Chang and "Thrust"

[moscheles001]

I'm unclear about what Chang means by "thrust"; I understand the motion itself, but I don't understand how it would be of value. He mentions it as a superior way to play a large chord, rather than using the gravity-drop. Can anyone explain why it would be better?

Thanks.

[shingo]

Maybe it is more stable, using the lower back and shoulders etc. i havn't read to this point though I don't think, or at least didn't think much of it if I did.

Others will probably give better advice.

[faulty_damper]

I'm unclear about what Chang means by "thrust"; I understand the motion itself, but I don't understand how it would be of value. He mentions it as a superior way to play a large chord, rather than using the gravity-drop. Can anyone explain why it would be better?

Thanks.

I would explain it but I won't.  It's useless for you to understand the concept declaratively/intellectually.

Try it.

[db05]

I would explain it but I won't.  It's useless for you to understand the concept declaratively/intellectually.

Try it.

Surely you can give an good example where to try it, though?

[faulty_damper]

Chang already give examples.

For one reason or another, most people are satisfied with the intellectual/declarative reason than the functional one.

Do you want to talk about piano-playing or actually be able to do it?  Too many of the prior gather here.  Too many pour out bad advice from their own feeble intellectual existence which is distantly connected with piano-playing.

You shouldn't wait for an intellectual reason why one thing works over another.  The fastest way is to simply try it and you'll usually immediately experience why.

[db05]

Chang already give examples.

Okay! Will check it out.

[moscheles001]

Faulty, why are you so rude in your responses? I'm not waiting for an intellectual response? I'm just trying to have a conversation. Is that so hard for you to understand?

[faulty_damper]

Answer this question: Did you try it?  If yes, then tell us the answer to your question.  If not, I guess we are having a conversation about human behavior, both yours and mine.

How can someone say they understand something and then contradict themselves by saying it doesn't seem to be of any value?  Understanding requires application, not thinking.  (Thinking is thinking.)  Application is inherently valuable.  It is the application of a known constant to get desired outcomes.

In this instance it is the use of "thrust" to get the desired outcome.  There is only one way to realize the outcome.

[moscheles001]

Yes, I did try it, but lacking experience and a teacher to whom I could turn, I thought I would ask others on this forum who have more experience than I. It isn’t easy to learn technique from a book, and Chang isn’t necessarily clear on “thrust.” I thought that was what this forum is for.

Your response to my question isn’t the only example of your attitude. When Kayordee posted a question about the problem he was having with speed, your response was “I have no problem with speed.” First of all, kayordee didn’t ask if you had trouble with speed; HE has trouble with speed, and is asking for help. The “help” you offered was he should google “speed walls.” If the answer is google, then what use is this forum? If any of us has a question or problem, we shouldn’t bother asking for help here, we should just stop wasting your time and go to Google instead?

I taught remedial writing for fifteen years, and one of the first things I learned was that when someone asks you for help, you check your ego at the door. Maybe, when you grow up, you’ll also learn that.

[db05]

Your response to my question isn’t the only example of your attitude. When Kayordee posted a question about the problem he was having with speed, your response was “I have no problem with speed.” First of all, kayordee didn’t ask if you had trouble with speed; HE has trouble with speed, and is asking for help. The “help” you offered was he should google “speed walls.” If the answer is google, then what use is this forum? If any of us has a question or problem, we shouldn’t bother asking for help here, we should just stop wasting your time and go to Google instead?

Er... I saw that thread, too. Er... I wanted to say something, but I'm in a hurry. Please check your facts, and do not argue with Sir faulty too soon.

[moscheles001]

What facts do I need to check? I'm sorry, but it just really bothers me when someone demeans a person who has asked for help. Either help them or don't post a reply.

[ridr27]

moscheles001
   

What facts do I need to check? I'm sorry, but it just really bothers me when someone demeans a person who has asked for help. Either help them or don't post a reply.

Please do not let this guy upset you.  it is doubtless his fun for this person.  On these boards (and most boards)  there is one or more who get their kicks being arrogant or whatever.  He does this a lot. You are right.  Why post just to put someone down?  He will not change.  Ignore him/her.  Then it will be no longer fun for him/her.   
Cheers
Rider 27

[faulty_damper]

Yes, I did try it, but lacking experience and a teacher to whom I could turn, I thought I would ask others on this forum who have more experience than I. It isn’t easy to learn technique from a book, and Chang isn’t necessarily clear on “thrust.” I thought that was what this forum is for.

Re-read what you wrote.  Was the idea you had in mind correctly communicated in the topic post?  If it was then you would not have to clarify/change the direction.

Trying doesn't mean doing something a couple of times to see if you like it or not.  This is not the point.  In this case, you should be learning to apply something that is new onto that which is already familiar.

[db05]

mosh, rider,

Sir faulty might be mean sometimes, but he does give good advice when you ask nicely, and the question has to be specific.

kayordee's thread title did say "Does anyone have trouble with speed?" so maybe he just responded to that. But he did clarify a few questions later.
He meant to search the forum, not Google.