An interesting video, with the usual misconcetptions and logical errors. Who is the guy, by the way? He looks vaguely familiar.
So here is his text (in italics) with my comments (normal typeface). I must also say that I feel it is a bit unfair to criticize his ideas in this format, because he did not really expand on them enough.
He starts by demonstrating a few technical exercises.
This sort of thing [demonstrates Hanon slowly] and of course the scales. Scales in thirds, in sixths and arpeggios, all sorts of formulas.Perhaps the most interesting bit: he shows how to play scales thumb over – if anyone wants to see what it looks like, just watch it!
Which somehow goes against his devotion to Hanon & al. since all of these pedagogues insist on thumb under. I mean, is he not practising everyday Hanon nos 32 – 38 which expressly aim at thumb under, and prepare for the scales that follow? If he is going to do thumb over on the scales, why waste time on a bunch of exercises that prepare for a completely different motion? Surely a waste of time. Maybe he would have a good explanation for that. Maybe he just does the exercises that suit him.
Actually I don´t believe in technique while playing repertory. Er… It is hardly a matter of belief. How can you play repertory without technique? While playing repertory should you have no technique?
Of course, what he means is that he does not believe that by simply playing the repertory one will acquire the necessary technique.
This is true. You do not acquire technique by simply “playing” the repertory. You must – as I have stated and reinstated many times – “work” in a definite and precise way to that end. The technique you will acquire thus, will be a consequence of the quality of your work. The worst quality comes from just “playing” the repertory. The best technique will be acquired by doing the full works. Anything in between is possible. His belief is really quite irrelevant to the point. It does not matter what he believes or not (as we will see later on).
I´m even rather against it because that way you transform the piece.I just realized (with a shock) that he has no clue what it means to acquire technique form repertory and how to go about it. He probably thinks it means to play a piece over anv over again lifting fingers high in the most mechanical way possible. No wonder he does not believe in it.
It reminds me of the story of the simpleton who went to the drugstore to get some cockroach poison. The clerk handed him a bottle of poison pills. The next day he returned to the shop with the empty bottle:
“These were no good”.
The clerk was surprised:
“You could not kill any cockroach?”
“Just two. My aim is not very good and they kept moving!”
Except for going through pieces slowly I´m against practicing technique on repertory even on the Liszt Transcendental Studies, or Chopin Etudes. In any case, you shouldn´t do it to excess.Again, I realise with a shock that the man does not have a clue. Going through a piece slowly is not a method to acquire technique. Depending on what is meant with “slow” (as I have written extensively about in other threads there are three very different slow speeds) it is a method to streamline motions (the “choreography” of it all), a method to check on memorisatitn other than hand memory, and a method to involve different muscle groups in similar motions.
I am not sure what he means by “you shouldn´t do it to excess”. I take it to mean technical exercises (Hanon et al). Unfortunately he does not teel us what “excess” means: 10 minutes a day? One hour? Three hours? Once a week? Twice a week?
But he could also mean the Liszt and Chopin etudes.
On the other hand I´m in favour of pure technique as it appears in studies by Phillipe, Hanon, Tausig, Brahms, Lizst, people like that.As long as it is his personal choice, I have no problem with that. By all means do them. I do have a problem with what he says next.
I think that way you acquire the equipment, the reserve of power you need to tackle repertory.He may well think that. In fact, (although the government and the corporations worry about that and are sure working a way to stop it) at the moment of writing anyone may think whatever they please (“Opinions are like arseholes. Everyone has one”
)
In fact you appear to be using sport as your point of reference.
Exactly, the reference is to sport, just as it is for singers, and dancers, for example. Singers do vocal exercises to warm up the voice and also to cleanse their vocal chords, and dancers spend several hours a day at the barre.Again, he seems to have just a superficial knowledge of the pedagogical issues both in singing and ballet. I can certainly imagine an equally ill-informed ballet teacher telling her students: “You have to spend hours at the barre. Just look at pianists: they too spend hours doing Hanon”.
Or since it is all sport (after all we do have piano “competitions” don´t we?) how come football coaches are not telling their players to do Hanon. (Maybe they are, I don´t know that much about football).
Why should pianists always have to play fast and overpedal to cover things up?Sure, why overpedal? But how exactly is Hanon going to help here? As for playing fast, is it not the whole point (according to him) of doing exercises to have that extra reserve of power to tackle repertory? Is it not “fast” the only objective criterion with which to judge superior technique (according to the initiator of the thread)? So why exactly was this statement thrown in here? I am sure that the exercise fanatic is as prone to overpedalling and fast playing as its counterpart.
That´s often sheer dishonesty and I´m highly critical of certain teachers in this respect.I am not sure what exactly is sheer dishonesty, and what is he critical of certain teachers. I take it to mean that not doing exercises is dishonest – although he may mean playing fast and over pedaling.
Is he critical of teachers whose students overpedal and play fast, or of teachers who do not assign exercises?
In any case, we see here one of the most common trends in debates of this kind. The moment one´s highly cherished beliefs (in this case the belief in exercises) are shattered and cannot be held anymore, one resorts to insult: the unbeliever must be dishonest – or more often (and I am surprised it has not been voiced here) simply “lazy”.
I regret that many young people who play very difficult works like the Liszt Sonata or the Chopin Ballades are incapable of performing and even and precise scale, what I call a machine gun scale. They do it like that [demonstrates]Why should he regret it? The world of piano performance is a tough one where competition is savage. He should be happy this is the case, so that both he and his students – with their superior exercise acquired technique – can easily take the stage by storm.
But they are note, are they?
I have never seen anyone who has mastered Chopin Ballades or the Liszt Sonata
properly not been able to play a perfectly pearly scale – even if they never practise scales in isolation – simply because the
proper rendition of these pieces demand that the proper technique for playing scales be completely mastered. I have seen many people with years of Hanon on their backs struggling with the scalar passages on these pieces
because they were trying to do it with thumb under – the technique precognised by Cortot, Hanon, Pishna, Schmidtt and all of this mafia – a technique that cannot possibly deliver, but which is then totally ingrained on their faithful followers. In fact, the "bad" unequal scale he plays to demonstrate how a person who does not do exercises plays a scale, is almost always the result of trying to play a fast scale with thumb under - as precognised by all exercise manuals - and therefore it is the person who exercises compulsivley who is mot likely to suffer from that sort of limitation.
So who is being dishonest here? He did not bring into his video a pianist who could play a Chopin Ballade and then asked him to play a scale. Instead, he played the scale badly and said that was how the pianist would play. I for one am not prepared to believe him on the grounds of such flimsy and biased evidence.
And yet they play repertory very well, they are good at expressing feeling, they have a certain strength of technique.
But when you ask them to play a certain scale, specially in C major which isn´t necessarily the hardest, or in a remote key like G# minor, this is what you get to give you an example [demonstrates].I see. So let me see if I understand this correctly. Here is a guy who can play repertory not well, but very well. A guy who is good at expressing feeling, a guy who has a certain strength of technique. And what he cares about is that he cannot play a C major scale? Why? The audience is going to wildly applaud the guy and demand that he comes back and as an encore play a C major scale?
Now I do not believe this to be true. If someone can play the repertory very well, express feeling and have a certain strength of technique, I assure all of you that this guy will be able to play a C major scale.
But even if that was true,
who cares? (“Oh, yeah, this was the most amazing hair raising performance of the Chopin Ballades I ever heard, but I have been told that he cannot play a C major scale”) Pulease.
But up to that point I was giving this guy the benefit of the doubt. However, at this exact point he lost all credibility by saying:
But when you ask them to play a certain scale, specially in C major which isn´t necessarily the hardest, or in a remote key like G# minor, this is what you get to give you an example [demonstrates].C major is
technically the most difficult scale to play. It has only white keys, which means that it goes totally against the anatomy of the hand. To play it properly (as indeed he does) demands four different basic motions perfectly integrated (as opposed to three basic motions in a remote key scale like B major which conforms perfectly to the hand´s anatomy).
Then it hit me. This guy thinks a scale in a remote key is hard, not because it is technically (motionwise) hard, but because
he cannot remember the black keys unless he practices it everyday. To him C major is easy because having only white keys, he does not play wrong notes. And he believes that in order to know the notes of a scale he needs to practise them physically at the piano everyday. How pathetic. He has never heard of alternative – and much better ways – to get familiar with a key.
And I say that because otherwise, why would he consider C major one of the easiest scales to play?
He then goes on to demonstrate G# minor, and I was a bit lost here because I was not sure if he was demonstrating an “easier” scale, or if he was demonstrating “bad playing” of a G# minor scale by someone who does not practise exercises.
I myself have a weakness in my left hand, and if I was totally honest I should do a lot more practice with my left hand and even with both hands together, as well as my pieces.So guess who was dishonest after all…
But one doesn´t always have the time.Of course not. Especially if you are using all your practice time on exercises. But wait a minute? Wasn´t the whole idea of doing exercises about
saving time, so that when we got to playing the pieces we would sail through them?
Oh, but wait a minute: This passage in this piece cannot be played with the technique I learned in Hanon. Even though the notes are almost the same, to get the proper musical sound I have to modify my motions. Darn! I will have to start all over again to acquire the technique. Oh no, look at this scale in my Mozart sonata. I cannot use the fingering I spend the last 6 months practising one hour a day! Dang! I will have to learn and practise the same scale with a totally new fingering!
Then again, perhaps he doesn´t have the time because he is lazy and would rather do silly interviews for French TV.
Best wishes,
Bernhard.
Topic: a technical advice video from DUCHBAG - what do you think? (Read 5717 times)