Certain schools of thought stress the value to the listener of having some practical experience of music. They suggest that even a rudimentary playing of the piano or some other instrument is better than reading a dozen of books about music. There are those, however, who claim that even many concert pianists have only a limited understanding of what music is.

Analysis

The given argument specifically in the context of music is not very contentious. I will support the argument that practical experience of music is better than learning music from books.

The practical experience will always be a better learning process than learning from books in almost all scenarios. Learning from books will give only knowledge about the music, melody and instrument. Music is something, which we feel from soul and mind, only thorough practicing in actual we will get the flavor of music.

If we draw analog between learning music and learning swimming my argument will get more strength. We can read dozen of books about “how to swim” and other swimming techniques but unless until we will not jump into water, we will never learn how to swim, will never understand how to apply the swimming techniques.

To support further, I would say that books about swimming or music or instruments must have been written by expert swimmers or musicians or instrumentalists, not by the person who has only theoretical knowledge of swimming or music or instruments. One can learn music by practicing first and then can evolve theories but other way round is not possible.

The best example one can get from the most popular music stars, instrumentalists who has the full authority about the music. Without any exception all has got their status by practicing the music, practicing the instrument not by reading the books day and night.

For all the above reasons I concur with the argument that even a rudimentary playing of the piano or some other instrument is better than reading a dozens of books.