What defines "Pianistic" Playing ?

[m1469]

And, we play "pianistically" as opposed to what, exactly ?

Yeah, that's pretty much it.  I think it's actually a question I have had for awhile, but, like so many other questions, I couldn't seem to ask ... LOL.

Many thanks .

[m]

And, we play "pianistically" as opposed to what, exactly ?

Not-pianisticly?

[m1469]

Not-pianisticly?

ha ha... well, yes  .  But, how could we be playing the piano unpianistically ?

I don't really get it.  People use these terms, but what do they really mean ?  I realize that some repertoire lends itself better to the pianist's hands, for example, and the feats that a pianist must do to achieve the music -- but, even if something is written "pianistically," a person can seemingly play it unpianistically.   

[m]

Pianistically comfortable as opposed to pianistically awkward?

[m1469]

Well, okay, yeah.  But, what makes it comfortable ?  Certain fingers for certain things ?  I would say that according to what others have argued in my other thread, it wouldn't be a matter of positions and fingerings, but of motions (and, of course, fingerings imply motions.  But, I have more questions, too  ).   And, what is comfortable for one person may not be for another -- which seems to depend more on the individual than the on piano itself.

I have heard somebody (who knows my playing very well) describe a performance of mine as more "pianistic" than other performances of the same piece (whereas, in his words, it had been more orchestral before).  What does that really mean ?  Anything ?

[walking_encyclopedia]

Here's my two cents:

I've heard to word used to refer mostly to compositions being 'pianistic' or not, although I suppose the word could be used in relation to performances.

I've always understood the word to mean, taking full advantage of what a piano's sound has to offer. For instance, to write pianistically, one needs to understand a piano's shortcomings. Listening to Ave Maria on a piano leaves much to be desired, IMO. That kind of piece is done better justice on a cello or violin, because on a piano, when a note is struck, it instantly decays, as opposed to a cello, which can sustain a note and even begin softly and become louder.

Imagine listening to 'The Swan' by Saint-Saens on a piano!! That would be nothing short of butchery. Each long, gorgeous tone would immediately fade and completely wreck the continuity.

When I think of pianistic writing, I think of Chopin and to a lesser degree Liszt. Chopin is supposed to be the composer that best understood the piano, and used every color and effect possible.

Hope I shed some light on the topic.

[henry_v]

Well, maybe I take it totally wrong, but it reminds me of what my teacher says to me all the time; that it is not enough to play the instrument like a pianist. Then you will probably ask, what is the difference between playing the piano like a pianist and, for example like a musician? Well, there should be no difference, you're always a musician, since these things are strictly related to each other. Almost all pianistical problems are in fact musical ones.

But there is another element in piano playing... An element which is definately the hardest of all to master and yet very few (of even the greatest masters) have a clue in this area...
Let me explain a little bit. For example, you play a scale (there are alot examples of this in the literature). You can play it louder, softer, faster, legato, more articulated, whatever you want. There are really a lot of choices you have to make, musical choices (where to make cresc. how much, etc), depending on the piece and the context. Once you are aware of all this, you should play it perfectly, technically (if you know about the movements etc.) and musically. Still there is missing one most important thing. That is, whatever you play, never, never, never, press the key (only) with your finger! You press it with your heart and your mind. That is when you play a scale in E flat, feel the harmony, use all your imagination that you have to feel the character of E flat!

Still this is not enough. Since in only one scale, there are different intervals (so different emotions) you can make different groups out of it and compare/relate it to each other. Once you use your imagination, you are able to create a illusion. But it is obviously there. Same thing like, you have to believe that you can and will make a cresc. on one single note. The power of the mind is incredible and should be developped.

Once you a little idea about this, your whole concept of virtuosity and playing the piano changes forever. Unfortunately, there are really few people that know about these things, and needless to say it will take more than a lifetime to understand about this (and therefore about the works of the great composers).

I think I am losing the way from this topic a little bit But this for me is a most important aspect of  music and creating music, and keeps me thinking of all the time

[dnephi]

Here's my two cents:

I've heard to word used to refer mostly to compositions being 'pianistic' or not, although I suppose the word could be used in relation to performances.

I've always understood the word to mean, taking full advantage of what a piano's sound has to offer. For instance, to write pianistically, one needs to understand a piano's shortcomings. Listening to Ave Maria on a piano leaves much to be desired, IMO. That kind of piece is done better justice on a cello or violin, because on a piano, when a note is struck, it instantly decays, as opposed to a cello, which can sustain a note and even begin softly and become louder.

Imagine listening to 'The Swan' by Saint-Saens on a piano!! That would be nothing short of butchery. Each long, gorgeous tone would immediately fade and completely wreck the continuity.

When I think of pianistic writing, I think of Chopin and to a lesser degree Liszt. Chopin is supposed to be the composer that best understood the piano, and used every color and effect possible.

Hope I shed some light on the topic.

I think that the reverse is a bit true.  Liszt's music is absolutely pianistic.  Chopin's is often comfortable to play, but not to the point of altruism. 

(I'm about to get e60 to shove down my throat something about Don Juan being  unpianistic.)

Playing?  It pains me to see someone with a technique which looks improper.

[opus10no2]

It's not a term I've heard often when talking about *playing*, but if it is mentioned in this context - 'pianistic' would refer to the natural inclination of the physical nature of the passage.

It can be seen as a flaw, I mean a MIDI doesn't deal with this 'emergency rubato' and any physical restrictions dynamically.

I think a player's technical approach should both embrace the natural physical inclinations, aswell as defy them, to suit the best end product.

[teresa_b]

You can think of "pianistic" as it pertains to a particular piece, or composer's style--Chopin wrote pianistically in terms of taking full advantage of the range of the piano's possibilities. 

Playing "pianistically" might result from you as a performer taking full advantage of the instrument's capabilites, also--as well as compensating for the piano's deficiencies--e.g., the dying away of the tones immediately such that you must create the illusion of legato, crescendo, etc.   By making your accompaniment fill in so your melody may sing, remembering the principle of continuation as the tones die away, and utilizing beautiful phrasing, you play pianistically!

Teresa

[pianistimo]

i like all the above definitions and yet would hate to see 'very pianistic' on an adjudication form.  it's just kind of like saying - you're just like everyone else.  you can play the instrument.  it's not specific enough.

adjudication forms must be more specific to what exactly is 'pianistic.'  this takes effort on the listener's part to determine exactly what measure, beat, and place in the beat that the 'peak' of this pianistic prowess happens.  is it at a sudden pp after a sfz?  or does the sfz fit into a pp?  sometimes i think someone is 'pianistically' minded when they control the sound as a pilot would control a plane.  not terribly frightful jumps of altitude - and no loss of control if that happens.  a sort of awareness of the vertical and horizontal aspects of piano playing.  maintaining one's cool.

perhaps my visual image would be snoopy with goggles on.  not schroeder.  he stoops over the piano too much.  snoopy has his head up and ears blowing in the wind.

[ahinton]

Imagine listening to 'The Swan' by Saint-Saens on a piano!! That would be nothing short of butchery. Each long, gorgeous tone would immediately fade and completely wreck the continuity.

I don't imagine that Godowsky - who was not known for his ignorance of matters pianistic - would have taken especially kindly to your remark here!...

Best,

Alistair

[dnephi]

I don't imagine that Godowsky - who was not known for his ignorance of matters pianistic - would have taken especially kindly to your remark here!...

Best,

Alistair

His transcription is gorgeous.

[nomis]

And, we play "pianistically" as opposed to what, exactly ?

Yeah, that's pretty much it.  I think it's actually a question I have had for awhile, but, like so many other questions, I couldn't seem to ask ... LOL.

Many thanks .

Hmm...maybe it refers to someone playing a little mechanically or percussively in a passage that should sound more lyrical/wavelike or less "notey" and playing in phrases.

[ramseytheii]

It seems a misnomer to apply it or not to someone playing piano, just like saying someone is "musical" or not.  But probably, the person means, is the person playing naturally, or unnaturally. 

We can tell by how people use energy: those who achieve the maximum effect with the minimum effort (to borrow from Schnabel) appear to be playing the most naturally.  Those who seem to apply a lot of movement are playing unnaturally.

Of course, you have people like Lang Lang, who applies a tremendous amount of movement for his overall performance, but I think you will find for his actual piano playing, it is the minimum required.  And he is clearly in control of his showmanship qualities, meaning it isn't as extraneous as one who is not in control of their movements.

A good mantra: maximum effect with minimum effort!

Walter Ramsey

[m1469]

Still there is missing one most important thing. That is, whatever you play, never, never, never, press the key (only) with your finger! You press it with your heart and your mind.

That sounds a little scary to me.  You mean, I have to actually open up   Sometimes I just feel like I don't know how to open myself -- but I actually know better than that.  I think, I am just scared, or sometimes just not really in the mood. 

Training oneself to be open on demand, at the right times and in the right ways -- that's a thing for sure !  I'm a m1469, afterall, and I open with the right circumstances -- you know, water, sun, food -- the usual stuff.

Perhaps I need to tweak my idea of "circumstance" and I need to learn how to control that better... my inward environment ... not being dependent on my outward environment.  Sometimes I have felt that in a (piano) performance (have never quite felt that in a vocal performance -- yet).  It's my favorite thing, actually.  I just walk into this "space" and I find that what was outside of me is actually inside of me (including my audience) and what was inside of me is outside of me -- it all becomes ONE and there is no longer an inner and an outter -- there just IS.  And, it's as though I am in this protective bubble and it's like I can just float in there -- it's my womb/home  -- and it's almost as though it doesn't matter what I do, or it doesn't matter if I mess up, I am protected.  I know who I am in there, but it's not just about me -- but, it's about life, and that includes me.

[henry_v]

That sounds a little scary to me.  You mean, I have to actually open up  

Kind of. Actually, it starts with having a clear concept of what you want to express with your music. You must carefully analyse every note that you play and make really a lot of musical decisions. And there are really a lot of choices. You can play one single note already at many different ways , imagine what you can do with a group of notes, (balancing, timing, dynamics etc.). In this process, you really need a lot of imagination, since there isn't a limit regarding beauty of art. It's like you are a composer, you need to make it sound as if it were your own composition.
Only after this process you can think of putting your heart in it and making it vivid. To feel only some general atmosphere the piece is about while playing without knowing what you are actually doing, is barely enough and will sound moreover very childish.
It's actually very hard mental/creative work, Menahem Pressler said it very well: You practise your fingers/hands to play well, you practise your brain to understand well, but then you do have to practise your soul. Now, that's the painfull practise.

[m]

It's actually very hard mental/creative work,

I have been saying on this board exactly the same words for a few years. Nobody seems to listen, though.

Menahem Pressler said it very well: You practise your fingers/hands to play well, you practise your brain to understand well, but then you do have to practise your soul. Now, that's the painfull practise.

Beautifully put.

[m1469]

I have been saying on this board exactly the same words for a few years. Nobody seems to listen, though.

No.  People hear but they just don't want it to be true.  And, honestly, neither do I, but I know that it is.  But, I am just nobody  .  Anyway, people resist this kind of work like no other, I think -- it confusing and immense and undefineable and where does it end and where does it start ?

So, here is the thing.  I sit down to Mozart after henry posts this and I think through my group of notes and I think about the vast decisions sitting at my fingertips... it's overwhelming.  Well, that is fine, that is one thing ... but, then I think about taking the time to sort out those choices for just this one passage ... well, overwhelming still even more, though probably conceivable yet.  Okay, multiply this by the all the notes and passages in one piece -- getting bigger and more overwhelming -- okay, multiply this times all the pieces just in one program ... now in two programs ... now in numerous programs over years and years and years and THEN -- add a time pressure to it :  "I learn this in a week.  It's good, me genius, now listen to me play" -- I quit. 

But, at the same time, to whatever extent I am capable, I hear this very effort in your playing, Marik -- and, this is what makes to me your music stand out from others.  Do I get to play, too ?  Maybe I will just go through all of this turning myself inside and out and dissecting music and nobody will even notice or care.  Sound familiar ?  Maybe, maybe not.  But, here, it becomes grunt work, and it's the wrong starting point.

To start correctly is to end correctly.

[opus10no2]

It puzzles me how many people spend so much time searching, when what comes easiest more often than not speaks more about oneself.

Sure, experiment, but trust your instincts.

Remember, you aren't learning a piece of music so you can spend your whole life perfecting it to perform it 'perfectly' in the end.

You learn the piece because you want to play it many times, and most probably quite different each time!

[m1469]

No, I play to experience and to discover -- I am not just a musician, I am also an archeologist.  I perform to give my audience an experience, and insight into a soul and into life and to stop their tracks of thoughts from what do I do with myself in this life ?  What is the world ?  How much am I ?  and then they leave wondering, who am I now ?  What is the possibilities of one's potential ? I teach to help my students discover the art of discovery for themselves.

Yes, what you say is true to some extent, but this comes from you, not me.  And, though you are right, we learn a piece to play it many times, this is not an excuse to refrain from digging deeply and discovering at every possible corner.  Though, there must be a balance.

[opus10no2]

Well, I learned a while ago to stop trying to be everyone and everything, and just be myself.

Because I'm cool like that.

[m1469]

And, that is nearly precisely the point.  I must turn to my students, I must turn to an audience.  You have no desire to do these things, from what I understand.  I will not say only to my students and to my audience "just explore and trust your instincts" -- this will not serve the entire purpose, no matter what.  Of course to some extent in life there is no other choice, but there is a line.  I will turn to my audience and I will say with my eyes and with my being and with my playing "I have put my entire self into this.  I have studied this from the inside and out and back again and I took it over the sun and through the hell and into heaven and it sits now on the moon... and you are there, too, now ( )" and then I will be satisfied.  And when I touch a key and a sound comes out, it will be a real sound.

[opus10no2]

I do intend to play to audiences though, and nothing you have said thus far has convinced me to modify my approach.

I mean I play to please myself, and I'd like to share it with an audience because (a) - they have a chance of enjoying it, and (b) because of the oh-so-nice feeling of people feeling an empathy with one's art.

I guess that means watching me play would be like watching a hot chick masturbate, and that sounds super-duper to me.

[m1469]

I am refraining for now from violating what I understand to be forum rules.  You, on the other hand, make no such reservations on behalf of what I have requested of you in both private and in public.  If you wonder why I have no desire to speak with you personally, this would be why, which I know that you know.

On the other hand, we are discussing music and piano, for at least part of the post.  And, by no means am I suggesting for you, nor trying to convince you, to change your approach.  It's not about you, actually, though everything in the world seems to be like that for you.

However, my point is that your approach is insufficient for me, and I think that should be plainly clear to you since we have very different intentions, and therefore your puzzlement over this and reasoning about it have very little place in my considerations of my own path. 

[opus10no2]

It was just an analogy, and it wasn't necessarily directed at you.

I think it's a very good one, and uh-oh it's humorous too, I don't see the problem.

Of course I'm aware you might not like that, or may even be offended by it, but I make no apologies for what I do.

This brings up something relevant to the direction of discussion, actually, the nature of playing in public seems to be akin to other types of communication.

There is the sender and receiver, and while the content is identical, the interpretation, intent, and context(because everyone is different, and at a different stage in their life, personally and musically).

So should the sender do all within their power to provide the reciever with their original absolute intention?

Musically, I do NOT see performance as an interactive process.
Without contradicting myself - I could concede that the player will react to how the audience reacts, emotionally, and this can obviously inform the interpretation of the music, but in the actual playing - nothing is said about the audience, everything which is 'sent' only speaks of the author.

So the analogy, public 'masturbation', as opposed to an experience more liek coitus, is the way I see it.

My approach will obviously not be sufficient for other's intents, but I have my own intent - and therefore I spend more time on other things, in light of my own intent.
So other people's approaches would be unsufficient for me also. 

[m1469]

Well, for the most part I have skimmed your post.  Shortly, I have never once asked you to apologize and I have simply asked that your refrain from referring to certain subjects when talking with me -- it's really pretty simple.  Also, if you act as though I should believe that you can't understand this or that you are somehow skirting around the issue since you are posting publicly, then yes, you are treating me like a moron.  I believe you have enough intelligence to 'get' what I have patiently talked with you about on numerous occasions, and therefore you are continuously and simply disrespecting what I am requesting of you, and I have no use for that.

So, improv something for me, I don't care.  If you think I am harsh for not responding to your comments, I don't care.  More than anything I just find it sad on many levels, but I will get over that, too.

In other news, since you apparently most enjoy being left to yourself, I will now do so.  I hope your conversation goes nicely  -- unfortunately I just don't care for your perspective any longer, and that's sad, too, since I think that there is more to you than what you continuously aim to present.  Good luck with yourself, Opus  .

[opus10no2]

It's funny, I do respect you, and I 'get' what your'e saying, but I don't understand the uptightness.

I can think of a few reasons, but not one that can give a good reason for the tense uncomfortable atmosphere I feel you impose by your reaction to light-hearted comments.

Don't just skim the post, and don't let anything you dislike about me put you off from responding, because you annoy me too sometimes 

[jinfiesto]

Pianistic playing is controlling the piano, as opposed to the reverse. That means all of the necessary technique is there to execute the piece in question musically. That's all.

[ramseytheii]

It's funny, I do respect you, and I 'get' what your'e saying, but I don't understand the uptightness.

I can think of a few reasons, but not one that can give a good reason for the tense uncomfortable atmosphere I feel you impose by your reaction to light-hearted comments.

Don't just skim the post, and don't let anything you dislike about me put you off from responding, because you annoy me too sometimes 

It's none of my business, but I can't help but notice that if someone causes great discomfort in a person, and then blames that person for being uncomfortable, it's a sure sign of a sociopath.

Walter Ramsey

[ramseytheii]

Pianistic playing is controlling the piano, as opposed to the reverse. That means all of the necessary technique is there to execute the piece in question musically. That's all.

Well put!  I think this could also serve as a definition of virtuosity, which came up in another thread.

Walter Ramsey

[opus10no2]

It's none of my business, but I can't help but notice that if someone causes great discomfort in a person, and then blames that person for being uncomfortable, it's a sure sign of a sociopath.

Walter Ramsey

Thankyou for that, you may be partly correct, as I was diagnosed with AS 8 years ago.

Unfortunately that means I have to learn to deal with things intellectually, as opposed to the neurotypical instinctual ease.

You might also note that I didn't do that, I put forward a counter-dicsussion which in no way( I think) negated the original.

If anyone thinks I haven't put any effort into educating myself, they're wrong.

I still think it's a 2 way street.

[m1469]

hee hee ... I now am wondering if, after all is said and done, trusting one's instincts is not actually the best way afterall ?

I guess it depends, to some degree, on what exactly these instincts are and where they lead  .

mumbo jumbo abounds inside a head ...

[invictious]

Pianistic playing means thinking that you are playing a piano, and treat it like a piano.

Yes, Bartok can be played pianistically. Sadly most people out here treat it like a percussion instrument, because Bartok treated it as one. Nowadays you just hear people bashing on the piano.

I have to play the WHOLE set of Dances in Bulgarian Rhythms for my piano exam. Just learning them is painful. The time signatures throw you off guard (7/8, 5/8, thanks), and more importantly, if it sounds like you are bashing the piano, then you are.

Man...why did i choose that..