because we couldn't find a teacher after we moved but would likely have stopped for a year anyway. The program he was in, while it was wonderful, was over $1000 per semester (about $2200 per year plus recital fees, books, violin purchase or rental, and other small things like bow rosin) which was just way to much for a three year old. If he was an only child I could see doing it, most of the kids there were only children. Also, if you look into suzuki make sure the violin he was given will be acceptable to them. We purchased a middle of the road one for a couple hundred dollars and ended up having to rent a special suzuki one which would have been $400-500 to purchase. They also required lots of parental involvement, but that could have been specific to that violin school. One parent (and it had to be the same parent every time) had to be present and participating in the lesson each week plus participate in all the other functions, it was asked that other children not attend the lesson.

[mamandedeux]

Wow! With a baby, there's no way I'd be able to afford that time commitment. I'll see what's available here - I didn't even know there were different methods...

Thanks!

[lolar2]

Not all Suzuki teachers will be that expensive-- especially with a private teacher (as opposed to a "school" of teachers) you might be able to work out some flexibility, just like with any sole proprietor. However, at 3 I'd think all of them would require some level of time commitment where the parent has to sit with the child to practice every day (20 minutes maybe?) and attend the lessons; that doesn't mean there would necessarily be required functions and recitals though.

[EFmom]

I think at that age, I'd try to find something light and breezy as far as lessons go, at least to start. I wouldn't start right in with heavy duty stuff.

My dd plays the violin. Most schools around here don't start kids until they are in 4th grade. DD is a pretty serious violinist, and she's been taking private lessons from an excellent, very experienced and accomplished tutor. Her tutor, against her better judgment, took on a 4yo because the mom was so persistent. The tutor feels that very, very few kids are ready at that age.

It's pretty awful. The kid has lessons right before my dd. He's so not ready, but although the tutor has indicated repeatedly to the mother that she'd be better dropping this for a time, poor little G. suffers on.

[lolar2]

There is such a thing as light and breezy Suzuki, btw-- part of the original reason for so much parental involvement is to make it more fun and bonding for the parent and child (if you read the book that Suzuki wrote about his method). You have to shop around for the right teacher.

Fourth grade seems late to me to start a string or keyboard instrument. Most of the serious players I know started by first grade or earlier. Of course if it's purely for enjoyment, it doesn't matter, but for a child who might be interested in performing (personality-wise) it might not be a bad idea to start on the early side.

[EFmom]

Originally Posted by lolar2

Fourth grade seems late to me to start a string or keyboard instrument. Most of the serious players I know started by first grade or earlier. Of course if it's purely for enjoyment, it doesn't matter, but for a child who might be interested in performing (personality-wise) it might not be a bad idea to start on the early side.

My dd is in a demanding and regionally competitive orchestra as well as several select groups in school. While a few of the kids started around second grade, overwhelmingly most of the players in the competitve orchestra started in fourth grade, both in school and with good private lessons. Most of the kids she knows who started earlier have musician or music teacher parents.

[emilysmama]

Every child is different, but here are my feelings from my personal experience. I started suzuki violin when I was 7, and my sister 6. I personally think 5-7 years old is a great time to start. Not too much in suzuki, so that the child does not get dependent on thinking of the notes as fingerings and can make a good transition to reading music and thinking of the notes as letters or notes.

My brother started suzuki cello at age 4 years old, and his attention span was lie a millisecond long. So for him, such a young age was not a good idea. He stopped, and then picked up other instruments when he was older, and is now the most serious amateur musician among we three siblings, so I think he had great aptitude, just not attention span at 4 years old.

My husband started cello when he was 9 years old, and he did a lot better than me, who started a lot younger.

When I was in high school, I played with lots of kids who started at all sorts of ages. Some of them started when they were three years old, some started at 9 years old. Really, it wasn't the age of beginning that mattered, it is whether they have the discipline to practice everyday without being nagged by the parent. Some have that at 3 years old. Those who have it at 9 years old, very quickly catch up and make up for lost time. And then there are plenty of kids who never have it at all.

[Qbear'smama]

We started my DD with Suzuki cello when she just turned 3 and I have read other more experienced parents say that when you start that young, it takes longer to get the basics down and I would agree. I am glad we started DD that young, she loves her cello, but at that age, there are complications that you wouldnt necessarily have to deal with with an older child, like problems with bow hold due to weak muscles in the hand (don't think that's so much an issue with violin) but she has been going for over a year now and we still have our struggles, lessons where she is more interested in chasing after the teacher's cat than learning something new, but she still loves it (most of the time ) Suzuki is a big time committment and both DH and I attend most lessons, recitals, etc. so it's a family thing, but we have only one child and now that another is on the way, not sure how we'll work it. I think I will wait a little longer to start with the next one, unless he is totally into it and the teacher thinks it's a good idea. Good luck!

P.S. I will say, it has been a lot easier since she turned 4!!

[zeldamomma]

Originally Posted by lolar2

There is such a thing as light and breezy Suzuki, btw-- part of the original reason for so much parental involvement is to make it more fun and bonding for the parent and child (if you read the book that Suzuki wrote about his method). You have to shop around for the right teacher.

Right, from what I can see, the 3 and 4 y.o.s at my dd's school practice by playing a lot of games, clapping along with rhythms, and other age-appropriate stuff. Although I have heard discussion of how to gently correct a child who doesn't want to do the assigned practice, so you are expected to get your kid to do what has been assigned. Also, our school doesn't have new players using a real violin and bow at first-- they have a pretend violin made from a box and ruler, and a pretend bow. It means that kids learn how to hold the violin and bow before they are working with the fragile real violin, and when they get to the point of playing, they know the right way to do things. Playing the violin correctly is complicated-- I think it's good to break it down to manageable pieces, so kids can be successful in the part they're learning now, and they aren't completely overwhelmed, or doing a bunch of things wrong, but if you are planning to go the Suzuki route, you should know that he won't actually be playing his violin for a while.

FTR, our school costs $1200 a year, which includes a weekly private lesson and a weekly group lesson throughout the school year, and all recitals. Summer lessons are extra, but optional.

[bluebunny]

Originally Posted by lolar2

Fourth grade seems late to me to start a string or keyboard instrument. Most of the serious players I know started by first grade or earlier. Of course if it's purely for enjoyment, it doesn't matter, but for a child who might be interested in performing (personality-wise) it might not be a bad idea to start on the early side.

My sister started violin lessons in fourth grade. She went on to get a full, four-year scholarship at a university for music. She plays in her local city's orchestra, teaches private lessons, and has a teaching degree. Definitely do-able, even for "late" starters.

OP, if your child is really interested, I would look into a private teacher who is willing to give lessons to a four-year old and be somewhat laid-back about it.

[Oubliette8]

I think if your son has the instrument, he should be in lessons. It is REALLY hard to unlearn bad techniques. It would be better to get him started learning proper technique right from the beginning. And you don't have to pick Suzuki, although it has a great reputation. I'd just work on finding a teacher who is comfortable taking on such a young student.

As far as starting age, in my school district they recruit for orchestra in 4th grade. I started then, went all state 4 times in high school and got a small scholarship to college. However, most of the kids that were REALLY good started much younger- first grade or before, even if they'd started on a different instrument.

Also, waiting 5 years gives your son a long time to develop bad habits with his instrument. I didn't learn my bow hold correctly for instance, and have never been able to correct it. My instrument is unusual in that it has two bow types, so in the end I switch to the other style and learned that correctly. Its far better to start learning good habits than to try to unlearn bad.

[ihathi]

My DS asked for a violin every X-mas since he was 2, so we finally gave in and signed him up for classes at 4. In the end, we learned that it was just too much to ask of him at that age--while he loved the idea of playing, he really struggled to make it through a 45-minute class. He was just too fidget-y. After the first session of classes, we returned his rental instrument and told him we were going to take a break.

He's 5 now and we think he'll be much, much better prepared to enjoy classes in the Fall and, since we didn't force him to "stick it out" or anything, he's still excited about this prospect.

Whatever you do, I guess I'd just encourage you to be ready to be flexible. If you try classes at 4 and it doesn't quite work out, you can always "take a break" too. IMO, you can't go wrong as long as you're following your child's lead...