Bernhard is right about exercises

[arensky]

About 8 months ago I stopped working on technical exercises with my students. This change in my teaching coincided with change in my life, life being something I did not wish to waste another nanosecond of, and teaching is a big part of my life, besides being my primary source of income. Before joining this forum and reading Bernhard's diatribes on Hanon/Czerny etc. I had been debating the usefulness of these finger treadmills for some time. My own teachers, good and not so good, famous and not, had all prescribed some sort of drill regimen or routine. It wasn't until I began teaching regularly some years ago that I began to wonder why I put my students through the same mill....

BTW I am speaking of Hanon Book I, Czerny, Dohnanyi, Pischna etc, not Scales, Arpeggios, Chord Cadences (what music is made of) and the Etudes of Chopin, Liszt, Scriabin etc, which are pieces of music, not merely mechanical patterns.

My students range in age from 7 to 81. I was preparing my lesson strategies for my 9-10 year olds ( there are three, they can play Anna Magdalena/Kabalevsky op.27 and are moving ahead rapidly) and thinking "gotta start 'em on Hanon" when I thought of my past doubts about it and then I thought of that Bernhard cat on Pianostreet. Then I thought, "Why? We could use that lesson time for music! If their playing falls apart, put the drills back."

Eight months later exercises (they had done Book 1 of Burnam's "Dozen a Day" ) are not missed and technical ability is UP. Because the notes in their pieces are just that, not the notes in Hanon #13 or Czerny op.4007 #519 or whatever. It's true; the notes in the drills have no relation to the notes in a piece of music. Hanon is good for Hanon. Nothing more. [/b]

Not only is technical ability up, so is "musicality" and student enthusiasm  . We work on scales (they now know most of them) and cadences, and they are learning much more repertoire than they were before, and isn't that the point? To play music, not drills?  The Hanon is not missed by anyone. My older students never seemed to notice the omission, I never mentioned it.

I know many of you read Bernhard's opinion of exercises with skepticism or disdain. We were all taught to do them, we want to do the right thing, so we "eat our vegetables". Our teachers did them, they made us, and we want to be good so we do it too, it must be right, everyone else always has and we did so you know... gotta do it. And it's horrifying to think that time was wasted...

No. The drills are bread and water. The music is the vegetables! I encourage all of you to ditch the drills, if you're skeptical then with one student maybe, as an experiment. I bet it works. It did for me. And if it doesn't work you can always put the drills back...

BTW I may still use the "Dozen a Day" Book I or parts of it with beginners in the future, they are fun and kids enjoy them. Then again, maybe not...

[penguinlover]

I SO agree with you!   I have been skeptical of Hanon for many years, just never bold enough to give it up.  I stopped assigning excercises (except scales, arp. etc.) to my students.  We are all a lot happier!   penguinlover

[thalbergmad]

OK, I will give up my Hanon.

But I will sue if i lose my fingers

Thalxx

[pianowelsh]

Hey! Not wishing to spoil the revolution BUT things must be kept in balance. Short studies ( I think of the type by Kuhner, Czerny, Burgmuller) are very valueable for the young learners as a means of cultivating specific touches, dynamic gradation and getting over particular technical hurdles.  Abstract exercises such as Hanon 'virtuoso pianist' and Beringer etc are not intrinsically bad and ANYONE can learn from taking a few moments to focus their playing on some of these finger drills in isloation.  I know all the arguments ie there is nothing you can do in a finger drill you can do in repertoire etc  BUT the point is we dont - thats why finger drills are usefull because they are simple - they repeat and the have a particular focus which allows us to most efficiently master a technical aim.  Used properly they can speed up the aquisition of technical ability and control. Used wrongly they can waste years of your life and give you finger problems. Its a balance.  I do not say you are wrong not to asign them.  i just issue a word of caution - don tthrow the baby out with the bath water.  They dont waork for every student and at every level but they can be usefull for particular students and at particular points in their development so please keep an open mind on them.

[debussy symbolism]

Greetings.

I just don't see a way that Czerny is not helpfull. Without the excercises it is much harder to learn Mozart of Beethoven. I am working on Beethoven's rage over a lost penny and it is practically Czerny excercises put into a musical piece. I also completed Mozart's "Twinkle" variations and Alla Turca and it is because of Czerny. I am working on Moszkowski's G minor etude opus 72 and that also depends on Czerny. Hope this helps.

[rlefebvr]

I may be speaking out of turn, but I think you are missing Bernard's point.

As far as I know, even he abdicates the use of Czerny or Hanon and the likes if and when it is needed to help or rectify special or specific needs.

The problem is when these books are used as general exercises with no other point  then to work your little fingers to the bones. Where they become part of your practise makeup wasting valuable and precious time that would be better used learning a new piece or studying the make up of music.

arensky was not using Hanon and Czerny to help cope with a specific Beethoven or Mozart piece. He was using them simply because that's the way he was taught and the belief piano can not be learned without them. That is false.

I for one applaud his effort and hope more and more teachers and students see these books for what they are and use them as sparingly as possible.

[arensky]

arensky was not using Hanon and Czerny to help cope with a specific Beethoven or Mozart piece. He was using them simply because that's the way he was taught and the belief piano can not be learned without them. That is false.

Not exactly; I've always known that technical drill was not nessacary. My thinking in the past was "Why use the repertore for technique? Since Czerny is just diluted Beethoven and Mozart, why bother with it? Hanon is better because it's not music, it's an abstract."

I was segregating the "technical" and the "musical" aspects of piano playing. That's what was false. Thinking stuff like "don't want to soil the music with technical work, so let's use this Hanon stuff, it's not music".

See the trap? I do, but it's hard to explain, and I have to go play shortly, have to get ready. Don't want to write the wrong thing...

Briefly, why use non-music to solve problems in music? Makes no sense...

I'm not advocating a complete abandonment of technical practice, scales chords and arpeggios (what music is made of ) are essential material that must be mastered. After that, there is only the music. Why deal with anythong else? Why segregate? It just seems like a waste of time and mental space to me, now.

More later, probably....

[arensky]

Hey! Not wishing to spoil the revolution BUT things must be kept in balance. Short studies ( I think of the type by Kuhner, Czerny, Burgmuller) are very valueable for the young learners as a means of cultivating specific touches, dynamic gradation and getting over particular technical hurdles.  Abstract exercises such as Hanon 'virtuoso pianist' and Beringer etc are not intrinsically bad and ANYONE can learn from taking a few moments to focus their playing on some of these finger drills in isloation.  I know all the arguments ie there is nothing you can do in a finger drill you can do in repertoire etc  BUT the point is we dont - thats why finger drills are usefull because they are simple - they repeat and the have a particular focus which allows us to most efficiently master a technical aim.  Used properly they can speed up the aquisition of technical ability and control. Used wrongly they can waste years of your life and give you finger problems. Its a balance.  I do not say you are wrong not to asign them.  i just issue a word of caution - don tthrow the baby out with the bath water.  They dont waork for every student and at every level but they can be usefull for particular students and at particular points in their development so please keep an open mind on them.

Not a revolution; an awakening!   

Don't know Kuhner, but Burgmuller op.100 is music, they are pieces with form, melodic and rythmic structure and content. I use them in my teaching. And remember, I'm keeping Burnam's "Dozen a Day" Book I... my mind is open and baby is in the tub, not the river! 

But isn't the "technical aim" to make the music better? If technical difficulty in repertoire progression is made logically and carefully, the solution is in the music, where it should be. All students should be working on something they can master, in addition to the "challenge piece", as well as scale/chord/arpeggio practice. Why do the exercises?  I've been doing this carefully for almost a year; no harm has been done, and improvement is rampant! A couple students still do drills, I don't stop them, if it helps them that's great!

[debussy symbolism]

Greetings.

Excercises and etudes will not hurt if done properly, and not doing them is just another way of saying that you are lazy. As a student, I feel that Czerny did alot to my technique and that without Czerny it is no good. Czerny studies are also musical and a proper touch is needed to properly play his studies. To further support Czerny, let's look at Moszkowski G minor etude. It is very musical and must sound very delicate. Without Czerny this etude is much harder. I am studying this one so far and must say that finger independance and other excercises from really pay off. All in all, Czerny will not hurt, but help. Hope this helps.

[steveie986]

I'm too superstitious to give up my Hanon.

[arensky]

Greetings.

Excercises and etudes will not hurt if done properly, and not doing them is just another way of saying that you are lazy. As a student, I feel that Czerny did alot to my technique and that without Czerny it is no good. Czerny studies are also musical and a proper touch is needed to properly play his studies. To further support Czerny, let's look at Moszkowski G minor etude. It is very musical and must sound very delicate. Without Czerny this etude is much harder. I am studying this one so far and must say that finger independance and other excercises from really pay off. All in all, Czerny will not hurt, but help. Hope this helps.

Czerny is not harmful; but is it nessacary? It is pseudo-music, why not play real music? Clementi Sonatinas and Mozart Sonatas and Bach "Little" Preludes and Scarlatti are musical and also require a proper touch and technique. Why not get to the point? We don't need step1, 2, 47, 5016, 3057, etc. I am not advocating this as a shortcut, in fact it demands more attention and focus from both teacher and student. What's lazy is to rely on a set of finger calisthentics as a substitute for actual music. Isn't music the point? I don't mean to be confrontational, although it's probably coming off that way. I repeat, Czerny is not harmful, but is it nessacary? Sure it will help, but so will approaching music correctly from the begining.

This compulsive technical practice reminds me of the person who goes to confession every week, says their Hail Mary's, and feels better, without having really done anything to improve. It's not the way it should be...

[arensky]

I'm too superstitious to give up my Hanon.

I can dig it, man! 

Try substituting Anna Magdalena, Clementi Sonatinas, anything from Easy Classics to Moderns vol.17 or the Alfred Essential Keyboard Repertoire books; works for me, and my older students. It's music, beats Hanon.

Even Czerny would be better...

[debussy symbolism]

To me Czerny is helpfull. Can you really say that Czerny is NOT helpfull. I from my own experience can say that Czerny is essential. Of course repertoire is essential and is a must, but what does repertoire consist of? As I mentioned before, Clementi, Mozart, Beethoven pieces all have moments which Czerny covers. As for "real" music, take a look at Moszkowski etudes. They are all very musical and very Czerny based. I am studying the G minor one. That is also real music as well as real good excercise. Liszt was a pupil of Czerny and highly approved of his methods. Also approved by Thalberg and Brahms. Although Czerny was disliked by Chopin and Schumann. According to my Czerny book, most schools do use Czerny however.

[arensky]

To me Czerny is helpfull. Can you really say that Czerny is NOT helpfull. I from my own experience can say that Czerny is essential. Of course repertoire is essential and is a must, but what does repertoire consist of? As I mentioned before, Clementi, Mozart, Beethoven pieces all have moments which Czerny covers. As for "real" music, take a look at Moszkowski etudes. They are all very musical and very Czerny based. I am studying the G minor one. That is also real music as well as real good excercise. Liszt was a pupil of Czerny and highly approved of his methods. Also approved by Thalberg and Brahms. Although Czerny was disliked by Chopin and Schumann. According to my Czerny book, most schools do use Czerny however.

I'm not saying it's not helpful, I'm saying it's not nessacary. Big difference. You don't have to stop what you do, but considering other viewpoints and possibilities does not hurt.

Repertoire consists of music; why not work on music instead of exercises?

Moszkowski Etudes are music. You can use this in a performance; Czerny,well you could,  but even the uninitiated listeners will know it's not really music. Why bother with that?

[debussy symbolism]

I'm not saying it's not helpful, I'm saying it's not nessacary. Big difference. You don't have to stop what you do, but considering other viewpoints and possibilities does not hurt.

Repertoire consists of music; why not work on music instead of exercises?

Moszkowski Etudes are music. You can use this in a performance; Czerny,well you could,  but even the uninitiated listeners will know it's not really music. Why bother with that?

Oh now I understand your drift. Well actually there are some Czerny pieces that are marvels and as they progress in terms of difficulty some are actually very exciting and fun, certainly an enjoyment to practice and listen to. And for the help they actually do deliver I think that it is worth doing them.

[debussy symbolism]

Don't get me wrong, repertoire pieces are very essential too of course. It has got to be everything. Repertoire, etudes, other excercises, etc.

[arensky]

there are some Czerny pieces that are marvels

Variations on "La Ricordanza", Horowitz made an extraordinary recording of this in the 1940's; an excellent piece, even without Mr. Horowitz' help! 

[debussy symbolism]

That's awesome.

[ted]

The whole debate is a non-event for me because I've never done any exercises of that sort for forty years anyway. I do a few minutes on my practice clavier, on which I invent my own exercises, and that's good enough for me. Recently I have gone back to improvising my own studies at the piano. If some particular movement is a bit slack I improvise something using that movement and try to make something musical out of it.

The thing I don't like about Czerny and the rest is that everything is too homogeneous; little blocks of identical formations, stereotyped rhythm, stereotyped harmony, no syncopation, all stuck together like pieces of a Meccano set. It seems to me that part of the essence of the best music is precisely an avoidance of this sort of square-toed symmetry. When I am at the piano I make music; anything less is a waste of consciousness.

[pianolearner]

When I am at the piano I make music; anything less is a waste of consciousness.

I have a great deal of respect for both Bernhard and my piano teacher. The only issue where they seem to diverge is on technical exercises. However, she insists that whatever I play must sound musical, even technical exercises. My piano playing has improved by leaps and bounds since being her student and I am not attributing this to the technical exercises, but instead, to her entire methodology. She is good at identifying my strengths and weaknesses. Admittedly I haven't practised Hanon or Schmitt for a few weeks and she hasn't really insisted. But every now and again she asks me how I getting on with them and then points out an exercise that will go hand in hand with a piece I am learning.

[thalbergmad]

Briefly, why use non-music to solve problems in music? Makes no sense...

Because if you don't, you are treating the music itself as a drill. You might just as well find an appropriate excercise.

[anda]

generally, i tend to agree with arensky - i mean, the time is so short, and you have to work on scales and arpeggios, and studies, and repertoire... it's only natural to cut off the exercises as being the least important thing.

one question though: what do you do on extreme situations? i mean, with an incredibly technically untalented child - very musical, smart, and having the worst hands you could imagine? do you still try to work technique on repertoire, or do you start working on technical exercises with such a child?

 

[debussy symbolism]

Concerning other finger exercises such as Schmitt and other finger independance, they are helpfull without a doubt. My teacher even commented on the help that they brought my technique. I know it myself. I am saying that these technicall excercises should be practiced along with other studies and musical repertoire. Hope this helps.

[pianowelsh]

I still believe that sometimes a few exercises (im not talking about assigning the whole section of virtuoso pianist) are very beneficial and indeed the most efficient way to grasp a technical principle.  If you have to master an entire piece to learn one or maybe two principles (the early repertoire is designed not to deal with too much at once) then it takes a student a lot longer to aquire the same level of technique particularly ones which require complex coordination. They also take away the frustration that a student can suffer because they have mastered a piece but for one tricky bar which is stopping them from having a piece 'ready' and ultimately the want to give up with it and do something new.  my general pattern (it varies student to student) is to assign two short etudes (burgmuller/etc) at anyone time a harder piece and an easier piece a duet and of course scales etc - in addition If there is a new concept in a piece ie stacatto in one hand with a legato touch in the other or a specific tonal gradation etc I will assign a little exercise or two which helps them master the difficulty they are going to need in the piece first and in a concise way that way they can do it easily when it comes to the piece and they can also learn that exercises are made up of technical problems we encounter in the repertoire. We study exercises (moreso at the beginner level) so they know how to devise their own from the repertoire.  I aim for students to retain a few as they go as warm ups before they start the practice proper - there are usually ones in the core playing forms ie doubles notes 8ves, scalic passages, cross rhythms extensions etc this way they are mentally and physically coordinated and warmed up for anything they need to practice for that day. With more advanced students who havent studied them before - I ususally only suggest they try them and see how they get on with them. Again I advocate them only as a means of a short warm up in the main forms or to fix any obvious technical difficulties they are encountering but i do find them very usefull/efficient ways of introducing new difficulties without the student getting frustrated with the repertoire they are learning. They isolate the problem and thats what they were intended for. Im glad to hear you arent ditching them completely and are still open to their use. Agreed many teachers do assign them with no thought atall and this is unhealthy practice in that it wastes so much time. - I should say that when a student has got a technical exercise mastered I get them to make up their own variations of it for practice sake - ie alter the rhythms cross the hands over, change the articulation, change the speed/key/intervals etc. so that they become versatile and can play the technical feature in a range of situations and dont get bored!

[orlandopiano]

I couldn't disagree more. One good thing about Hanon, Schaum, Philipp etc is that they are pattern based, and thus easier to read through for a younger piano student or a student whose reading isn't up to par. All they have to do is learn the first measure of the ascent, and the first measure of the descent, and they instantly have the notes learned and can focus 100% on their technique.  They can't give this kind of attention to detail when they are trying to learn the notes of a "real piece of music", or even trying to remember the fingerings of a parallel motion scale.

Also, the original poster mentiones scales/arpeggios as better because they are more like real music, but last I checked they don't require finger combinations like 3-2-3-1, 5-2-4-1, or any fingerings where you wiggle your hand back and forth which is very prevalent in the piano repertoire. There are oodles of such fingerings in Hanon and Philipp.

For the record, I teach scales and arpeggios too. But the exercises are a big part of my lessons.

[arensky]

Because if you don't, you are treating the music itself as a drill. You might just as well find an appropriate excercise.

This is the problem and the pitfall. But we are not treating the pieces as drills: we are working on them as music, and technical ability is up. Again ( I am turning into a parrot) why use non-music to solve musical problems? BTW we still have technical work, but it's on the music, not some abstract pattern. I am being very careful to make sure that the music does not become a drill. And yes, this is a more complex task with Beethoven's op.31 #3 than Kabalevsky's Toccatina or a Clementi Sonatina. But it is more rewarding, for the students and me. I am keeping my options open, but I am very happy about what has come about in my students in the past few months. I hope it will continue. BTW I met a prospective student over the last week, a teenager who is very talented but does not have a strong technical background. We may need some Hanon to "wind him up", so to speak, if he joins my studio. But first, we will deal with the music....

[gonzalo]

BTW I met a prospective student over the last week, a teenager who is very talented but does not have a strong technical background. We may need some Hanon to "wind him up", so to speak, if he joins my studio. But first, we will deal with the music....

Remember Chopin . Kalkbrenner said his technique wasn't good and proposed him to do Hanon like exercises. Chopin realised it was useless so he didn't accept.  He continued playing with his "deficient techinque" .
Yes, first deal with the music.

[emmdoubleew]

Completely disagree.

Liszt didn't spend 2 years locoked in his room playing techincal excercises because he knew they were useless.

[tibi]

Completely disagree.

Liszt didn't spend 2 years locoked in his room playing techincal excercises because he knew they were useless.

he did it? i never heard about i before.

me myself, i never touch hanon, schmitt, czerny, etc. but till know, i have played a lot of pieces in quite good quality. such as ballade op23, etude paganini no 6(liszt), lost penny rondo, fantasie impromptu, and many others. even it required a lot of work to do in each passages.

peace..

[emmdoubleew]

he did it? i never heard about i before.

me myself, i never touch hanon, schmitt, czerny, etc. but till know, i have played a lot of pieces in quite good quality. such as ballade op23, etude paganini no 6(liszt), lost penny rondo, fantasie impromptu, and many others. even it required a lot of work to do in each passages.

peace..

Well first of all Czerny wouldn't allow him to play anything but technical excercises until 2 months later, Liszt got so upset at this that Czerny gave in.

Then in his twenties when liszt witnessed Paganini play, he decided to become the best pianist in the world and Practiced techincal stuff for 10 hours a day every day for one or two years.

Something along those lines.

[timothy42b]

An observation:  As a beginner I never find dexterity the limiting factor.  I struggle with other problems, but my fingers move plenty fast enough.  This implies two things:  technical exercises would not help me, because dexterity is not yet the problem; but also suggests the current level of pieces I can work on may not develop dexterity.  I guess i could try to play everything insanely fast, but somehow it stops seeming like music above a certain point. 

The chord cadences mentioned by the OP are of interest.  They would clearly help me at this stage.  Can you offer some suggestions?  Are there some standard methods people use? 

[arensky]

Well first of all Czerny wouldn't allow him to play anything but technical excercises until 2 months later, Liszt got so upset at this that Czerny gave in.

Then in his twenties when liszt witnessed Paganini play, he decided to become the best pianist in the world and Practiced techincal stuff for 10 hours a day every day for one or two years.

Something along those lines.

Or so Liszt later said; his written recollections are often exaggerated... I have no doubt that he did practice with a technical orientation during this period... but I doubt that he played exercises in the Hanon/Schmitt or Czerny molds; he could not have developed the Lisztian technical vocabulary with five finger drills. His piano writing indicates to me that he picked up where Beethoven left off, and that he was also influenced by Weber, the Schubert of the Wanderer Fantasy, and of course Chopin. Liszt was an extraordinary improviser; his "technical practice" was probably more like jamming on "Orage" or Mazzepa" for several hours. This is conjecture on my part, but the mental image of Liszt sitting patiently at the piano practicing drills does not jibe with the reality of the music he wrote. If you look at his "juvenile" compositions, they are rather conventional in their piano writing, like really hard Schubert. After about 1828, which is when he would have heard Paganini, the texture and layout of his piano style becomes truly "Lisztian".

I think Liszt's technical practice was probably more musical than many pianists' playing of actual repertoire. Which is what my OP was about; why not play music, instead of non-music?

[kriskicksass]

Or so Liszt later said; his written recollections are often exaggerated... I have no doubt that he did practice with a technical orientation during this period... but I doubt that he played exercises in the Hanon/Schmitt or Czerny molds; he could not have developed the Lisztian technical vocabulary with five finger drills. His piano writing indicates to me that he picked up where Beethoven left off, and that he was also influenced by Weber, the Schubert of the Wanderer Fantasy, and of course Chopin. Liszt was an extraordinary improviser; his "technical practice" was probably more like jamming on "Orage" or Mazzepa" for several hours. This is conjecture on my part, but the mental image of Liszt sitting patiently at the piano practicing drills does not jibe with the reality of the music he wrote. If you look at his "juvenile" compositions, they are rather conventional in their piano writing, like really hard Schubert. After about 1828, which is when he would have heard Paganini, the texture and layout of his piano style becomes truly "Lisztian".

I think Liszt's technical practice was probably more musical than many pianists' playing of actual repertoire. Which is what my OP was about; why not play music, instead of non-music?

In another of his letters he goes into a bit more detail about the technical exercises he did in those days, and basically it said that he drilled every basical technical component he could think of (scales, arpeggios, thirds, sixths, fifths, octaves, trills, repeated notes, glissandi, etc). I'm sure there was quite a bit of improvisation there too, but he really was being a workman at that point. Although I doubt that he had an exercise book in front of him, I'm willing to bet that a lot of what he did sounded an awful lot like Hanon or Czerny.

Then again, I doubt that he really practiced only exercises for 10 hours a day. I don't care who you are or what you're hoping to do, that'll drive you mad. I don't have any proof, but I'm willing to bet that he played through most of the Beethoven sonatas and the WTC, maybe even Clementi's Gradus.

[leahcim]

To me Czerny is helpfull. Can you really say that Czerny is NOT helpfull. I from my own experience can say that Czerny is essential.

I assume Beethoven managed his pieces without it [and maybe even Czerny?]

Not that the above, and many of the other points haven't been made before. I guess Arensky's addition to all the previous threads is that he tried it and his experience is that it worked.

OTOH, I've played a heap of different stuff and I still can't play a piece I'm happy with, so I'm waiting for Bernhard's plan that lets you throw all the other music away too

[stevehopwood]

I'm new here so I don't know who Bernhard is, but he sounds like my sort of guy. 

I see little point in using exercises for their own sake. Much better to use the music of Scarlatti, Bach, Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven. This enriches the soul as well as working wonders for the fingers.

I occasionally use Hanon myself when I want to concentrate on nothing but my own finger action. For my pupils, I solve individual problems by inventing exercises for them.

Steve 

[daniel patschan]

There ist something really funny: Bernahrd must have spent weeks of just sitting in front of his computer writing replies about his opinion on exercises (about their "uselessness" - however). And people are asking the same questions over and over again: "Which exercises are the best ect. ect. ect." He could never have won this fight. And he finally gave up to write replies. How many additional Scarlatti-Sonatas could he have learned instead of fighting against Czerny et al. !? One can only guess... 

[steveie986]

Bernhard is not a person. He is the Collective Intelligence of Music. He is the mind of God.

[daniel patschan]

Bernhard is not a person. He is the Collective Intelligence of Music. He is the mind of God.

Means that God did something without a chance for success - hard to believe !

[lostinidlewonder]

To push excerises aside is to take away playing experience. Playing experience for the beginner is essential, they have to get their fingers moving asap on the keyboard. Pieces take too long to learn for a beginner, thus excerises such as hanon are used because they are very fast to learn, highlight a concept of pattern and memory of the piano, highlight balance and control of a group of notes with ONE position of the hand, teach about how fingers provide one another balance and support and so on.

This is essential piano knowledge and something a lot of teachers miss. A beginner should immediately realise that a group of notes can be controlled and memorised with one position of the hand. This is a difficult concept for most beginners to break through because natrually they are thinking of individual fingers and individual notes all the time.

You of course do not base your lesson on excerises nor do you tell the student to practice them for hours. Every day but not for very long. Excerises in my lesson for a basis to understand how to see pattern in music and how to control groups of notes with one positon of the hand. In ALL music we play there are groups of notes required to be control until we move our hand. Excerises highlight this concept in a very simple but dificult to master procedure.

It is logical that to push aside one bit of knowledge will put you at a disadvantage. So it is stupid to push aside excerises and tag them useless because you simply reduce the amount of resource for you to study your instrument! People will argue that it is not as effective as this or that, but what is essential to know is that EVERYONE must play it at least one time in their life. Whether they like it or not. People who disregard hanon have played hanon and mastered it to some respect, if they do not master hanon and then call it crap then they don't know what they are talking about. But once mastered poeple realise how useless excerises are because they can learn pieces faster. The fact is that Excerises are essential for the beginner, and there is no debate about that.

[leahcim]

The fact is that Excerises are essential for the beginner, and there is no debate about that.

On the contrary, there's loads of debate, do a search See your own thread on the subject.

Here's a thought experiment debate

Lostinidlewonder "Beginner"
Hanon "Virtuoso"
Lostinidlewonder "No, beginner"
Hanon "Look, I wrote the £$%£$ing things I think I know what they are for"
Lostinidlewonder "Sorry, but you don't know what you're talking about"
Hanon "So why use my exercises then? Eh? You'll be saying lifting your fingers is nonsense too next!"

[stevehopwood]

The fact is that Excerises are essential for the beginner, and there is no debate about that.

Oh yes there is. Just because an individual holds a particular viewpoint does not mean that viewpoint is necessarily correct, final, definitive and not open to argument.

Sorry to be picky, but someone like me will always point this out if you make such statements. 

Steve 

[lostinidlewonder]

Here's a thought experiment debate

Lostinidlewonder "Beginner"
Hanon "Virtuoso"
Lostinidlewonder "No, beginner"
Hanon "Look, I wrote the £$%£$ing things I think I know what they are for"
Lostinidlewonder "Sorry, but you don't know what you're talking about"
Hanon "So why use my exercises then? Eh? You'll be saying lifting your fingers is nonsense too next!"

I refer back to the Baseball bat analogy I gave on the thread I gave support Hanon early this year. It can be used to hit a ball, or defend yourself against intruders.

Hanon can be used in many many ways, how you use it is important though. Use it for virtuosos? Wow... the difficulty of hanon doesn't come near what you find in say Chopin's etudes and yet Hanon claims it will make u a virtuoso? I don't think so. That doesn't take away the importance of Hanon though. It is just unimportant argument, the fact still remains that Hanon is an essential tool, you have to play it some time in your life. If you don't you are missing out. That is why I am saying there should be no argument saying NEVER LEARN HANON. That is just stupidity in my mind.

Maybe I should restate and not say: hanon is meant for beginners, but rather Hanon is meant for people who have never tried Hanon.

[mike_lang]

I refer back to the Baseball bat analogy I gave on the thread I gave support Hanon early this year. It can be used to hit a ball, or defend yourself against intruders.

Hanon can be used in many many ways, how you use it is important though. Use it for virtuosos? Wow... the difficulty of hanon doesn't come near what you find in say Chopin's etudes and yet Hanon claims it will make u a virtuoso? I don't think so. That doesn't take away the importance of Hanon though. It is just unimportant argument, the fact still remains that Hanon is an essential tool, you have to play it some time in your life. If you don't you are missing out. That is why I am saying there should be no argument saying NEVER LEARN HANON. That is just stupidity in my mind.

Maybe I should restate and not say: hanon is meant for beginners, but rather Hanon is meant for people who have never tried Hanon.

Clearly, the first 30 exercises are nothing more than some tame finger independence, but I believe that if the sixths, octaves, repeated notes, trills, tremoli, etc. are practiced diligently, the player can achieve virtuosity.  However, one does not need to purchase the Hanon book in order to practice these things...

ML

[leahcim]

Hanon can be used in many many ways

Indeed, including not using it

I guess Hanon's foreword which you appear to accept shows he doesn't know what he is talking about hasn't discouraged you from using it anyway. Which, after a message where you said the same "doesn't know what they are talking about" phrase gives me a better idea of how much I should regard it

I remember the last thread you talked about Chopin too. But when you're talking Hanon your description only seems to cover the most ham-fisted people that don't have normal, developed motor skills.

Perhaps very young pre-school / early school toddlers [i.e the sort where you might invent "Hanon for writing and drawing with a pencil" because they can't do that either and then claim that those pencil exercises are needed because just writing a story is too hard. Worse is that the guy who wrote the exercises is claiming they are necessary and sufficient to turn you into Raphael]  or older children / adults that have some kind of physical or mental development issues.

I'd still maintain there's nothing in Hanon that'll stop the kid holding the pencil in his fist or gripping it too tightly...and that how to play is far more important for a teacher to teach, than what. Although in that last thread you seemed to believe that the pages of sheet music themselves did some magic all by themselves.

Certainly IME I've never had a problem playing the notes of, say, Clementi's sonatinas, Bach's Minuet in G, Fur elise, Mozart's sonatas and so on, from the first time I sat at the keyboard.

That's not to say I could play the pieces well, nor that I couldn't improve,  and obviously there's a whole bunch of technique to learn as the rep gets harder. But once you start talking beyond that complete beginner who can't play notes, you don't appear to be offering a debate as to Hanon's usefulness.

So, if accept that you used to know what you were talking about [as opposed to Hanon], then I interpret your old views on Hanon and your usage of them as effectively saying it's useless for the vast majority of folk.

Although I notice you've just changed what you've said in this thread and in the past - you called it rephased, but it's saying something completely different. It now moves away from these cack-handed beginners to just say Hanon is for people who've never tried Hanon. That's just so full of obvious holes it's not worth addressing.

That just brings me back to the "don't know what they are talking about" phrase. If you're going to tell folk we should dismiss the opions of others in here who appear to know what they are  talking about on a variety of piano-related subjects, even if they are wrong about Hanon, you need to have formed your own, coherent and consistent view on Hanon by now.

[lostinidlewonder]

Indeed, including not using it

I guess Hanon's foreword which you appear to accept shows he doesn't know what he is talking about hasn't discouraged you from using it anyway. Which, after a message where you said the same "doesn't know what they are talking about" phrase gives me a better idea of how much I should regard it

You have to be careful not to confuse yourself when quoting people. I said people who say Hanon and excerises are useless and have no mastery over the excersies themselves or have never tried them OR have never tried to use it as a teaching impliment for students DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT. That is a logical statement because it is only what you THINK not what you KNOW. There is a big difference between that and a lot of people who discriminate against excerises only THINK but do not KNOW. They only THINK for themselves and push themselves further that make other people think the same. This is how you spread wrong information.

But when you're talking Hanon your description only seems to cover the most ham-fisted people that don't have normal, developed motor skills.

Ham fisted is going too far, I have always suggested that beginners use excerises to increase their playing experience, and those who have never tried it to try it. Hanon and other excerises are good to use as a litmus paper to test your basic technique. Do you have to test this every day? No, not someone who knows they can do it, but those who are trying to aquire better technique would make a daily habit of it, definately they are not ham fisted or any lesser of a musician. We all have to experience it sometime, it has nothing to do with ability.

How is the concept of balance, controlling groups of notes with one position of the hand etc considered for "ham fisted" people? Your argument falls apart because hanon is not only for physical excerise but for conceptual excerise, how to visualise groups of notes with one hand position which is a concept which exists in every single piece of music ever written.

I'd still maintain there's nothing in Hanon that'll stop the kid holding the pencil in his fist or gripping it too tightly...and that how to play is far more important for a teacher to teach, than what. Although in that last thread you seemed to believe that the pages of sheet music themselves did some magic all by themselves.

I never for one moment believed that the pages of sheets will do anything by magic, that is something you have imagined up. Even at the beginning of your reply you quoted me saying, Hanon can be used in many ways. (and not at all isn't one way to USE Hanon) Now let me ask you, can you describe all the ways that it can be used? I doubt it, I also doubt you would know how to apply Hanon to a developing student because you have determined it cannot be used. In my mind I know how to apply it, and how to use it to teach general concepts of memorisation,fingering, centre balance between fingers etc. I don't want to have to repeat what I've written in other posts. But it might interest you that for the early beginner I might spend a maxiumum of 5 minutes of the lesson studying Hanon (that means playing it and undertsanding how to play it in words). The rest is on our pieces, but Hanon is used to get the fingers moving and to start to undertsand how music is all about patterns.

That's not to say I could play the pieces well, nor that I couldn't improve,  and obviously there's a whole bunch of technique to learn as the rep gets harder. But once you start talking beyond that complete beginner who can't play notes, you don't appear to be offering a debate as to Hanon's usefulness.

I have continually stated that studying pieces are much better than studying excerises. But why do I want to offer debate for the experienced pianist to study Hanon?? Just because I offer no debate for it does that take away from the fact that Hanon is essential for the Beginner? You better organise your arguments a little better, because I don't know what you are trying to say here.

For those who do not understand Balance of the hand while playing groups of notes, for those who have trouble to realise pattern in music and most importantly for those who have never studied exercises (Beginner or most advanced), they must make it their duty to experience it before making comments. To know not to think.

And to sucesfully play notes means jack unless it is balanced. I can see messy playing with 100% note accuracy, but the hand looks uncmofortable and really strains to control what it plays. Piano isn't about note accuracy at all, it is about controlling what you play and making it feel easy. Accuracy and speed is a product of balanced hands while playing. Excerises highlight this point in a very simple but difficult model to master.

Although I notice you've just changed what you've said in this thread and in the past - you called it rephased, but it's saying something completely different. It now moves away from these cack-handed beginners to just say Hanon is for people who've never tried Hanon. That's just so full of obvious holes it's not worth addressing.

I am happy that you noticed what I rephrased it to Hanon is important to those who haven't tried it. Because I tend to find a lot of people THINK, they don't KNOW. If people say Hanon is crap explain why? Explain why would I not apply it to someone who needs to develop their fingers? Explain why should I take away playing experience from the piano and hope to get better? Explain why NOT doing Hanon will make you better? If there is an arguument for it then the argument must state that the note combinations Hanon asks for are obsolete and are never seen in general music (which would be a lie.) Thus I cannot understand how Any excerises can be discriminated against because they all aim to improve our playing, it is a matter of YOU understanding HOW to use it.

That just brings me back to the "don't know what they are talking about" phrase. If you're going to tell folk we should dismiss the opions of others in here who appear to know what they are  talking about on a variety of piano-related subjects, even if they are wrong about Hanon, you need to have formed your own, coherent and consistent view on Hanon by now.

People don't know what they are talking about for those who simply say Hanon is useless FULL STOP. Because they have not applied it to people of lesser ability than themselves. I have teaching experience from all different levels. I get the advanced students turn their nose at Hanon, but I get them to play it at least once. If I can see they play it with mastery then we can forget about it, but they must know of it! Otherwise they have no idea what they are talking about if someone asks them of their opinion on excerises, they will only talk what they THINK not what they KNOW.

[steveie986]

Group hug time

 
 

[dnephi]

Hanon teaches independence of fingers.  Helps you do Liszt...  Like scales.  Also, Czerny is more fun than Hanon, and still works on techniques.  I find that pure technique expertly supplements my applied technique in Chopin Etude & Mendelssohn concerto.  Your students may have lacked the discipline to really do Hanon at the speed and dexterity and technique with which they are supposed to be practiced.

[thaicheow]

Techinical training is essential, whether one likes it or not.

My teching principle is that, I rather teach my student the way to catch fish, rather than giving them fish all the time.

My hope is that one day, I could just assign them with the repertoire, giving them minimum hints, and let them learn themselves. What I give is just coaching them, rather than teaching them note by note.

I found that my students who do Hanon and Czerny, can pick up a sonate, or miniature work by bach, kuhlau, mozart or beethovan, much easier, faster and with less instruction from me. With Czerny excercise, they know better on the chords progession, where to place their fingers, etc.

Technical excercise is essential in order to teach repertiores more effectively. With this, the teacher can actually shorten the time on teaching/coaching a certain repertoire, and share more repertiore with his/her students.

Unless you have a student as talented as Richter, who claimed that he never did techinical excercise, which I doubt deeply.

[debussy symbolism]

Techinical training is essential, whether one likes it or not.

My teching principle is that, I rather teach my student the way to catch fish, rather than giving them fish all the time.

My hope is that one day, I could just assign them with the repertoire, giving them minimum hints, and let them learn themselves. What I give is just coaching them, rather than teaching them note by note.

I found that my students who do Hanon and Czerny, can pick up a sonate, or miniature work by bach, kuhlau, mozart or beethovan, much easier, faster and with less instruction from me. With Czerny excercise, they know better on the chords progession, where to place their fingers, etc.

Technical excercise is essential in order to teach repertiores more effectively. With this, the teacher can actually shorten the time on teaching/coaching a certain repertoire, and share more repertiore with his/her students.

Unless you have a student as talented as Richter, who claimed that he never did techinical excercise, which I doubt deeply.

Yes, I completely support that.

[daniel patschan]

Techinical training is essential, whether one likes it or not.

My teching principle is that, I rather teach my student the way to catch fish, rather than giving them fish all the time.

My hope is that one day, I could just assign them with the repertoire, giving them minimum hints, and let them learn themselves. What I give is just coaching them, rather than teaching them note by note.

I found that my students who do Hanon and Czerny, can pick up a sonate, or miniature work by bach, kuhlau, mozart or beethovan, much easier, faster and with less instruction from me. With Czerny excercise, they know better on the chords progession, where to place their fingers, etc.

Technical excercise is essential in order to teach repertiores more effectively. With this, the teacher can actually shorten the time on teaching/coaching a certain repertoire, and share more repertiore with his/her students.

Unless you have a student as talented as Richter, who claimed that he never did techinical excercise, which I doubt deeply.

Well spoken ! How true.