unending open debated philosphies in piano?

[Bob]

What are the big philosophical ideas in piano that are never resolved and would always be argued?

One I can think of is what the goals should be -- developing technique or learning literature.

More?

[henrah]

Hanon will always be argued.

Tone is another unending debate. Though some like to try and end it with scientific proof, it is still debated.

Use of wrist/fingers will always be debated.

Practicing philosophies will always be debated too, and many new methods are being thought of.

[pianistimo]

how high or low to sit.  i used to experiment so much - and then went for a lesson and was told to quit futzing around and just play.  an adjustable bench is good.  u can make it go down 1/2 inch or so from the normal bench height (and if u are a tall person it makes a difference).

whether women should stride out (as men do ) before a concert or take little japanese lady steps.  same with bowing.  should they deeply bow and risk showing all - or take one hand, place it on their chest - and bow lightly like a japanese lady.

should the lady that is careful how she walks and bows - play rachmaninov in an extremely passionate way. 

[mike_lang]

Slow practicing, scales, and etudes.

ML

[musik_man]

Whether one should try one's best to observe the composer's intentions, will never be resolved.

[ada]

um, whether you should play Bach with dynamics?

[mike_lang]

um, whether you should play Bach with dynamics?

For that matter, whether or not pedal should be used in Bach.

ML

[Derek]

I don't understand why people think that there even should be debates about these issues. There is a such thing as taste and subjectivity in music. For example, I find it satisfying to play Bach both with pedal, and without, and with a variety of other touches.

My piano teacher, Dr. Smith, teaches me one way of playing---his---but I do not allow that to control how I play at home. At home I learn how to play his way but also experiment with my own way of playing. It seems to me the more variety one cultivates in one's playing, the more versatile and flexible you'll be and the better able you will be to make decisions while playing a piece.

[mike_lang]

I don't understand why people think that there even should be debates about these issues. There is a such thing as taste and subjectivity in music. For example, I find it satisfying to play Bach both with pedal, and without, and with a variety of other touches.

My piano teacher, Dr. Smith, teaches me one way of playing---his---but I do not allow that to control how I play at home. At home I learn how to play his way but also experiment with my own way of playing. It seems to me the more variety one cultivates in one's playing, the more versatile and flexible you'll be and the better able you will be to make decisions while playing a piece.

I happen to agree with you, but we're just naming controversies in music here.  Regarding the pedal, there are purists who say Bach didn't have a pedal, so we shouldn't play with it.  On the other hand, there are those who say that if Bach had a pedal, he would have used it.  I side with the latter, particularly considering the first prelude of the WTC book I.

Best,
ML

[pianistimo]

apparently so did busoni - who in arranging a transcription of some organ preludes, suggested using all three pedals at once.

[ramseytheii]

An unending debate would be the method of sound production, and what is available in variety.  Read these interesting letters to Charles Rosen, and his replies:

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/273

and then

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/214

Walter Ramsey

[crazy for ivan moravec]

I don't understand why people think that there even should be debates about these issues. There is a such thing as taste and subjectivity in music. For example, I find it satisfying to play Bach both with pedal, and without, and with a variety of other touches.

but debates can create wonders for everyone. no one idea is solely correct. even if there are winners in actual debates, the decision is still made and is subject to the judges' backgrounds and thinkings. in essence, there are no winners in debates.

but imagine the critical thinking and sharing of views happening in a debate. it is a venue for more learning. you learn from your competitors.

with piano technique and piano playing, i believe there is always a scientific way for everything. the problem is, what we read from technique books are the views of the authors- that are according to his playing, his hands, mind, etc. all these do not necessarily apply to all of us. but we do get ideas. and these ideas are all the same, bt like i said, we find it hard to formalize these ideas and make them scientific because there are just way too many views.

[ramseytheii]

I happen to agree with you, but we're just naming controversies in music here.  Regarding the pedal, there are purists who say Bach didn't have a pedal, so we shouldn't play with it.  On the other hand, there are those who say that if Bach had a pedal, he would have used it.  I side with the latter, particularly considering the first prelude of the WTC book I.

Best,
ML

But there is still another side to the debate, and that is sympathetic resonance.  The strings of Bach's harpsichord would all resonate with each other whenever a key, or especially, a chord, was played.  So this notion of constant dryness in Baroque music justbecause "there was no pedal" is way off from the actual way people in that time would have heard sound.  Furthermore, music was performed in the church, or in royal halls, typically constructed out of amplifying marble and other materials.  There was natural resonance in the air, that of course gave the music a net of upper partial tones, that we can imitate by using the pedal.  That's right: to get a more authentic sound for Baroque music, we can start by using the pedal.

Walter Ramsey

[kriskicksass]

But there is still another side to the debate, and that is sympathetic resonance.  The strings of Bach's harpsichord would all resonate with each other whenever a key, or especially, a chord, was played.  So this notion of constant dryness in Baroque music justbecause "there was no pedal" is way off from the actual way people in that time would have heard sound.  Furthermore, music was performed in the church, or in royal halls, typically constructed out of amplifying marble and other materials.  There was natural resonance in the air, that of course gave the music a net of upper partial tones, that we can imitate by using the pedal.  That's right: to get a more authentic sound for Baroque music, we can start by using the pedal.

Walter Ramsey

I once had the chance to play an authentically-built harpsicord in a chapel, and I will tell you that there was no way that the resonance created by the lack of dampers and the performance space came anywhere near the resonance made by using the pedals on a piano. That being said, I believe it's perfectly fine to use pedal in Bach's more vocally-inspired works. Using pedal in a fugue is just careless.