Grasping the Key

[logik]

I recently read Prof. Alan Fraser's book, "The Craft of Piano Playing," and watched the corresponding DVD.  In his book and DVD, Fraser makes very clear numerous facets of piano technique.

One of the primary focus points of the book is that of "grasping" the key to establish a secure, physical connection.  Fraser uses the analogy of grasping ones forearm with their hand, "not convulsively, but firmly," to illustrate this principle.

My question is: Is grasping only a tool through which a person learns to have the structure of their hand stand up, and not collapse, as it is sometimes prone to do, when playing legato, between the thumb and second finger as Fraser illustrates, or pianissimo?  Once we experience the sensation of structural integrity, need we still maintain the "grasping" feeling? 

And then, how do we still maintain the security, without grasping? I thought that finding optimal bone alignment, and playing skeletally, not muscularly might be the next step, but I wasn't sure, and I know there is never one given answer.

I also often find that grasping too much causes tension and actually inhibits movement, whereas if I don't "grasp" at all, I seem to lack the structural integrity that gave me that secure physical connection to the keys.

How can I find the right balance between "grasping" the keyboard, and playing skeletally, with optimal bone alignment, so that the structurally secure fingers seem to grasp themselves? 

Is it possible to grasp without unnecessary tension that could lead to tendonitis or other physical problems? 

Can grasping firmly with the hand, but keeping the arm and wrist supple and flexible, prevent these negative effects?

I know that all of this is difficult if not impossible to discuss outside of  musical context, but I greatly appreciate any help.

Best Wishes,
Cameron

[pianistimo]

frankly, this is the first time i've ever heard about the concept of grasping a key.  it almost sounds obscene.  but, i know what you mean.  just a solid feel of the hand to the keyboard. 

at first i thought you mean - key - as in a 'key.'

as i see it - you are entirely correct about 'grasping too much might cause tension.'  in fact, i think any sort of 'grasping' is going to cause tension.  i totally agree about relaxed muscles just flopping around doing their job.  sort of 'deadfishing it.'  piano is a very easy instrument to play once you become relaxed.  watch some of the pros.  they are just letting their fingers move and occasionally moving their hands to the best possible positions to allow the fingers to move.  it's not like you are using the entire hand every moment that you play.

i think it's just using the tips or pads of your fingers mostly.

in my first lessons many years ago, i recall the professor telling me to put my arms at my sides and walk - letting my arms and hands freely move as they normally do when walking.  he said - this is exactly how you should feel at the keyboard.  then - he brought my hand up to the keys and just rested them there with the weight (that wasn't really weight - but just natural arm movement) already existing.  not making ANY more weight.

[ramseytheii]

WHen someone refers to grasping a key, I believe they mean playing with the whole hand rather then just the fingers.  The hand has to be balanced, with a conscious center point in the palm on which the weight rests.  You can simulate this by turning your hand palm up, pretending to hold a baseball, then flipping it over and dropping it right on the keyboard.  When you pretend to hold the baseball, your fingers move into a natural position, and you imagine the weight in the center of your hand, and this is ideal for piano playing.

There is also a certain kind of touch which is akin to petting a cat.  It's a pulling out, or really a stroking out, motion.  Cats like a lot of pressure in your finger tips, so imagine petting the cat, and simulate this on the piano.  But don't forget to feel the centering sensation in the palm.

Walter Ramsey

[mikew3456]

btw, does anyone else have any experiece with this book or dvd and could comment on it? thanks

[danny elfboy]

There's a potential for something very wrong and harmful here.
"Grasping the key" sounds like contracting the hand muscles to form a sort of tense "claw" with the fingers and hand. This is not the right way though to mantain a proper shape and position of the hand. All that tension is unnecessary and would make playing hard and painful with time.

We need to be conscious of the natural shape of our hand when its back is flat and up aligned with the wrist and the natural shape of the resting fingers ... arched, like rainbows starting from the knuckles.

If grasping is a "mental" feeling then it's another story.
But if grasping is artificially creating a claw/ball shape of the hand tensing the muscles that abduct and curl the fingers than it is to be strongly discouraged.

[richy321]

I've been puzzled by Mr. Fraser's odd emphases, such as the Tai Chi walk and the grasping action, for some time now, and still find them to be irrelevant and unhelpful for piano technique.  The grasping action, for example, was truly important for humans when they were wielding spears and such, and still is for many activities, but I fail to see what relevance it has for piano technique.  In fact, as Elfboy points out, such an approach could easily lead to excess tension to the point of injury.  My main criticism of Fraser is that he tends to over-emphasize the need for strength in finger action while discounting the role of the rest of the arm and body in providing the needed stability and control, although in one of his many contradictions, he acknowledges the latter as well.  Generally, I find his ideas poorly integrated and lacking a centrally organized core, such as a comprehensive anatomical-mechanical model would have.

Rich Y 

[mike_lang]

I've been puzzled by Mr. Fraser's odd emphases, such as the Tai Chi walk and the grasping action, for some time now, and still find them to be irrelevant and unhelpful for piano technique.  The grasping action, for example, was truly important for humans when they were wielding spears and such, and still is for many activities, but I fail to see what relevance it has for piano technique.  In fact, as Elfboy points out, such an approach could easily lead to excess tension to the point of injury.  My main criticism of Fraser is that he tends to over-emphasize the need for strength in finger action while discounting the role of the rest of the arm and body in providing the needed stability and control, although in one of his many contradictions, he acknowledges the latter as well.  Generally, I find his ideas poorly integrated and lacking a centrally organized core, such as a comprehensive anatomical-mechanical model would have.

Rich Y 

Perhaps I did not grasp his points accurately, but my impression was that his technical ideas center around a good legato, and furthermore, economy of motion.  He holds that one does not rely only on fingers or only on arm weight (obviously it would be absurd to take either extreme, though many teachers lean one way or the other), but that they are to be integrated.  His main point seems to be that all sound is initiated by the finger, and so the structure of the hand must be properly developed - not that one should not use the arms.  I think it is less strength in the finger action than in the bridge (i.e., the muscle supporting the pinky and the muscle between the thumb and first finger). 

To me, his views seem very moderate in that he assigns every part of the mechanism its own role.  I am interested to hear what anyone else has to say about this book - it has been a great help to me over the last year or so.

Best,
Michael

[danny elfboy]

Perhaps I did not grasp his points accurately, but my impression was that his technical ideas center around a good legato, and furthermore, economy of motion.  He holds that one does not rely only on fingers or only on arm weight (obviously it would be absurd to take either extreme, though many teachers lean one way or the other), but that they are to be integrated.  His main point seems to be that all sound is initiated by the finger,

I don't agree with such point at all.
The best explanation of what initiated all sound comes imo from Whiteside:

It is the body as a whole which transfers the idea of music into the actual production of music. All bodily skills, (not only those concerned with music) have this in common: they always involve the whole body if the best results are to be obtained. The body is the center of the skills even though in each case there is a necessary periphery of some kind.
The center controls the periphery; it can never be the other way around.

Fingers are the periphery they don't initiated the sound.
The hips, the shoulder, the torso, the elbows and forearm initiates it ... the fingers are just appendix.

and so the structure of the hand must be properly developed

The structure of the hand is already developed.
It is developed in very young children too from a lot of activities.
Piano playing doesn't require such a pressure force so hard to be able to develop anything.
The only exception is stretching to reach wide chords.
The fingers can't develop as they're just bones, ligaments, tendons and fat.
Even the metacarpal very small muscles are not really reinforced by such a light activity as piano playing. That's also the reason why very young children with very small hands can play virtuoso repertory with power and beautiful tone.

The idea of grasping the keys is still dangerous because the grasping shape or position involves chronic contraction of muscles, muscles that should actually be relaxed and not be interfering with more important contractions. There's no need to form fake shapes (spider, igloo, ball, grotto) with the hand, the hand has already a perfect shape for playing which also sustains the fingers joints and the wrist and it's the one we can observe when the the whole arm is hanging in a relaxed state at our side.

[lostinidlewonder]

There are tonns of different kinds of actions at the keyboard, none are wrong but all have to be applied correctly. Grasping the keys or even one key is only one movement of the many, but we have to apply it in context not mindlessly use it when you can use it.

We are always coming up with particular movement to be able to play a group of notes with one action. That is basically what piano technique is all about. Someone with bad technique plays a phrase of music with multiple actions, someone which strong technique can do it with much fewer. When you see able pianists play we observe how easy they make it look, it is because they melt multiple actions into one single effortless movement. Watch someone just learning say the.. Chopin Op10no1 and their right hand looks like it is doing multiple movements, watch someone with a lot of experience with the piece, their hand looks like one singular flowing movement.

Grasping keys to me feels like allowing the fingers to keep moving in the same direction of the note strike without having to lift them up after they have played. It is a very circular motion and it refines the linear down and up idea of our fingers. We waste energy if we press a note down then retract the individual finger, instead the hand lifts up and the fingers have a slight circular curling motion to them.... like stroking the cat. But ideally when our hands are totally relaxed, they curl up, when you strike a note the finger straightens. So when you stop depressing the note you should return the hand to its relaxed state, curled up. Thus we feel as if we are grasping the note, but in fact we are not physically grasping the note with any extra energy, the hand actually relaxed more and the fingers grasp the note.

To apply grasping the note BEFORE we strike the note could actually cause extra energy to be used and thus create an ineffient technique. This sure is hard to explain in words though. Basically I find the application of grasping notes for how we leave the notes we play, not how to play the notes.

[danny elfboy]

Grasping keys to me feels like allowing the fingers to keep moving in the same direction of the note strike without having to lift them up after they have played. It is a very circular motion and it refines the linear down and up idea of our fingers. We waste energy if we press a note down then retract the individual finger, instead the hand lifts up and the fingers have a slight circular curling motion to them.... like stroking the cat. But ideally when our hands are totally relaxed the curl up, when you strike a note the finger straightens. So when you stop depressing the note you should return the hand to its relaxed state, curled up. Thus we feel as if we are grasping the note, but in fact we are not physically grasping the note with any extra energy, the hand actually relaxed more and the fingers grasp the note.

To apply grasping the note BEFORE we strike the note could actually cause extra energy to be used and thus create an ineffient technique. This sure is hard to explain in words though. Basically I find the application of grasping notes for how we leave the notes we play, not how to play the notes.

I can see what you mean.
My only problem is with the terminology.
Grasping involves very strong contraction, in fact grasping involves the kind of wasted energy you talk about: and uneeded contraction after the moment the finger hits the key.
Grasping involves an "unnatural" and straining bending of all the fingers joints.
Lifting the relaxed note after the depression of a key doesn't involve the tension and strain and curling of grasping. In fact neither stroking a cat involves it.

Another problem is with the term "curled".
We can observe that different states of bending and contracting of the fingers joints can make the fingers look like "arches/rainbows" or like "hooks"

Curling refers to the "hook" shape with the joint totally disaligned and the last phalange totally bent inward.

But the natural shape the relaxed fingers assume is the "arches/rainbows" one with the joints aligned one after another.

I understand what you mean but still found the terms coinfusing and we shouldn't forget that our body forms habits and moves in certain ways also in response to certain thoughts, belief or recurrent terms of definitions. Grasping is a dangerous term for the "body-mapping" at the piano.

Maybe a better way to explain it is not to think of grasping as in big objects but slighly grabbing an ant with our fingers and thumb making sure not to hurt it.

[pizno]

Grasping sounds like exactly what we DON'T want to do!  That sounds like griping, or tensing the hand unnecessarily, and after it's actually played.  I think a much better word is Traction.  This connotates having secure contact with the top of the key before and during playing.

Pizno

[nouon]

video demo of the full dvd, he describes grasping:

 

I have his book, and got a bit confused by it ( I am no concert pianist)

[danny elfboy]

video demo of the full dvd, he describes grasping:

I have his book, and got a bit confused by it ( I am no concert pianist)

Okay watched the video so I know can asnwer the original question:

My question is: Is grasping only a tool through which a person learns to have the structure of their hand stand up, and not collapse, as it is sometimes prone to do, when playing legato, between the thumb and second finger as Fraser illustrates, or pianissimo?  Once we experience the sensation of structural integrity, need we still maintain the "grasping" feeling?

Grasping (as the video makes clear) is only a tool to find and be conscious of the the correct playing structure of the hand and maintain and wrist-hand arch.

It's a way to find a structure that doesn't collapse the wrist wich would result in you playing with just the fingers, lifting them high with the forearm muscles and literally destroying your tendons, and doesn't allow the weight of the arm to collapse the hand again destroying the bridge structure.

[nouon]

that explenation is very precise, I was also confused by the term "grasping"

thanks

[pianowelsh]

really I think what he is after is a firm knuckle joint and a sense of connectivity to the key. It is I suppose a kind of grasping but personally I think the word may give a wrong impression?!? Really ALL piano playing is controlled tension. You CANNOT play without it...but you must also be carefull not to wallow IN it.  Its tension and release.

You know I really get quite vexed by the lack of vision in these matters.  WE as pianists shouldnt have ONE approach to the key, one idea of how to make a sound etc.  HOW big is our repertoire guys!!! - its basically limitless..in realterms anyway as none of us will ever get through it all in a lifetime. We need to have a malleable technique and what I would call a 'listening, musical hand' one which intuitively can sense what the music requires and makes the necessary physical adjustments to play in that way for that period of time. Sometimes what is required is weightless and positively flabby. Sometimes what is needed is a going right into the keybed with a powerfull thrust. Sometimes we must pull a sound out of the piano othertimes we must slap it down 'con pugno'  - its all in the literature guys! check it out.   A good teacher will encourage the student to think for themselves and know the workings of the instrument, know the workings of the music, know the workings of their body - then go figure!  METHODS have destroyed individuality in a generation or so's pianists.  I for one am determined that it wont pervade into my students thought processes....be origional....live a little!!!  'LIVE LIVE LIVE!!!!' - (classy quote from MAME)

[nouon]

Grasping is not the only method Alan Fraser teach, he describes many approaches which
contradicts eachother if one takes everything to literally (as I did)