Piano Performace DVD's to recommend?

[violinist]

Hello,

I'm looking for piano DVD's that are really like recordings of a piano recital.  I haven't bought any yet, but any recommendations would be appreciated.

I've seen documentaries of the Cliburn Competition (Olga Kern's on it and one side of the DVD is the concerto performance which is more what I'm looking for) and The Art of Piano.  But these are documentaries with just clips of piano playing.

My purpose for these is to help me watch piano playing style (okay... I just remembered I have lang lang live at carnegie - seems like a unique playing style).   I'm looking for style - where the fingers go, where the wrists go, where does the bench sit.  How does the body move in relation to the hands, and how does the body react to different parts of the music.

I'm mainly self-taught (I don't have a piano teacher) and these DVD's would help me.  I do play violin and had been taught by great teachers for violin.

I think I saw on amazon.com someone (a woman) who plays the complete chopin etudes on DVD.... worth getting?

[bernhard]

If you are intending to use such DVDs to emulate the movements famous pianist make, think again. A lot of very famous pianists have terrible technique and absurd mannerisms. By all means use these DVDs to enjoy their playing (which has superb musicality in spite of their technical misconceptions - e.g. Glenn Gould and Claudio Arrau doing vibrato on the keys as if this was going to influence the sound ).

Instead get the series of videos from the Taubman institute (google them) and do yourself a favour getting it right from the beginning. Seymour Fink's book "Mastering Piano Technique" and accompanying video (Amadeus Press) are also highly recommended. And since you are at it, have a look at Barbara Lister-Sink's video "Freeing the caged bird" (Wingsong).

These have all been discussed before in the forum, so do a search.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[xvimbi]

What Bernhard said is absolutely correct. Don't expect to learn proper movements from watching DVDs of top pianists. For one, they are often terribly injured, because of the way they are playing (the majority of pianists in fact has injuries), or the movements are so fast and minute that it would be difficult to figure out what is going on. Violinists are not much better off.

If you just want to see great people in action, I'd recommend signing up with Netflix and/or Blockbuster and go through all their piano-related DVDs. Then buy the ones that you like.

If your main purpose is to learn good, healthy movements, you are in a unique situation. As a medical doctor yourself, and with a hand surgeon as a wife, you know what human anatomy/physiology is capable of doing in general. Now, you need to correlate this with the task of producing a certain sound effect on the piano, i.e. technique.

Bernhard's last comment referrs to the fact that we have countless discussions on this forum about the capabilities of the human playing apparatus. We discuss what proper posture is, what the effects of ulnar and radial deviation are, when to wear a splint, the signs of CTS, the effects of antagonistic muscle contractions, the Alexander Technique, etc.

You'd be amazed at how many myths are out there, how many students still believe in them, and how many teachers are hell-bent to perpetuate them without understanding what they are doing. So, you find us discussing whether it is a good idea to press down all the fingers in the hand and then lift one at a time as high as possible for thousands of times. You'll find fierce battles about whether the famous Hanon exercises achieve what they claim to achieve (complete independence of the fingerss), although only few people realize (and Hanon himself did not know this) that some fingers share tendons and can therefore fundamentally not be independent. Still, generations of students go through hundreds of hours of ill-conceived exercises, and they are very proud if it, just to end up injured. That brings me back to your original question. Rachmaninoff was a very strong proponent of technical exercises, but he didn't really tell anyone that he had the most severe injuries.

So, check out the Taubman videos (very expensive, though) and get some of the basic books on the topic (Sandor, Bernstein, Fink). My favorite is Thomas Mark's "What every pianists needs to know about the body". There is a similar one called "What every musician needs to know about the body". I wish people would get these books instead of a few CDs. We would have fewer injured people. If you are interested, I can give you exact titles. It's also been discussed many times on the forum.

However, the best is really to find a teacher who has a solid understanding of th human body and the movements required to produce certain sounds on the piano. They are very difficult to find, though. With your knowledge, you may be able to get buy just with a good, open-minded teacher. You can then filter out yourself what is healthy and what not. And then you can educate the teacher about muscle contraction, actin filaments, and glycolysis... 

[violinist]

Glenn Gould and Claudio Arrau doing vibrato on the keys as if this was going to influence the sound ).

Instead get the series of videos from the Taubman institute (google them) and do yourself a favour getting it right from the beginning. These have all been discussed before in the forum, so do a search.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

Thanks Bernhard and Xvimbi,

Wow, you've given me a lot to work with.  I'm checking out the

https:/www.taubman-institute.com

They have some videos on line too.

And I also have netflix... I am going through all their piano stuff (and violin stuff).

THANKS!!!!

[thalberg]

Get a video of Martha Argerich.  Her technique seems correct to me, and the funny thing is, you can't even see any of her muscles working.  Everything is so smooth it's just effortless.  And I don't think she's been injured (Has she, anyone?) You may or may not learn from this, but it sure is fun to watch.  Plus, of course, she's hot.

[jeremyjchilds]

e.g. Glenn Gould and Claudio Arrau doing vibrato on the keys as if this was going to influence the sound ).

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

That used to drive me insane...but man..can he ever fly through quadraphonic material...maybe he's onto something.

My favorite Gould position is the one where he plays a few of the Variations (goldberg) with his eyes at or below the key level, looking at his hands as if he were suprised they were there. "What are these!!!"

[violinist]

Get a video of Martha Argerich.  Her technique seems correct to me, and the funny thing is, you can't even see any of her muscles working.  Everything is so smooth it's just effortless.  And I don't think she's been injured (Has she, anyone?) You may or may not learn from this, but it sure is fun to watch.  Plus, of course, she's hot.

I found two videos on Netflix with Argerich.  Netflix has some pretty cool stuff.

Martha Argerich (1976)
"This live video of Ms. Argerich, one of the greatest pianists of both the 20th and 21st centuries, recorded in the CBC Montreal studios is possibly the only existing footage that captures her playing a concerto. Here, she chooses Schumann's Piano Concerto, along with Liszt's "Funerailles," and Ravel's "Leux d'eau." The chance to see Ms. Argerich's hands as she plays with both blinding speed and an even touch is something not to be missed. "



AND



Martha Argerich & Friends (1982)

"Classical music aficionados are in for a treat with this rare filmed performance by acclaimed pianist Martha Argerich. This recording of Agerich's 1982 concert features 12 pieces, including works from Mozart, Schuman, Ravel and Rachmaninov. Argerich also performs a number of duets with the aid of talented guest performers such as Mischa Maisky, Nicolas Economou and Nelson Freire. Biographies of the performers are included as on-screen liner notes"




Thanks for the suggestions.  I'll be watching them in the next few weeks.

[nyquist]

From my experience, it is very hard to learn technique from videos.  (Heck, it is hard to learn technique from a live teacher!)  I have watched the first five of the Taubman Techniques videos,  Barbara Lisker's "Freeing The Caged Bird", and Seymour Fink's.  I found the Taubman series to be the most useful of the three (I was able to get them via interlibrary loan).   This past July I attended the Golandsky Institute week-long workshop (Edna Golandsky is the main speaker on the Taubman videos).  I have also been taking lessons with a member of the Institute's faculty for a few months now.   My current understanding is fairly different from what I got from the tapes.  YMMV, but perhaps one can profit from a video only if one already has an understanding that is similar to what is being taught.

It occurs to me that piano technique and martial arts videos are similar in the sense that you can learn from them only if you already know what they are teaching.  This might be because when dealing with precise and subtle body maneuvers it is very hard to convey what one is doing, particulary when one does not really "know" what one is doing.  I have practiced Aikido for a while now and I notice that what an instructor says h/she is doing can be different from what he/she is actually doing.   Matthay was right to talk about "the invisible" in piano technique.

nyquist

[bernhard]

From my experience, it is very hard to learn technique from videos.  (Heck, it is hard to learn technique from a live teacher!)  I have watched the first five of the Taubman Techniques videos,  Barbara Lisker's "Freeing The Caged Bird", and Seymour Fink's.  I found the Taubman series to be the most useful of the three (I was able to get them via interlibrary loan).   This past July I attended the Golandsky Institute week-long workshop (Edna Golandsky is the main speaker on the Taubman videos).  I have also been taking lessons with a member of the Institute's faculty for a few months now.   My current understanding is fairly different from what I got from the tapes.  YMMV, but perhaps one can profit from a video only if one already has an understanding that is similar to what is being taught.

It occurs to me that piano technique and martial arts videos are similar in the sense that you can learn from them only if you already know what they are teaching.  This might be because when dealing with precise and subtle body maneuvers it is very hard to convey what one is doing, particulary when one does not really "know" what one is doing.  I have practiced Aikido for a while now and I notice that what an instructor says h/she is doing can be different from what he/she is actually doing.   Matthay was right to talk about "the invisible" in piano technique.

nyquist

This is a most perceptive post. I completely agree.

When watching some of the Taubman videos I very often disagreed with the way stuff was verbalised while at the same time being in completely agreement with what was being done.

But then I guess this is the main problem with language. If you know what is being talked about you will understand and make the necessary adjustments to what is being said. However, if you don’t know what is being talked about, chances are that talking about it will just be misleading.

I would be very interested if you would be willing to comment further on the differences between the material in the Taubman videos and the live teaching of this material (I only know about Taubman through the videos). I do find most of her ideas very similar to Matthay’s (as you mentioned), and later Abby Whiteside.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[nyquist]

I would be very interested if you would be willing to comment further on the differences between the material in the Taubman videos and the live teaching of this material (I only know about Taubman through the videos). I do find most of her ideas very similar to Matthay’s (as you mentioned), and later Abby Whiteside.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

That is a tall order.  Let's see what I can do.  The obligatory caveat applies:  this is my current best understanding; I am relatively new to the training; the descriptions and wording below are not "official Taubman language". 

There are a miriad little details that get worked on over and over at one-on-one lessons.  I will not go through those in this post–though I am thinking of preparing a separate post. 

The basic concept I am working on and did not get from the tapes (though it might be there) is that playing consists of going from stable position to stable position while spending little time on the transitions.  When one is stable at one place; one is just there.  There is no preparation for what is going to come: no reaching for the next note, etc.  At the right moment one "just" moves to be stable at the next location.

By stable position I mean something very specific.  I think of the playing aparatus (upper arm, forearm, hand, fingers) as a suspension bridge.  It hangs from the shoulder and stands on the playing finger(s) (the non-playing fingers are relaxed and don't depress keys).  The position is stable if the upper arm is relaxed (not lifted out to the side, or pushed against the ribs), the biceps and triceps are relaxed, and the top of the hand is horizontal; the hand is extended only as much as it needs to play.  (Muscles in the forearm are contracted to provide stability of shape.)  To me it feels like a pendulum (with some friction?): if one distubs it, it swings back to its bottom position.  One plays by disturbing this stability while moving to a different note (or notes), and depressing a key (or keys) with the motion of the apparatus as it regains stability.

The active element of playing happens when one disturbs the stability (flexes the biceps, rotates the forearm, moves the hand in-or-out), sound production happens powered by the metaphorical bridge regaining its stability at the new position.  90% of the time should be spent in the stable position, 10% moving.  When playing slowly, it can look jerky, at speed it looks fluid.

The image I keep in my mind is that of a sitting frog that is very relaxed who jumps suddenly; when it lands it seems unperturbed–didi I move?.  A different image that emphasizes the active and passive side of sound production is that of playing a Japanese temple bell: one moves the clapper out and lets it go; gravity does the playing by throwing the clapper at the bell.  (I tend to get mad at my instructors when they use this type of "poetry", but I have to admit it is useful–if just as shorthand.)

I have spent what seems like a lot of time looking for the stable position and then learning to play with the stability-regaining motion.  It is work but it is fun (a bit of OCD does not hurt).

The details of the Taubman technique concern the proper way to hold the fingers, wrist, forearm, etc., when at rest in the stable position; and the proper way(s) to move from stability to stability (rotation, in-and-out, walking arm, shaping, and all their coordinations–to steal Bernhard's phrase).  After the initial training in which all gestures are very exageraged one works on minimizing them, so that to the casual observer they are not obvious.  The person playing still feels them, "underneath".

nyquist

[xvimbi]

That's a good description. I have a particular question:

By stable position I mean something very specific.  I think of the playing aparatus (upper arm, forearm, hand, fingers) as a suspension bridge.  It hangs from the shoulder and stands on the playing finger(s) (the non-playing fingers are relaxed and don't depress keys).

Is this a Taubman concept? In other words, is the arm considered to start at the shoulder? If that is the case, I would be really surprised. The arm really begins at the sternoclavicular joint, in the center of the body. The shoulder itself is not a stable structure that is connected to the torso. It is suspended just like the elbow is. Thus, the "bridge" really begins in the center of the body. Would you mind to clarify?

I have spent what seems like a lot of time looking for the stable position and then learning to play with the stability-regaining motion.  It is work but it is fun (a bit of OCD does not hurt).

The details of the Taubman technique concern the proper way to hold the fingers, wrist, forearm, etc., when at rest in the stable position; and the proper way(s) to move from stability to stability (rotation, in-and-out, walking arm, shaping, and all their coordinations–to steal Bernhard's phrase).  After the initial training in which all gestures are very exageraged one works on minimizing them, so that to the casual observer they are not obvious.  The person playing still feels them, "underneath".

That brings me to my other question: I have heard that Taubman pupils spend a lot of time practicing proper movements, so much so that they don't have any time to learn any repertoire. That's probably exaggerated, so I'd be interested to hear how you see that.

Thanks so much.

[bernhard]

That is a tall order.  Let's see what I can do.  The obligatory caveat applies:  this is my current best understanding; I am relatively new to the training; the descriptions and wording below are not "official Taubman language". 

There are a miriad little details that get worked on over and over at one-on-one lessons.  I will not go through those in this post–though I am thinking of preparing a separate post. 

The basic concept I am working on and did not get from the tapes (though it might be there) is that playing consists of going from stable position to stable position while spending little time on the transitions.  When one is stable at one place; one is just there.  There is no preparation for what is going to come: no reaching for the next note, etc.  At the right moment one "just" moves to be stable at the next location.

By stable position I mean something very specific.  I think of the playing aparatus (upper arm, forearm, hand, fingers) as a suspension bridge.  It hangs from the shoulder and stands on the playing finger(s) (the non-playing fingers are relaxed and don't depress keys).  The position is stable if the upper arm is relaxed (not lifted out to the side, or pushed against the ribs), the biceps and triceps are relaxed, and the top of the hand is horizontal; the hand is extended only as much as it needs to play.  (Muscles in the forearm are contracted to provide stability of shape.)  To me it feels like a pendulum (with some friction?): if one distubs it, it swings back to its bottom position.  One plays by disturbing this stability while moving to a different note (or notes), and depressing a key (or keys) with the motion of the apparatus as it regains stability.

The active element of playing happens when one disturbs the stability (flexes the biceps, rotates the forearm, moves the hand in-or-out), sound production happens powered by the metaphorical bridge regaining its stability at the new position.  90% of the time should be spent in the stable position, 10% moving.  When playing slowly, it can look jerky, at speed it looks fluid.

The image I keep in my mind is that of a sitting frog that is very relaxed who jumps suddenly; when it lands it seems unperturbed–didi I move?.  A different image that emphasizes the active and passive side of sound production is that of playing a Japanese temple bell: one moves the clapper out and lets it go; gravity does the playing by throwing the clapper at the bell.  (I tend to get mad at my instructors when they use this type of "poetry", but I have to admit it is useful–if just as shorthand.)

I have spent what seems like a lot of time looking for the stable position and then learning to play with the stability-regaining motion.  It is work but it is fun (a bit of OCD does not hurt).

The details of the Taubman technique concern the proper way to hold the fingers, wrist, forearm, etc., when at rest in the stable position; and the proper way(s) to move from stability to stability (rotation, in-and-out, walking arm, shaping, and all their coordinations–to steal Bernhard's phrase).  After the initial training in which all gestures are very exageraged one works on minimizing them, so that to the casual observer they are not obvious.  The person playing still feels them, "underneath".

nyquist

Thank you for a most interesting post . (Do continue! )

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[bernhard]

That brings me to my other question: I have heard that Taubman pupils spend a lot of time practicing proper movements, so much so that they don't have any time to learn any repertoire. That's probably exaggerated, so I'd be interested to hear how you see that.

Is that so?

From watching the videos I've got the impression that they practised the movements on repertory. They certainly seem to dislike pure exercises (Hanon, Dohnanyi, Cortot, etc.)

So, do they do the movements in the "abstract" so to speak? (Fink does that, with his "gymnastic" routine).

The plot thickens!

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[xvimbi]

Is that so?

From watching the videos I've got the impression that they practised the movements on repertory. They certainly seem to dislike pure exercises (Hanon, Dohnanyi, Cortot, etc.)

Yes, but I don't think those people were Taubman pupils. They seemed to have been there for the first time, many of them with injuries.

[nyquist]

That's a good description. I have a particular question:

Is this a Taubman concept? In other words, is the arm considered to start at the shoulder? If that is the case, I would be really surprised. The arm really begins at the sternoclavicular joint, in the center of the body. The shoulder itself is not a stable structure that is connected to the torso. It is suspended just like the elbow is. Thus, the "bridge" really begins in the center of the body. Would you mind to clarify?

That brings me to my other question: I have heard that Taubman pupils spend a lot of time practicing proper movements, so much so that they don't have any time to learn any repertoire. That's probably exaggerated, so I'd be interested to hear how you see that.

Thanks so much.

On  shoulder anatomy:  The instructors I have had interaction with do not speak in strict anatomical terms.   They use what I would call "folk anatomy".  This might be intentional as I have heard Edna Golandsky say that knowing which muscles one should contract does not really help do the motion.

On practicing the technique vs. applying it:  I have met some students that  seem to be caught in that trap.  I have also met others that complain of this attitude and poke fun at the the first group.  Edna Golandsky is a wonderful musician and teacher.  Her master clases are purely focused on music-making.  There is very little "technique" teaching.  However, I have got to admit that the Taubman technique induces (at least on me) a  "kinesthetic high" that makes the physical act of playing enjoyable by itself.  Going back to the martial arts analogy, it is like the feeling of a well-coordinated Aikido projection and/or fall.

nyquist

[bernhard]

On  shoulder anatomy:  The instructors I have had interaction with do not speak in strict anatomical terms.   They use what I would call "folk anatomy".  This might be intentional as I have heard Edna Golandsky say that knowing which muscles one should contract does not really help do the motion.

This is very correct. One cannot will a muscle to contract. One can only will a certain motion, which then engages the necessary muscles (and some complex motions may be achieved by different sets of muscles – which explains how certain people injured in accidents regain certain motions even though their muscles/nerve pathways may have been permanently injured: they just learn how to perform the same motions using different sets of muscles). Nevertheless, using the proper anatomical nomenclature should be encouraged, otherwise all sorts of unnecessary misunderstandings result.

On a side note, are there any famous pianists who have been trained from the start on Taubman principles? (I know that there are several that – usually after injury – retrained themselves, but I was curious about someone who from the beginning followed her system).

Best wishes,
Bernhard.