Using the thumb on the black keys allowed?

[csharp_minor]

Hi

My teacher said I shouldn't use the thumb on the black keys, and its a rare thing to do if you do, do it. ( maybe she only meant the piece we were working on at the time?)

I'm a bit confused, as I'm learning a Beethoven ecosaise ( Eb Major WoO 86 ). The fingering for it uses the RH thumb on Eb throughout the picece, and I find it fine to do this. I haven't had time to discuss this with her as I learn a lot of pieces on my own.

I also read Chopin used the thumb on the black keys too... 

Personally I think you should use any fingering that is logical if it makes playing the piece easier for you. And we should do away with what is supposedly ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ as long as you get the best sound from it in the easiest way.

What do you guys think?

[shortyshort]

I agree with you.
If they're there in the right place, use them.

It would make octaves very difficult.

[j.s. bach the 534th]

just put your fingers wherever they want to go (on the keyboard only, please)

[faulty_damper]

Limiting yourself by avoiding the thumb on a sharp is like walking on shards of glass without your shoes.  Wear your shoes!  I have been told this by many teachers and the conclusion of following that advice: that advice is wrong.  But let's briefly survey how this no-thumb-on-sharps came about.  It has it's origins long before the piano was even invented.

Long ago, there was no piano, only keyboard instruments: the harpsichord.  (Let's ignore the others.)  The technique to playing the harpsichord was very different: there was hardly anything a player could do to modify tone; it was an all-or-nothing technique.  If you depressed too lightly on a harpsichord, the lack of force would not pluck the strings and thus no sound.  So sufficient force had to be applied by the fingers: the index, middle, ring, and pinky.  These four fingers were the harpsichordists tools and they worked for a very long time.  But what about the thumb?  It didn't function mechanically the same as the fingers because it grasps inward (it opposes the others) whereas the fingers could strike down.  So the thumb was rarely used.

However, there came a man who revolutionized keyboard technique by doing this: he regularly employ the use of the thumbs to depress the keys.  (He had no teacher, you see.  Much more on this later.)  Suddenly, a world of new compositions became possible simply because a player could use the thumbs.  The only caveat: it was used almost exclusively to the natural keys, not sharps.

This is the basis of the "modern" technique of not using the thumb on the sharps.  It has no basis from the piano but with an antiquated instrument that hardly anyone knows how to play.

So why did this idea persist?  The piano looks like a harpsichord and therefore functions just like one.  It doesn't take much thought to figure out that they are to be played the same and so the old school of thought on the art of keyboard (harpsichord) playing was transferred into the school of thought on piano playing. 

But as the piano was innovated, technique did not.  It has generally stayed at a time somewhere before Chopin even touched the keys in the early 19th century.  Why did it stay there?  It stayed there because just prior to Chopin, the burgeoning wealth of Europe led to an increased production of pianos.  It became a household necessity and that necessity required someone to learn how to play it.  Someone to learn required someone to teach and hence the crux of the problem: the teachers.

Piano pedagogy exploded.  Every accomplished (and many not so accomplished) pianist developed a "new method" for the art of dexterity or piano playing.  These methods flew off the shelves to those eager to learn how to play.  Methodology became a get-rich-quick scheme.  If you wanted to make money you simply wrote a few scales harmonized with some chords, send it to a publisher, and get your money.  (Czerny must have held a monopoly!)

But unfortunately, we know too well that things in permanent existence can last an eternity, even after it goes out of print.  Newer methods were written and sold very well especially once they were adopted by formal institutions (like the Conservatoire.)  These method books continued to be supplied even to this very day, December 26, 2183, simply because there is a demand for them.  It doesn't matter that they don't work.  They are just like weight-loss pills - they don't work but people keep buying them.

So now getting back on amputating the thumb to make piano-playing easier: don't do it - you won't be able to hold a spoon afterward.  This idea existed long ago but does not, in anyway, apply to modern times, the year 2183.

From my personal experiences, I have been told not to do a lot of things simply because they went beyond the limits of my teacher's.  The irony of it all is that I am far beyond their own limits simply because their limits did not work.  I do everything they have told me not to do simply because it allows me to play without restrictions.  Was I a bad student?  Yes, I was!  But in your case, I don't know how you would handle this or address it to your teacher.  Caveat emptor.

[csharp_minor]

thanks for the replies, and wow thanks faulty damper for loooong reply / essay!

Conclusion: I shall do as I please! 

[j.s. bach the 534th]

thanks for the replies, and wow thanks faulty damper for loooong reply / essay!

Conclusion: I shall do as I please! 

best conclusion you could have made


@faulty damper: WOW, and um, am I the only one who noticed you saying the year 2183?