Indeed!
Since Bernhard does not seem to be in rush to chime in and "debunk me", I'd say, from this standpoint the answer to the question about "whether to do excercises and etudes or not" would be pretty easy--if you have the question itself the first place, then there is a good chance that you'd better play those.
Someone might object: "But Richter or Rubinstein did not do it and still were Greatest Pianists"!!!
On that I would say: "Well, they did not raise that question, to start with"
Best, M
Well, yes, those people did not raise the question to start with, that is very true. From my perspective, it just seems that there is more than what a person is playing, it is more
how. And, I realize that has been said before, and by you. My own experience is that I didn't just magically learn some of the basic mechanics that have made a huge difference for me from just sitting down and doing exercises (and I didn't learn it from just sitting down and playing repertoire, either). I mean, I did learn from them, but as far as I knew, it was similar to just playing a piece of music in the respect that I was not aware enough to know what I supposed to be learning from them nor getting out of them, and I did not know how to apply them to my repertoire -- and in my repertoire, I didn't really know what I was supposed to be truly aiming for either.
What I find interesting about your thoughts, Marik, is that you do present clear ideas on how to use them for more than just moving one's fingers around. You present that there is a need for repetitive and simple patterns so that an individual can concentrate on other matters than the sheer physical feat. But, without a knowledge beyond thinking of a set of exercises as a set of exercises, without a knowledge on what a person is supposed to be gaining from the experience, it seems to me a waste of time.
On the grounds though that somebody should only play what they love, as Bernhard suggests, that does not handle the idea that some people actually love playing exercises. As an interesting side note, I have recently started including more exercises in what I play for my students whom need to pick out a new piece, I just don't tell them it's an exercise and instead I tell them (the little ones) that this is a magic piece where they get to make their own title for it
. When I play for them a few selections of pieces and they choose an exercise because they like it, well, there's something to think about.
In any respect, I suppose I would personally rather see the principles behind what both of you are suggesting. It should be something we love because time is precious. Agreed. It should be some pattern that allows a person to concentrate on particular aspects of playing without too many written things to be thinking about. Agreed. It should be musical. Agreed.
From my perspective, I would like to be a master. Are exercises really the key ? Is repertoire, for that matter, really the key ? There is just something more than that, it seems. There have been plenty of people whom have dutifully played their exercises and have not become masters, and even more disturbing, they have become injured because important information about *how* to play was missing for them and/or they were actually told to play a certain way that has caused injury. For that matter, there are plenty of people whom have played only repertoire, and they have not become masters, either. I am not against exercises nor am I arguing for them. I just don't see any particular thing that is more magical than another about playing pieces vs. exercises, and eventually, I think people and their technique and musicality will hopefully transcend all of that anyway, even they will seemingly transcend the instrument itself.
Topic: daily technique practice