An Experiment in Tone

[goldentone]

I remember when I saw Jorge Bolet perform for the first time on video I was surprised the way his fingers worked.  An unorthodox kind of style.  Very interesting in light of his distinct, gorgeous tone.

A few months ago while I was playing I started to try to strike the keys the way he did, and I couldn't believe what happened.  My tone sounded like his!   I simply imitated the physiology of his fingers as I remembered.  I ought to record a passage imitating him and see how close it sounds to his and post it sometime.

[pianowolfi]

I remember when I saw Jorge Bolet perform for the first time on video I was surprised the way his fingers worked.  An unorthodox kind of style.  Very interesting in light of his distinct, gorgeous tone.

A few months ago while I was playing I started to try to strike the keys the way he did, and I couldn't believe what happened.  My tone sounded like his!   I simply imitated the physiology of his fingers as I remembered.  I ought to record a passage imitating him and see how close it sounds to his and post it sometime.

Oh yeah please post. That makes me curious.

[invictious]

Hmm, that is interesting. Scientifically speaking, the only control we have over the tone is the velocity at which the hammers strike the strings. Just the different combinations of velocities already can produce a whole wide ranging of tone.

How you said the method of striking the keys, in the manner you described, probably means a different velocity of the hammer striking the strings, so you get that 'distinct, gorgeous tone'

[counterpoint]

Hmm, that is interesting. Scientifically speaking, the only control we have over the tone is the velocity at which the hammers strike the strings. Just the different combinations of velocities already can produce a whole wide ranging of tone.

Scientifically speaking 

Okay, besides the volume of the tone, there are other things like pedal, timing, tempo modification, articulation (how long or short the note is played). All this contributes to the "sound quality". I'm sure, goldentone not only remembers the exact movement of Bolets fingers, hands and arms, but also the fine grades of pedal, rubato etc. So it's not only a special movement, but all aspects of the playing of a phrase that leads to the "special tone".

[houseofblackleaves]

I have never heard any pianist who can successfully recreate the tone or interpretation of any piece played by Argerich.  IMO, the most unique tone.

And as far as more modern "tone" goes, I'd have to say that the most intriguing usage of the tone of a Yamaha would have to be by Claire Huangci, specifically in her performances of Feux Follets & the Prokofiev Toccata.  The way she puts tension on the strings using the pedal is just remarkable.

/relatively off subject

Bolet's playing always seemed to sound "modest" to me.  I'm not sure why.

[goldentone]

Oh yeah please post. That makes me curious.

Ok, but it may be a little while.   

Scientifically speaking

I'm sure, goldentone not only remembers the exact movement of Bolets fingers, hands and arms, but also the fine grades of pedal, rubato etc. So it's not only a special movement, but all aspects of the playing of a phrase that leads to the "special tone".

Actually, my imitation was solely with my recollection of how he used his fingers.  But it would be interesting to see how it sounds if I try to incorporate his entire physiology.

[m]

I remember when I saw Jorge Bolet perform for the first time on video I was surprised the way his fingers worked.  An unorthodox kind of style.  Very interesting in light of his distinct, gorgeous tone.

A few months ago while I was playing I started to try to strike the keys the way he did, and I couldn't believe what happened.  My tone sounded like his!   I simply imitated the physiology of his fingers as I remembered.  I ought to record a passage imitating him and see how close it sounds to his and post it sometime.

Two things.
First, I am much less interested in Bolet's tone, but rather what he does with it, i.e. his actual interpretations and how he uses his tone for creating musical images.

Second, if I wanted to hear Bolet's tone I'd rather reach for his recording rather than for its clone.

I'd highly suggest you to find your own one... at least it will be unique and willl express what YOU want to say with your music. Why to step into somebody else's poop?

[leonidas]

Marik, actually for practical reasons, I'd be more interested in his tone than his interpretations.

Though of course they are intrinsically connected, the tone is a means, and the interpretation is the end.

We cannot in all sincerity 'borrow' someone's end, we must have our own, as you rightly say, but we can observe his tonal pallete, and paint our own images with his colours.

I do find it interesting though, for someone who can imitate a pianist's 'sound' and interpretive tendencies so accurately and convincingly, and apply it to pieces that pianist didnt play or record.

[iumonito]

I am a big Bolet fan and studied several years with one of his favorite students.

I am curious, golden, what is it that you are adopting.  Flatter fingers?  Most of the piano technique is invisible, anyway.

And Inv, we have been down this path before.  The infinite variety on piano tone, that is consistent across dynamic ranges is a simple and irrefutable empirical evidence that there is more to piano tone than key speed.

A little tension here, a fatter finger there, some mass, slower keystroke, a better angle of attack, a fulcrum, you name it.  If you can dream it, chances are your subconcious and your technique will find a way to create the sound you will with your soul.

[leonidas]

  The infinite variety on piano tone, that is consistent across dynamic ranges is a simple and irrefutable empirical evidence that there is more to piano tone than key speed.

I don't think so, the things you listed are physical ways of producing different sequences of key speed relations.

Changing the way the fingers move to change the sound does not effect their purpose - to produce different varieties of velocity strikes.

It's hard to explain, and it's equally hard to imagine how the same motions would work for differently shaped hands.

[ramseytheii]

I'd highly suggest you to find your own one... at least it will be unique and willl express what YOU want to say with your music. Why to step into somebody else's poop?

A surprising answer in many respects!  First of all your general comparison of Bolet's tone to dung?   Secondly, surely the path towards finding a personal sound will at some point involve imitating another person's, or at least imagining that you are imitating that person's.

In my experience, often someone who believes they are imitating another pianist is actually just focussing on certain issues that they take a dim view of normally.  Someone may not automatically voice a complicated texture in a thoughtful way, and not know exactly what is wrong; but they hear an idiosyncratic performance, imagine they are imitating it, but really just applying a little balance where before there was none.  Or, they may hear a performance that sounds at top speed, and they think they are imitating it, but they are really playing the piece much faster than they heard it, and imagining it is the right tempo (because they don't understand all the factors that contribute to speed).

Listening and trying to mimic in my opinion is a very valuable exercise.  I've known many students who can play relatively advanced pieces, but are not aware enough to be able to point out the mistakes they make.  They know dimly something is wrong, but can't identify.  Trying to imitate the sound of a performance that does it right often leads to more awareness and knowledge.

Walter Ramsey

[goldentone]

Two things.
First, I am much less interested in Bolet's tone, but rather what he does with it, i.e. his actual interpretations and how he uses his tone for creating musical images.

Second, if I wanted to hear Bolet's tone I'd rather reach for his recording rather than for its clone.

I'd highly suggest you to find your own one... at least it will be unique and willl express what YOU want to say with your music. Why to step into somebody else's poop?

Marik, you missed the point. 

The fact that I was able to replicate Bolet's tone, I think to a great extent, is full of valuable things and possibilities (e.g. Walter).  You assumed a lot.  I'm not trying to become a clone of Bolet but just sharing the enthusiasm of what happened.

[lostinidlewonder]

I thought I'd mention that Shostakovich Preludes and Fugues are great to test how well you can control phrases and tone on the piano. Currently one of my students are studying them and although he has great technique controlling these notes musically is a totally different matter.

Some peices you find the variation in the control of tone might be quite miniscule, differences are difficult to tell, but with pieces like the Shosty everything is lay bare, if you don't do a perfect job it sounds wrong, where other music you can get away with things and its hard to tell. Liszt's Nuages Gris is another good random example of a peice which needs master control to express the musical content, but has very easy notes most beginners could learn it.

[m]

A surprising answer in many respects!  First of all your general comparison of Bolet's tone to dung?   Secondly, surely the path towards finding a personal sound will at some point involve imitating another person's, or at least imagining that you are imitating that person's.

Well, I like surprises and sometimes even surprise myself  .

First, hopefully nobody would read into my message as if I compared Bolet's tone to a poop  . It was rather general metaphoric way of saying (paraphrasing Horowitz) "It is better to make your own mistakes, rather than copying others".

I would never compare his tone to dung, although Bolet is not my absolutely favorite pianist ever, but I deeply respect him and when at his best, I like his playing a lot. But that's not the point here.

In fact, I completely agree with the statement about imitating another person. I myself did it many times and it taught me understanding music, piano, and technique in the most helpful way.
The difference is that "another person" for some misterious reason has always played "wrong" instrument.

It was my favorite cello, which I still adore to imitate on piano, for its incredible depth of sound and emotions.
It was real passion of my life--singing, which taught me how to phrase and shape music, use breathing and... just to sing or pronounce music.
It was opera, which taught me about theatrical context of music.
It was orchestra, which taught me about possibilities of alternating Tutti and different groups of instruments.
It was conductors, which taught me about how to breath with hands and put phrases into pianistical motions.
It was violin, clarinet, tuba, and hundreds other instruments which taught me about piano more than any pianist could possibly do.

For some reason I just never felt interest in imitating sound of other pianists, but maybe that's just me...

[iumonito]

Hi Marik,

I agree with you re Gilels, whom I understand comes froma  rich tradition that also includes Anton Rubinstein, Lhevine and Safranitsky. 

I wonder whether this thread may be a good place where to get started the masterclass we were talking about.  Could we persuade you to give us a virtual lesson on Liebestraum 3?  Fertile ground to discuss tone.

I believe there is much more to tone production that mere key velocity.  I say let's explore this question for real so that those in the "concrete" side of things can learn something about a beautiful tone once and for all.  Who knows, maybe I will also learn something (if I pay attention, right?)

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php/topic,26283.0.html

[m]

I wonder whether this thread may be a good place where to get started the masterclass we were talking about.  Could we persuade you to give us a virtual lesson on Liebestraum 3?  Fertile ground to discuss tone.

I feel I have already hijacked this thread way too far. Just out of respect to original poster I think it would be fair just to stay on topic.

[iumonito]

OK. 

Let's have it in the linked thread at the audition roomm, then.  Goldentone, no hijacking intended.     And anyone interested, the link is here already.   

[thalberg]

Marik, you missed the point. 

The fact that I was able to replicate Bolet's tone, I think to a great extent, is full of valuable things and possibilities (e.g. Walter).  You assumed a lot.  I'm not trying to become a clone of Bolet but just sharing the enthusiasm of what happened.

For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism. 

[counterpoint]

For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism. 

Only he, who does completely nothing - does it completely right 

[goldentone]

I am a big Bolet fan and studied several years with one of his favorite students.

I am curious, golden, what is it that you are adopting. Flatter fingers? Most of the piano technique is invisible, anyway.

Yes, it's the flat fingers.  I was working at it tonight some and it seems also important to strike the keys from underneath where the nail begins, farther back than I usually strike the keys and is comfortable for me.  And different muscles come into play, muscles that are underdeveloped in me.

[thalberg]

Only he, who does completely nothing - does it completely right 

 

[iumonito]

Yes, it's the flat fingers.  I was working at it tonight some and it seems also important to strike the keys from underneath where the nail begins, farther back than I usually strike the keys and is comfortable for me.  And different muscles come into play, muscles that are underdeveloped in me.

Well, watch out.  Tha's what I meant when I said most of technique is invisible anyway.  You shouldn't be using small muscles to do the work of larger ones, or slow muscles to do the work of faster ones, nor should you be using various muscles against each other.

If it hurts, stop and think.

Good luck and enjoy your new palette!

[m]

You shouldn't be using small muscles to do the work of larger ones, or slow muscles to do the work of faster ones, nor should you be using various muscles against each other.

To be honest, I have no idea where my small muscles and where large ones located. Likewise, I don't know anything about my slow and fast muscles.

What I know is that my hands do the kind of sound my ears ask for.

The sound and ultimately technique is all about relationship of whole your body with key bottom--aka touch, that ultimate sensitivity, which impossible to see with a naked eye.

Many people feel quite confident critisizing, let's say, Gould or Horowitz. All they see is some superficial things like way of sitting, or holding their fingers, etc.  .
The only thing they fail to see is that absolutely perfect mechanism, where the keys are a continuation of the whole body and fingers in fact, get not even into the key bed, but penetrate straight into the string, resulting in that unique sound each of them had, which was just a mirror of their very soul.

[leonidas]

Well Gould and Horowitz had completely different sounds, and I think any criticism of their technical means must take into consideration how accurately their inner sound was realised...and noone can know on this level.

[m]

Well Gould and Horowitz had completely different sounds, and I think any criticism of their technical means must take into consideration how accurately their inner sound was realised...and noone can know on this level.

It seems you are trying to argue here, I just don't understand what.

First, let me assure you I am perfectly aware of the fact that obviously, Gould and Horowitz had completely different sounds... it is as obvious as they had different souls. What's the point here?

Second, if you read my message carefully enough, you'd pay attention I was referring only to a certain aspect of criticism of some people when they'd critisize only superficial things such as way of sitting, or holding fingers, etc. That was in response and to support Iomunito's passage:

most of technique is invisible anyway.

And after that I mentioned some of the things which are invisible.

In this respect I just don't see what is the point of your passage about how accurately their (Horowitz and Gould) inner sound was realised. To me it seems completely out of line and is a topic for completely different discussion.

It seems that you want to say at least something, but unsure yourself as for what it is.

[leonidas]

No, I was just carrying on from your post.

Viewing technique as a means, without explicitly knowing their intended end, we can only suppose that their technique allowed them to do whatever they desired, and if this is so, their techniques were as 'perfect' as can be.

Again, how can someone criticise a pianist's 'technique' when the sounds produced accurately reflect their inner ear's intent.

And to criticise the actual intent would be entirely subjective.

I suppose the only absolute and objective criteria upon which a technique can be compared would be velocity.

[m]

Dear Leonidas,

May I suggest, this thread is about TONE and about TECHNIQUE AS MEANS OF TONE PRODUCING. This has nothing to do with your rantings about absolute and objective criteria of technique.

Out of respect to original poster, please stay on topic, if you can.

If you feel that burning desire to discuss your ravings about technique and velocity again, please open another thread and I am sure, the more ridiculous your ideas are, the more interest it will generate.

Thank you so much, M

[schubertiad]

Through the wonders of the internet I have discovered some weird and wonderful fetishes, but your  relentless obsession with people playing the piano as quickly as they can still strikes me as totally bizarre. Did your mother used to rock you extra quickly as a baby or something? 

[leonidas]

Out of respect to original poster, please stay on topic, if you can.

Call me naive, but I didn't think humans could be that stupid

Through the wonders of the internet I have discovered some weird and wonderful fetishes, but your  relentless obsession with people playing the piano as quickly as they can still strikes me as totally bizarre. Did your mother used to rock you extra quickly as a baby or something? 

I'd suggest you take some maturity pills.

[m]

Through the wonders of the internet I have discovered some weird and wonderful fetishes, but your  relentless obsession with people playing the piano as quickly as they can still strikes me as totally bizarre. Did your mother used to rock you extra quickly as a baby or something? 

Schubertiad,

The answer to your question is very easy--this person is just sick, very very sick.

Not once he was advised to change medication or find a better doctor, alas, nothing seems to help.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome

[leonidas]

Schubertiad,

The answer to your question is very easy--this person is just sick, very very sick.

Not once he was advised to change medication or find a better doctor, alas, nothing seems to help.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome

I am down with the sickness.