Cortot's rational principles of technique

[daniel patschan]

G. Sokolov (won Tchaikovsky at age of 16), who has the most unbelievable pianistical reflexes one could imagine. I went to a lot of his recitals in 80s. One of his favorite encores then along with unbelievable rendition of Russian Dnace from Petrushka was Chopin Etude Op.25/11. Let me tell you, never ever in my life I heard something like that, not in recordings, not live. And it was consistently phenomenal from one recital to another... untill one day, when I heard it completely slipped. It was a mess!!! After the concert I came to him. Being very apologatic he explained: "I did not practice it for two days".


Best,
M.

That´s something one can believe immediately - the same with Pogorelich: 12 hours a day !

[leahcim]

I feell Ali v Frazier coming on.

You're watching channel 4?

My money's on the skinny female lawyer - unless the brain doctor gets his brother to help.

[m]

Here is the very short answer: Thumb under – the thumb goes under the hand. Thumb over – the thumb does not go under the hand (it does not go over either). In order to play a clean, fast, pearly scale the thumb must not go under the hand, therefore you must use thumb over. If you are happy with this explanation, go home. Otherwise, read below a slightly more elaborate one.

Almost everyone is taught to play scales (say, C major) by playing CDE with fingers 123 and then FGAB with fingers 1234, then move on to the next octave CDE with finger 123 and so on.

Playing CDE with 123 and FGAB with 1234 is easy.

The real difficulty comes when you need to move from E (3rd finger) to F (thumb) and from B (4th finger) to C (thumb).

Almost everyone is taught to bring the thumb under the hand in order to reach for the F or for the C.

For several anatomical reasons, this motion (known as “thumb under” because the thumb goes well under the hand) is very awkward. So several piano pedagogues (including Cortot and Hanon) devised all sorts of “preparatory exercises” to develop the ability to pass the thumb under the hand, and to make the motion less awkward.

Although these exercises do work to a certain extent, the anatomical limits cannot ultimately be circumvented, so the motion will always feel awkward, and will always have a potential for disaster (hitting the wrong note, uneven playing – both in rhythm and tone – at fast speeds, misco-ordination of fingers, etc.). Moreover, you must keep practicing it for the rest of your life. Any neglect and the illusory facility you have acquired slips away and you are back to ground zero.

Fortunately there is an alternative motion to negotiate the movement of the thumb. This motion is anatomically natural – which means that you are not constantly fighting your own body, and more importantly, once you figure out this motion, it does not need to be practiced anymore . The reason why it does not need to be practiced anymore is the same reason one does not need to practise eating with a fork after figuring out how to do it: you will do it all the time, since it is such a natural, easy motion.

This alternative motion is “Thumb over”. However, this is a misnomer: the thumb does not really go over the hand. Rather, it never goes under the hand. And the way to do it is to integrate four basic motions: shift, slant, rotation and back and forth movements. The link I gave above explains in detail each of these movements and how to integrate them.

A lot of people tend to focus in just one of these basic motions, so often in the forum you see people talking about thumb over as a simple hand shift. But that is not so. Just shifting the hand (although already much better than thumb under) will not lead to a clean, fast, pearly scale. You need to integrate the other three motions to it.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

Bernhard,

Reading into your message (at least the way it is written), I have a few questions and also a few things to address.

Let's just go point to point:

You say:

In order to play a clean, fast, pearly scale the thumb must not go under the hand, therefore you must use thumb over.

I ask:

Why "MUST NOT"? Many pianists play clean, fast, pearly scale with thumb under. Why "THEREFORE" we must use thumb over? Or do they do something terribly wrong?

You say:

For several anatomical reasons, this motion (known as “thumb under” because the thumb goes well under the hand) is very awkward.

I ask:

What are those anatomical reasons, and why this motion is very awkward? Thousands of pianists (including myself) feel it very natural.

You say:

So several piano pedagogues (including Cortot and Hanon) devised all sorts of “preparatory exercises” to develop the ability to pass the thumb under the hand, and to make the motion less awkward.

I ask:

Could you provide names of the pedagogues who advocated thumb over as a universal and only principle?

You say:

The real difficulty comes when you need to move from E (3rd finger) to F (thumb) and from B (4th finger) to C (thumb).

I say:

If it is the REAL DIFFICULTY, then there is something fundamentally wrong with the WAY you are using thumb under. 

You say:

Although these exercises do work to a certain extent, the anatomical limits cannot ultimately be circumvented, so the motion will always feel awkward, and will always have a potential for disaster (hitting the wrong note, uneven playing – both in rhythm and tone – at fast speeds, misco-ordination of fingers, etc.). Moreover, you must keep practicing it for the rest of your life. Any neglect and the illusory facility you have acquired slips away and you are back to ground zero.

I say:

This assertion is wrong. Ones you have aquired the RIGHT technique of thumb under, you never have to practice it again. It feels very natural and comfortable, without risk of hitting wrong notes, uneven playing-both in thythm and tone, etc.

You say:

And the way to do it is to integrate four basic motions: shift, slant, rotation and back and forth movements.

I say:

Wow! four motions?!!!... instead of two: very flexible thumb reaching under, preparing for the next position, and a pivot?


Now,
after saying all that, it is important to notice that by no means I diss the idea, however, I'd like to stress that thumb under technique IS the fundamental principle of piano playing and therefore should be practiced, developed, and treated as such. It involves very loose and flexible thumb, and fast and seamless wrist pivot.

The thumb over produces different sound, and has different momentum, and in some situations is invaluable. EXTREMELY fast passages in Spanish Rhapsody (12345 fingering, right before Jota) is one of the examples (although, I know many pianists for whom it actually feels very awkward, and who "re-fingered" them for more conventional "thumb under" fingering). In slower scale passages often it is nearly impossible to reach seamless joint with thumb over, even with use of pedal. Needless to say, when you need dry, pedalless, even passage, you can't use the thumb over.

Best regards,
M.

[leahcim]

Why "MUST NOT"? Many pianists play clean, fast, pearly scale with thumb under. Why "THEREFORE" we must use thumb over? Or do they do something terribly wrong?

Out of interest, I saw this on the web

https://pianoeducation.org/pnovtscl.html

This guy certainly seems to be using his thumb under albeit he's citing some speed photography and stating that his method is inbetween the two methods [which I believe is what Bernhard has said "thumb over" is before now]

It's physically impossible for me to do what he is doing with the "quiet hand". Beyond the first couple of small movements - I simply do not have a thumb that is long enough to reach the pass under the 4th. No amount of practise or exercise will change that and although he angles his hands slightly, the amount I would need to would be ridiculous, I wouldn't be able to cover the other notes.

If I try, I end up doing what he is showing in his first "what goes wrong" examples of what not to do. Something more than the thumb has to move. Period.

But he can clearly do it.

Seems to me his "what goes wrong" and his "practise" and "exercises" are just "an exercise in how long your thumb is" nothing more. Worth a PhD

Perhaps not just the length, perhaps it's more the proportions of the hand, since my hands aren't small per se, but my thumb is in relation to the other fingers.

I wonder if that's more or less the difference, some physically can do it, some can't and in between will be a range of (dis)comfort.

[will]

In order to play a clean, fast, pearly scale the thumb must not go under the hand, therefore you must use thumb over.

I ask:

Why "MUST NOT"? Many pianists play clean, fast, pearly scale with thumb under. Why "THEREFORE" we must use thumb over? Or do they do something terribly wrong?

To a point many pianists may be able to play clean, fast, pearly scale with thumb under.
However I do not recall ever seeing any very fast runs being played thumb under. Are there any online videos you know of that show this?
A good example of thumb over can be seen at

From about 1:20 on if you watch his right hand ascending you can clearly see that his thumb does not go under his hand.

You say:

For several anatomical reasons, this motion (known as “thumb under” because the thumb goes well under the hand) is very awkward.

I ask:

What are those anatomical reasons, and why this motion is very awkward? Thousands of pianists (including myself) feel it very natural.

I'm not sure of the exact anatomical reasons but just try this: continuosly move your thumb up and down like you are repeatedly playing a key. Continue this motion and gradually move your thumb from its neutral position to a position where it is tucked under the hand. The closer the thumb gets to the little finger the harder the up and down movement becomes.

You say:

So several piano pedagogues (including Cortot and Hanon) devised all sorts of “preparatory exercises” to develop the ability to pass the thumb under the hand, and to make the motion less awkward.

I ask:

Could you provide names of the pedagogues who advocated thumb over as a universal and only principle?

Gyorgy Sandor from On Piano Playing p63 "avoid placing the thumb under the palm of the hand at all costs. Unfortunately placing the thumb under the palm is the most widespread method of teaching scales; we must protest against it vigorously....Although it is the most agile and can move in any direction while it is alongside the hand, the thumb is totally handicapped and cramped when it is pulled in...If we force it into that unnatural and tight position (under the palm), we practically incapacitate it, and we lose all hope of achieving even, fluent playing".

[daniel patschan]

It´s a shame that Bernhard shirks this discussion. 

[sarahlein]

I don't think he is. Be patient!

I for one keenly await to what he has to say 

[thalbergmad]

I don't think he is. Be patient!

I for one keenly await to what he has to say 

Me too, because here we have differences of opinion between a stupendous pianist and an extremely knowledgable teacher.

In life, there are people who talk and people who play.

Fascinating.

Thal

[pianalex]

  that french guy - 'they play repertoire very well and are good at expressing feeling....yet cant play an even c major scale.'   Is that meant to be so bad, given that the ultimate aim is surely repertoire, and scales a mere agent for acheiving it?  Oh yeah, definitely TO I thought; bit distracted by those big quavers on the fall tho'.......

[m]

It's physically impossible for me to do what he is doing with the "quiet hand". Beyond the first couple of small movements - I simply do not have a thumb that is long enough to reach the pass under the 4th. No amount of practise or exercise will change that and although he angles his hands slightly, the amount I would need to would be ridiculous, I wouldn't be able to cover the other notes.

Dear Leahcim,

Throughout my life I had maybe about 200-300 students (starting from age as young as 4) and don't remember one single case when the thumb was too short to do the task.

It is very hard to give any advice without seeing what you are doing, but it is clear that you do something not quite right.
I will try to outline at least where to look.

The most common mistake is treating thumb as a finger with two joints. In fact it has three, where the third located close to your wrist.
Put your hand down, feel it absolutely free, and start slight vibration of your arm. You will feel your WHOLE thumb being completely relaxed, and you should get the feeling where it starts. That's how you should feel it while playing AT ALL TIMES--straight, flexible, and relaxed, with its motion starting from the 3rd joint. 
Now, take your completely relaxed R.H. and try to slightly squize it with your left hand fingers placed on third joint of the thumb and third joint of the pinkie. You will feel that the palm gets a slight tube-like shape. That's what you should feel when the thumb reaches under.

Now make an excersise. Put your completely relaxed hand on the keys with thumb on the F. Press it gently, putting only as much weight, as it is nessessary to hold the key down. Feel your hand relaxed. Hold the F with your thumb and lightly press G with your 2nd finger. Release the 2nd and slowly and smoothly (while still holding the thumb) move your 3rd down on E. The thumb should feel straight, relaxed, and "growing" from the 3rd joint. Your palm should not change any angle, remaning calm and relaxed. Repeat a few times.

Then put your thumb (all feelings are exactly the same) on C. Repeat the process, but with 4th on B.

What do you feel?   

Gyorgy Sandor from On Piano Playing p63 "avoid placing the thumb under the palm of the hand at all costs.

I did not learn playing piano from books. Although I am sure G. Sandor's wrote very fine and thoughtfull book, I am afraid I cannot comment without knowing the context, as I did not read it.

I am for the one, who believes the truth is always in between. As I wrote before, this technique has a certain sound and may very well suit certain kind or type of music, for example, Bartok, Prokofiev, etc. But to put it as a universal and THE ONLY WAY, is simply wrong. Maybe that's one of the reasons why Mr. Sandor was not famous for his let's say Schubert or Chopin renditions.

Unfortunately placing the thumb under the palm is the most widespread method of teaching scales; we must protest against it vigorously....Although it is the most agile and can move in any direction while it is alongside the hand, the thumb is totally handicapped and cramped when it is pulled in...If we force it into that unnatural and tight position (under the palm), we practically incapacitate it, and we lose all hope of achieving even, fluent playing".

What you say is instead of facing the problem, working on it, developing as many tools as it is possible for being ready to tackle ANY difficutlies you might meet on a life-long  jorney called piano playing and music making, we like oistridges should put our heads into the sand (at least what they say), and pretend the problem does not exist?
   
I'll tell you, many greatests teachers have emphasised that developing thumb under technique is one of the most fundamental principals of piano playing.
I will tell you more. Piano playing is not only about thumb technique, but involves many other aspects, physical and mental. It is a biggest fallacy to think that ones you master your thumb (whether it is under, over, or even sideways) you will achieve fluent and even playing. That is only one of the steps!

In order to learn piano and music you need a teacher, good teacher, the teacher who will see yours (and only yours) individual problems and will methodically address them   
to develop right kind of technique, which suites you, and only you. And if the teacher sees the thumb over is the only way suits you, then be it.

And BTW, speaking of teachers...

As for absolute trust in your teacher. Why? Sure, you must trust him enough to try out what he suggests, but if he tells you, drink this weird looking beverage, and I promise you that after half an hour you will be playing like Liszt himself, will you do it? Religious people make faith (blindly believing what is clearly non-sense, and even if it wasn´t how would they know?) to be a great virtue, but them much money can be made out of the faithful...

Bernhard,

The "trust him enough to try out what he suggests" to me sounds a little bit simplified.

Don't forget, when we come to a teacher we are overwhelmed with the feeling "what we WANT". A good teacher is the one who has a vision of "what we NEED".
When we come to a teacher we are like in the forest, where we don't see a next tree behind that bush. A good teacher is the one who sees all the field, with every tree, every bush, every flower, and every stone on the road. And s/he knows how to lead you through that forest and what is the best and most efficient way to get above it and see the whole field. If you do not trust your teacher sees all that--time for a new teacher.

To me it is clear that a student SHOULD and MUST do what the teacher says. However, the student should and must THINK and ANALIZE what the teacher says, and WHY the teacher says that or another certain thing. It is clear to me that student also should and must think and try ALTERNATIVE WAYS of achieving the same result. The GOOD teacher will always encourage it! 
And it is absolutely clear to me, if your teacher tells you, "drink that weird looking beverage", then it is time for another, better teacher. 

It´s a shame that Bernhard shirks this discussion. 

I am sure Bernhard has life outside this board as well, and might be busy. Once he has time, or feels it is nessessary, I am sure he will come to put some light.

Best,
M.

[will]

Now make an excersise. Put your completely relaxed hand on the keys with thumb on the F. Press it gently, putting only as much weight, as it is nessessary to hold the key down. Feel your hand relaxed. Hold the F with your thumb and lightly press G with your 2nd finger. Release the 2nd and slowly and smoothly (while still holding the thumb) move your 3rd down on E. The thumb should feel straight, relaxed, and "growing" from the 3rd joint. Your palm should not change any angle, remaning calm and relaxed. Repeat a few times.

Then put your thumb (all feelings are exactly the same) on C. Repeat the process, but with 4th on B.

What do you feel?   

That depends in which range of the piano I play the exercise. Generally the higher up I play the more awkward it becomes – starting from somewhat awkward proceeding to very awkward. If I play in the upper range the thumb feels very cramped and unnatural.
In all instances turning 3 over the thumb is easier than turning 4 over the thumb. However the primary difficulty is not depressing the keys with fingers 2-5 while the thumb is in this position. The primary difficulty is in using the thumb while it is in this tucked under position. With your right hand with thumb on C and 4th holding down B repeatedly play the thumb's note. What do you feel?

What you say is instead of facing the problem, working on it, developing as many tools as it is possible for being ready to tackle ANY difficutlies you might meet on a life-long  jorney called piano playing and music making, we like oistridges should put our heads into the sand (at least what they say), and pretend the problem does not exist?

I didn't say that. I merely responded to your question Could you provide names of the pedagogues who advocated thumb over as a universal and only principle? You called for examples from authority and I gave you one.

[m]

That depends in which range of the piano I play the exercise. Generally the higher up I play the more awkward it becomes – starting from somewhat awkward proceeding to very awkward. If I play in the upper range the thumb feels very cramped and unnatural.

Excellent point! I have exactly the same problem. But there is a way around. Find a position of your body when you feel it as natural as in the middle range. Usually, for some people it is when your body moves towards the upper range, and for some when they lean back. You can also experiment combining both. Just feel that the thumb is a continuation of your arm.   

What did you get now?

In all instances turning 3 over the thumb is easier than turning 4 over the thumb. However the primary difficulty is not depressing the keys with fingers 2-5 while the thumb is in this position. The primary difficulty is in using the thumb while it is in this tucked under position. With your right hand with thumb on C and 4th holding down B repeatedly play the thumb's note. What do you feel?

To play repeatedly the thumb on C, while holding 4th on B is not the subject of this excersise. But if you ask me, it is not as bad as hold 3rd and 5th and repeatedly play 4th  .

I didn't say that. I merely responded to your question Could you provide names of the pedagogues who advocated thumb over as a universal and only principle? You called for examples from authority and I gave you one.

Huh! 
I apologise for that--my mistake. I should've read more carefully and pay attention to the parentheses in your citation. 

Please address that whole my section to Mr. Sandor.

Here I'd like once again to take an opportunity to stress--what works for one person does not nessessarily work for another one. My point is--even if you never ever again going to use thumb under, you should and must try it, practice it, master it... at least for a mere reason of UNDERSTANDING WHY it does not work for you, whether it is some physical, or musical reason.
And of course, the same goes for the "thumb over"

Best,
M.

[leahcim]

Dear Leahcim,

Throughout my life I had maybe about 200-300 students (starting from age as young as 4) and don't remember one single case when the thumb was too short to do the task.

Thanks for your reply.

No doubt both you and Bernhard might agree that I might not be doing what you each describe in words correctly, but it seems you're discussing which I need to worry about doing at all

Bear in mind 2 things (a) I pointed to a bunch of videos showing what someone else was doing. Which is not necessarily what you would advocate doing.

(b) Being 4 years old you mention specifically. You perhaps mentioned that because it implies that they have small thumbs? But, firstly you can have a shorter thumb because your whole hand is smaller and thus getting your thumb past your 4th finger is not going to be harder [although obviously a child's hand has other issues that my hands don't have]

The other advantage the child has is that folk ignore the noise he makes and know he will grow. My hand isn't going to grow. Imagine telling Hoffman [whose skill I'm not going to pretend to ever have] that his hands aren't too small because none of your 200 students, some only 4, ever needed a special piano.

AFAICT Hofmann wanted to play the piano like an adult with his small-for-the-rest-of-his-life hands and probably didn't care that some 4yo played on a full size piano because he knew that a difficult stretch was always going to be difficult and a jump that made a gap wouldn't disappear as his hands got bigger and he could use a different technique.

I can hear the compromise a 6yo playing Chopin has to make even if I'm impressed he is doing it at all at 6. Although I may never have the skill to be as good as some 6 year olds I've seen, I don't want to play like they do, because if you remove the cloak of cuteness and age their playing suffers terribly because of their physical size, at least for the ones that I have seen.

It is very hard to give any advice without seeing what you are doing, but it is clear that you do something not quite right.
I will try to outline at least where to look.

I need to have my thumb play the note next to the index finger [easy unless I angle my hand too far - i.e the amount I can angle as the guy in the video describes is limited by the fact that my thumb has to reach the first note] then 2, 3 and 4 play, and then the thumb must move past and play the note past the 4th finger.

When that guy does it he doesn't play 2,3 and 4, but just does the 2 thumb notes without moving anything except the thumb.

For me it doesn't reach. Not comfortably. Not without movement from the hand. I'd be willing to accept that I am unusual, perhaps even nearly extreme - I can see my thumbs are different -  just as you might see some people have 6 fingers or some people have unusual kinks or bends in their little fingers that affect their playing even if 200 people have 5 fingers. But, what I wouldn't accept is that there isn't a wide variety and that some are going to find it physically much easier than others to do.

Once I move the hand to play the thumb, afaict it seems moot to me what that movement is. If the premise of his method is that the quiet hand has some significance, then once I move the hand, I'm not doing it.

OTOH, if moving the hand is ok, what's the fuss about thumb over / thumb under?

Because afaict, it just boils down to Bernhard et al describing a way of moving your hand [possibly by moving something else that it's attached to!] as you play the thumb and shift position.

...and obviously the idea for any "quiet hand" method is that the hand moves at some point, because there's not much point passing the thumb unless you intend to move up / down the keyboard.

I also need to get dynamics with this quiet hand. As Will suggests, I don't just want to get the thumb to that note and play it, as in an exercise. I might have to play it loudly too which even for the 3rd finger pass, which is possible in some positions, becomes another reason to question it.

OTOH, if we've got to move the hand, rotating / pivoting the left hand away and then back towards the body on the 4th / 3rd finger brings the thumb to the note comfortably and seems to be described by Bernhard and by books like 20 lessons in keyboard choreography.

If you can say "But that won't let you do this" "that will cripple you" or whatever else then it could be an issue, but for the time being it works better than nothing - even if I'm not 100% certain that I'm doing exactly what Bernhard says correctly, I believe it's close to what he is saying. There's no "jump" or "gap" that prevents legato that the straightforward explanation of thumb over suggests and obviously the thumb doesn't go over anything, indeed it still goes under the hand, just not as extremely.

[will]

Excellent point! I have exactly the same problem. But there is a way around. Find a position of your body when you feel it as natural as in the middle range. Usually, for some people it is when your body moves towards the upper range, and for some when they lean back. You can also experiment combining both. Just feel that the thumb is a continuation of your arm.   

What did you get now?

Yes there are certainly ways to make playing in the upper register feel very similar to the middle range. However the exercise still feels awkward.

To play repeatedly the thumb on C, while holding 4th on B is not the subject of this excersise.

It should be the subject of the exercise since it is the main movement that is difficult when trying to play thumb under. Shouldn't you work on the difficult movement, take the most unnatural movement and repeat it over and over until it feels natural?

But if you ask me, it is not as bad as hold 3rd and 5th and repeatedly play 4th  .

Agreed. But it is not as bad as holding down the five notes of a diminished 7th chord and repeatedly playing the 4th finger. You should not do any of these things  .

Huh! 
I apologise for that--my mistake. I should've read more carefully and pay attention to the parentheses in your citation. 

Please address that whole my section to Mr. Sandor.

Not a problem. I would like to address that section to Mr. Sandor but unfortunately he recently deceased  .

[m1469]

I am sure Bernhard has life outside this board as well, and might be busy. Once he has time, or feels it is nessessary, I am sure he will come to put some light.

Best,
M.

*waves hands through darkness to find the light switch ... or at least the wall*


































*nothing but dark air*

[m1469]

Me too, because here we have differences of opinion between a stupendous pianist and an extremely knowledgable teacher.

They may both be both .  After having read this thread and numerous others with posts by both Bernhard and Marik, I tend to see that they actually agree more than they disagree.  What do they agree on ?

Learning technique through musical feats.

In life, there are people who talk and people who play.

Fascinating.

Thal

And sometimes there are people who do both.

[phil39]

don't waste your time.  read TAYLOR, 'THE PIANIST'S TALENT' (based on Thalberge).  If this isn't the secret of professional technique then nothing is.  And it's only a short book, but it may just have the profound secrets we all need.  At least you won't have spent hours grinding through the most piss-boring exercises imaginable.

[figensco]

Here is my take on the Liszt´s story:

When Liszt was brought to Czerny at age 12, he was already a full fledged pianist, with a few years of concert experience behind him. He played with great ease the most difficult repertory, having been allowed to develop his personal technique intuitively. The result was that he had found movements and motions that were completely natural for him.

That is when he had the great misfortune of meeting Herr Czerny. Czerny was horrified by Lizst´s natural and comfortable movements, since they did not conform to his own fixed ideas. He was convinced one had to play with one´s fingers and generally experience the utmost discomfort when playing. He proceeded to “correct” Lizst´s technique over the next few years, and Lizst complied and actually became very good at playing with a very limited and ultimately inappropriate technique.

In his twentys, he had become just another indifferent pianist playing with an inapropriate technique in Paris, just like so many other pianists in town. This was Czerny´s legacy.

Had Lizst died then, no one would have heard of him. He would just be another mediocre pianist amongst mediocre pianists.

But then two momentous things happened. Pay attention, exercise supporters, because there is a moral and cautionary tale for you all here.

Had Lizst not gone through these two momentous happenings and not died, he would still have been a mediocre pianist, and as he got older, his uncomfortable, inappropriate Czerny style technique would deteriorate and again we would never have heard of him.

Look at this thread to see the fate that would have befallen Liszt (and to a great extent has befallen Cortot):

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php/topic,13208.msg143740.html#msg143740
(an account on how Cramer’s technique deteriorated with age)

So what were these two life changing events?

It was his meeting with two men. Nothing would ever be the same after that.

The first meeting was with Chopin.

Chopin – like Lizst in his early years – had developed a highly idiossincratic technique (= way to move) when playing the piano. But contrary to Liszt he had not had the benefit of a Czerny to “correct” him. When he first arrived in Paris at 20, the most famous pianist of the day was Kalkbrenner. Kalkbrenner watched Chopin play and like Czerny with Liszt, was horrified at the neglect of Chopin´s technique. He offered to teach Chopin and estimated that in four years time he could turn Chopin into a piano virtuoso like the many swarming Paris. Chopin was actually tempted by this offer (he was impressed with Kalkbrenner´s playing), but in the end declined.

The interesting thing was that all those virtuoso pianists could not play to satisfaction any of Chopin´s pieces, in spite of their apparent superior technique. This was not lost on Lizst. Apparently Chopin´s idiossincratic technique was necessary for the correct rendition of his pieces.

The second meeting was with Paganini.

After witnessing Paganini in concert, Lizst was so overwhelmed that he vouched to do on the piano what Paganini did on the violin.

And here is where Liszt phenomenal technique starts.

Not with Czerny, because it became completely obvious to him that Czerny was completely inadequate to emulate Paganini, but with Chopin, because the key to the transference of Paganini´s umbelievable virtuosity on the violin to the piano, lies not with Czerny´s limited and limiting pedagogy, but with Chopin´s weird way of playing the piano.

It is now that Lizst will retire from concertizing for a while and feverishly pursue Paganini style virtuosity for up to ten hours a day.

But what do you think Lizst was doing for ten hours? Do you really believe he was practising Czerny or Hanon/Dohnanyi/Cortot types of finger exercises mindlessly hour after hour? Don´t be silly. If this would work, he would already have been the Lizst of legends. After all he had been there and done that with Czerny.

No. What he was doing during these ten hours was investigative practice. Not repetitive mind numbing repetitions of some finger pattern, but intelligent, totally focused piano work. He knew the result he was after, and he knew that in order to achieve it he had to recover the technique of his early years, the one that Czerny had destroyed. Chopin had shown him this, and Paganini was the ultimate proof that this was the only way to go.

When he was finished with the process (it didn´t take that long), he had so completely transformed his technique that it was a different pianist altogether that emerged from that practice room. And everyone noticed.

Lizst always refused to teach technique. He knew that the process through which he had acquired his technique could not be systematized. He knew Czerny was crap (and therefore never told his students to go through it - but being a good, polite boy, he never bashed his teacher for it). He knew that technique was highly personal, highly idiossincratic and could only be achieved by a process of intense investigation as he himself had gone through. Hence he never wrote anything about it.

His masterclasses – in which he never discussed technique – consisted of listening to the student play, and then playing himself in such a superior fashion that the student had to face the same experience he had faced when he first listened to Paganini: “sh*t, I am crap!” (incidentally, Chopin used the same pedagogical approach in his lessons)

After that time of intense, investigative practice – we do not know for sure but I am prepared to bet it was all based on repertory and most likely Chopin´s pieces – he never “practised” again. He had discovered – or perhaps rediscovered – his natural way of playing, and it felt so easy that all he had to do was play. And play he did!

Anyone who believes Liszt practised ten hours of exercises a day until the end of his life should consider this: Where would he have had the time? He was traveling around, bedding whatever pretty face happened to cross his way, running away from husbands, fathers, authorities, concertising, composing prolifically a daring, highly complex musical oeuvre, supporting new pianists and composers, teaching and even dedicating himself to a religious life.

To think that Lizst technique owes anything to Czerny is simply laughable. If so, every Czerny player would have become a Liszt by now.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

It is a known fact  that Liszt had studied thoroughly the most important methods that had been written up to that time. Clementi, Cramer, Herz, Moscheles and of course those of his teacher. Czerny, were well known to him. So were the pianistic devices of the famous performers of the period: Weber,, Hummel, Thalberg, Kalkbrenner, Chopin, etc. But he aimed at going further. In a certain letter to a friend he says; "I practice exercises daily for four or five hours, thirds, sixths, octaves, tremolos, repeated notes, cadences, etc". It is interesting that he uses the word "exercises" But not many books of exercises had benn written, and the few that existed were not in the virtuoso level. So the implication is that he developed his own.

 This text appears in the preface of "Liszt -- Technical Exercises" (Complete) and is a quote from an article by Harold C. Schonberg that appeared in the N.Y. Times on Jan. 31, 1971.

[chopin2015]

G. Sokolov (won Tchaikovsky at age of 16), who has the most unbelievable pianistical reflexes one could imagine. I went to a lot of his recitals in 80s. One of his favorite encores then along with unbelievable rendition of Russian Dnace from Petrushka was Chopin Etude Op.25/11. Let me tell you, never ever in my life I heard something like that, not in recordings, not live. And it was consistently phenomenal from one recital to another... untill one day, when I heard it completely slipped. It was a mess!!! After the concert I came to him. Being very apologetic he explained: "I did not practice it for two days".

I am not even talking about A. Gavrilov...


Best,
M.

[/quote]

Haha....

As far as amazing technique goes....it slips if you play fast without developing the best habits. Its simply impossible to play good if your fingers arent following all detail percisely, breaths and suppleness of touch as well as consistensy. If you dont use the best fingerings, you wont play correctly and are very likely to hurt yourself. Sometimes you have to check your fingerings twice and see what all they affect in the sound, flow and feel of the hand. You cant just think about music all the time when the piano is the mediator and the way you think about it is very important in perserving the well being of your hands and muscle memory. Bad technique affects your muscle memory and you just cant play piano without it...

As far as cortot...lovely pianist.

[austinarg]

Last Active: 13 February 2013
Last Post: 04 May 2009

Why, bernhard, why are you doing this to us... 

[flashyfingers]

I've been told and found it to be true, it's all in the wrist. If you hold your wrist in a relaxed position at all times...then it is very difficult to hit the right notes. Because, it is easier to tense up and hit the notes you want to hit, at any and all costs, (it also really hurts). Well, I finally found a fast way to retrain those stupid wrists. And retrain them, we shall!!! No mercy.