Is this book good?

[Saturn]

On this forum, I saw someone link to this online book about piano technique:

https://members.aol.com/chang8828/contents.htm

I read through some of the beginning, and a lot of the basic practice methods seem good.  Then it started using some strange terms, like "parallel sets" and "phase angles."

Any opinions on this book and the advice it offers?  Is it worth reading and learning?  How does it compare to the Fink and Sandor books on technique?

[johnreef]

You get good technique from pracicing a lot and working out the problems for yourself -- not from reading books (my opinion)...I find books about technique tend to be written from the perspective of those who are blessed with natural technique (and hence need no "secrets") rather than those of us who have to work hard to aquire it.

[Hmoll]

There are a few good take-aways from that book. I don't agree with everything he says, though.

[bernhard]

Any opinions on this book and the advice it offers?  Is it worth reading and learning?  How does it compare to the Fink and Sandor books on technique?

It is an excellent book (so are Sandor and Fink). It is not really a matter of comparison. They address different issues with different ways of organising what in the end is more or less the same knowledge. Therefore they complement each other. Chang does not discuss technique in any detail. His emphasis is on learning methods and practice routines. Fink and Sandor go deep into technique as patterns of movements. Practice methodologies are not treated in nay organised way, although Sandor has a whole (fascinating) chapter (14) devoted to it.

As you read through these books, do not get into the trap of agreeing or disagreeing with what they say on the basis of intellectual (or other) belief. Instead, try what they suggest in a systematic way. In other word, give the authors the benefit of doubt. Add what works to your current repertory of approaches to the piano, and discard what does not work. And remember that it may not have worked for you, and may still work for someone else. Also, some things may not work simply because you may not understand what to do from the book. A lot of this stuff need hands on instruction.

Johnreef:

You get good technique from practicing a lot and working out the problems for yourself -- not from reading books (my opinion)...I find books about technique tend to be written from the perspective of those who are blessed with natural technique (and hence need no "secrets") rather than those of us who have to work hard to aquire it.

Sorry, jonhreef, but I have to disagree. Practising a lot the wrong thing will not get you good technique. A book may give you ideas that lead to technical breakthroughs. Consider this. I was taught by some very famous people. All of them taught the orthodox way of fingering scales. It never occurred to me to dispute that given knowledge, and if it wasn’t for books describing alternative scale fingerings, I would probably still be playing scales and teaching them with the (very inefficient compared to the alternative) orthodox fingering. This is just one amongst a myriad of examples. Moreover, Chang is not a pianist (he is a physicist). He is not blessed with a natural technique, and his book is actually very relevant for people who do not have a natural technique. Books are great. However, you must try outwhat the book says. It is no good just reading the book. Perhaps that is what you mean. At some point you must go to the piano and implement what you read about.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[Saturn]

You get good technique from pracicing a lot and working out the problems for yourself -- not from reading books (my opinion)...I find books about technique tend to be written from the perspective of those who are blessed with natural technique (and hence need no "secrets") rather than those of us who have to work hard to aquire it.

If only that were true for me!  Unfortunately I spent years with improper technique and bad teachers, developing bad habits.  My situation is such that if I were to continue practicing without any outside assistance, I would only be reinforcing my bad habits.

Thanks for the opinions.  I'll read the book, and try out what he says, and see what works for me.

[Clare]

I've read Chang's book and found it misled me a bit for a while in that I practiced things using his systems of groups of notes in fast passages but found it led to my hand getting kind of static and stretching too far whereas one's hand should never really be too far ahead of itself. Whoops. That was a long sentence.

I haven't read any Sandor and Fink yet, but I'm meaning to.

The most useful books on technique I've used are Tone, Touch and Technique by Max Cooke. There are two books with exercises, pieces (the sort of pieces you'd actually WANT to learn) and detailed commentary. I don't know how available these books are outside Australia, though.

[johnreef]

Bernhard -- I'll concede that Chang does make some good points. However, it is my belief (feel free to disagree) that good piano technique comes from coordination, having the requisite strength in all the muscles used in piano playing, and having appropriate flexability in all the joints you use. Those will not come from reading a book.

[xvimbi]

Bernhard -- I'll concede that Chang does make some good points. However, it is my belief (feel free to disagree) that good piano technique comes from coordination, having the requisite strength in all the muscles used in piano playing, and having appropriate flexability in all the joints you use. Those will not come from reading a book.

Here is my opinion: Reading books to learn about things is good! However, one has to be intelligent about it. That means, first, approach a book with a positive attitude; like Bernhard says, there could be somthing in there that will work for you. Second, always ask "why?", "how?", and very importantly: "is this really true?". Never just believe things, no matter how famous the author is. On the other hand, don't reject things, because an author is not famous. Finally, try things for yourself. Just reading the book is not enough (to agree with johnreef).  
Now to disagree with johnreef (you said, I was allowed to Doing things without reading books is very dangerous. Reading a book is equivalent to talking to people. Somebody shows you something, explains something, gives valuable hints. Disregarding such input would be foolish and, what concerns playing the piano, loaded with the possibility to get injured, as Bernhard already pointed out.
To agree some more, flexibility is good. Coordination, I believe, is everything, but that is kind of a self-evident point. Stating it doesn't help anybody, because it doesn't tell you how to achieve it. Those books do! HOWEVER, strength, as johnreef says, has nothing to do with it! Well, a little, perhaps, because you have to hold your arms up, but that's about it. If you have the strength of a ten year old Kissin or a 75 year old Brendel, you can play anything! By the way, this is one premiss that is well laid out in Sandor's book (however, he has no clue about the physics of motions and sound production).
Just to throw in one more book into the mix. I'd suggest to check out Thomas Mark's "What every pianist needs to know about the body". It approaches piano playing from an orthopedic point of view, stressing coordination and - most of all - ballance, along the lines of the Alexander technique. Very useful. Cheers.

[Saturn]

I've read Chang's book and found it misled me a bit for a while in that I practiced things using his systems of groups of notes in fast passages but found it led to my hand getting kind of static and stretching too far whereas one's hand should never really be too far ahead of itself. Whoops. That was a long sentence.

Yeah, I could see that becoming a problem.  All of his ideas seem pretty involved in that his methods lead to goals which aren't intuitive or obvious.  At first his advice on parellel sets seemed really odd to me, since in fast passages, you don't (and can't) play that way.  Then I read on, and it said that the goal of the parellel sets is to teach relaxation, and that the ultimate goal is serial play.  I guess his theory was that going first through hand play is the fastest and easiest way to accurate and relaxed finger play.  It's unorthodox to say the least.

The most useful books on technique I've used are Tone, Touch and Technique by Max Cooke. There are two books with exercises, pieces (the sort of pieces you'd actually WANT to learn) and detailed commentary. I don't know how available these books are outside Australia, though.

I couldn't find this book at my local library or on Amazon, so it might be a bit obscure here in the US.  I'll try searching around some more.  Thanks for the recommendation.

[johnreef]

 
------->Now to disagree with johnreef (you said, I was allowed to Doing things without reading books is very dangerous. Reading a book is equivalent to talking to people.


I do not agree. A book, no matter how well put together, is never a substitue for one-on-one experience with a knowledgeable teacher.


----->To agree some more, flexibility is good. Coordination, I believe, is everything, but that is kind of a self-evident point. Stating it doesn't help anybody, because it doesn't tell you how to achieve it. Those books do! HOWEVER, strength, as johnreef says, has nothing to do with it!

Why, then, do people with insufficient technique get tired in physically taxing passages? Why, specifically, is this muscular fatigue, caused by a buildup of lactic acid? Why did my octaves triple in power, speed, and endurance when I started lifting weights? Understanding how the muscles of the upper arm work (and to go back on what I said before, this information can be found in many books about piano technique) answers these questions. The muscles get tired in bad octavie playing, I believe, since they are too weak, in many cases. Also, I firmly believe finger strength matters - more for those of us who have short stubby fingers (this should be apparant to anyone who understands the concept of a lever - essentially both fingers and keys are levers.)
I have had very little luck convincing others of my opinions and their infallibility
But, at least consider what I have to say, even though it is not universally believed. I know for a fact that in my own playing that muscle strength has had a lot to do with whatever improvement I have experienced.

[xvimbi]

 
I do not agree. A book, no matter how well put together, is never a substitue for one-on-one experience with a knowledgeable teacher.

You either misunderstood, or I didn't state clearly enough what I meant, or you didn't completely lay out your own argument. However, you do seem to be wiggling around a bit...

Initially, you said one has to work out things for oneself. This is where we disagree, because I believe this is dangerous advice. Nobody said that books would substitute for a knowledgeable teacher, but they are a fundamental source of information (and sometimes knowledge) and should not be disreagrded.

Why, then, do people with insufficient technique get tired in physically taxing passages?

Exactly as you say: because their technique is insufficient, not their strength! Technique has more to do with coordination than with strength. I would put flexibility far above strength.

Why, specifically, is this muscular fatigue, caused by a buildup of lactic acid? Why did my octaves triple in power, speed, and endurance when I started lifting weights? Understanding how the muscles of the upper arm work (and to go back on what I said before, this information can be found in many books about piano technique) answers these questions.

Most muscular problems in piano playing come from tensions. Tensions come from bad technique, i.e. a lack of understanding how the human body works and how the piano works, and - most importantly - how both of them work together, or applying this understanding correctly. It's all about effective and efficient motions and transfer of momentum.

Given proper technique, i.e no tensions, I think one has to do a lot more than play piano for a few hours to truely over-exert muscles. Everybody who can walk thousands of steps a day, ride the bike, use a computer, etc. has enough strength to play the piano. There is a big difference between fatigue that comes from tense and cramped muscles and fatigue that comes from over-using a muscle.

The muscles get tired in bad octavie playing,...

Have you ever had a technical difficulty that caused you "muscular fatigue" according to your definition, and then a teacher shows you the proper technique, and all of a sudden you could master the passage without fatigue? Probably a lot. And most likely, you didn't build up strength between before and after you learned how to play that passage. Again,"bad" and "good" playing has more to do with coordination than with strength. Look at martial arts.

Also, I firmly believe finger strength matters - more for those of us who have short stubby fingers (this should be apparant to anyone who understands the concept of a lever - essentially both fingers and keys are levers.)

Your understanding of the basic physical principles is commendable and probably better than what can be said about the majority of pianists. However, if you believe that fingers should primarily be used as levers, I dare to say, then you are misguided. Hand, forearm, upper arm and shoulder, and even the torso sometimes, have to assist in bringing the fingers down on the keys with the appropriate momentum. The fingers should do as little as possible to protect their delicate anatomy and to conserve energy and avoid muscular tension. The times where people sit stiff at the piano, and one can see only their fingers moving are over, because it leads to injury. Finger movements are of course necessary during phrasing, trills, etc., but this will not lead to muscular fatigue.
This is the eternal battle between those who believe in "finger technique" as opposed to "weight technique".

I have had very little luck convincing others of my opinions and their infallibility

Infallability! That's a good one I believe there is a reason why you haven't convinced anyone

But, at least consider what I have to say, even though it is not universally believed. I know for a fact that in my own playing that muscle strength has had a lot to do with whatever improvement I have experienced.

Oh, I do consider what you're saying (otherwise, I wouldn't write this response). My own experience is exactly opposite. Focusing on strength and disregarding the proper use of the human anatomy has caused me a lot of problems (in all areas of life). If I could do it over again, I would focus entirely on coordination and zero on strength. Strength will automatically build up. One cannot avoid it. Perhaps this is why people believe strength is important while they don't realize that it is really their technique that has improved. I believe that strength can mask bad technique and give a false sense of improvement; it only means that one can take more abuse. Many piano teachers would even argue that one should not do strength training as it diminishes the ability to play delicately and control dynamics. However, I believe this is just as misguided as focusing on strength.

[bernhard]

That was beautifully put, xvimbi.

I would just add that I did once come accross a student who actually needed strength. He was a very shy teenager, very thin and who did no physical exercise at all. As I shook his hand, his hand was like a piece of cloth. So in such a rare case, a build up of strength is necessary, and this is the bit I would like to add: Strength should not be acquired through piano practice. In this particular case I told the parents to get him a bicycle and make him ride it often (cycling develops amazing strength in the hands). After a couple of months he was all right.

I totally agree with xvimbi: most normal people doing normal activities should have more than enough strength to play the piano.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[xvimbi]

I use the results I get to determine if I am working out my problems effectively.

I hope you are right. Otherwise, tendonitis will tell.

A proper technique does not imply no tensions. With no muscular tension in the wrist, you  would not be able to play even the simplest series of notes with your fingers. --See Otto Ortmann (and Sir Isaac Newton).

Let's define the term tension in this context: There is normal muscular tension (the one that holds your head and your torso up all day long) and there is abnormal muscular tension, the one that feels crampy and the one we are concerned with here. Normal tension does not lead to fatigue. By the way, the wrist cannot have tension, because it is a joint. Normal tension goes away immediately after ending the activity. Abnormal tension is more persistent (i.e. cramp-like, static) and can still be felt afterwards, and even before you started the activity. Just check yourself out. However, detecting tension is very difficult if you don't know what to look for. Try to lie down and relax completely. If you have not done this ever or haven't practized it for a long time, you'd be amazed how much tension there is still left in a body. That's bad!

Regarding the term "proper technique": To me, it means - in a nutshell - getting the appropriate sound without harming the body (not the pianist's nor the listener's This includes "no tension", as tension is harmful and, over time, leads to many ailments that pianists are plagued with. Period.

Yes, and I believe that muscles are more likely to be overly tense if they are not strong. If you are strong enough such that your muscles need not work at full capacity, they will not be tense.

Now, that IMO is incorrect, at least what concerns piano playing. During piano playing, muscles do not need to work at full capacity. Any healthy person has more than enough strength for that. I cannot see anywhere in the repertoire where any muscle would have to work at full capacity. Not even during practicing, unless it includes pushing the piano around. If you find any of your muscles working at full capacity, your technique is flawed, and you need to stop immediately! I can see that strength training would give the illusion of improvement in this case, but it is merely masking bad technique.

To borrow from the literature:
"1. Some people are more physically strong and can play for longer hours even with a tense technique, without incurring injury. These people are very fortunate, but it cannot be predicted who the genetically advantaged people are.
2. The person's technique is an important factor. Excessive incoordinated muscular activity in the technique will interfere with good execution. Joints that are overstabilized by excessive muscular tone will require more force to move them, and the joint will be less responsive. All other things being equal, the person with effortless coordinated technique will always be further away from the threshold of overuse injury.
(Dr. Hunter Fry, Australia, https://www.pianomap.com/links.html )

And some more:

Every pianist should examine an illustration of the muscles and tendons of the arm and hand. A picture gives a vivid sense of the length of the tendons and their vulnerability to various kinds of mis-use. Looking at an illustration makes clear why awkward positions, excessive force, co-contraction, and static muscular tension (the four principal causes of injury described in "Pianist's Injuries") will put extra stress on the tendons. Pianists and teachers with this knowledge will be better able to prevent or recover from injury, and better able to help their students. (Good illustrations can be found in Netter, Atlas of Human Anatomy, or in Gray's Anatomy which is available online.)
(https://www.pianomap.com/tendonitis.html)

Moreover, I believe that strong muscles are easier to coordinate.

I give you that

---->This is the eternal battle between those who believe in "finger technique" as opposed to "weight technique".

Right --- can't we have both working concurrently?

Sure, as long as you don't have any tensions!

[johnreef]

---->I hope you are right. Otherwise, tendonitis will tell.


Let's hope not  


---->Let's define the term tension in this context: There is normal muscular tension (the one that holds your head and your torso up all day long) and there is abnormal muscular tension, the one that feels crampy and the one we are concerned with here. Normal tension does not lead to fatigue. By the way, the wrist cannot have tension, because it is a joint.


To be exact -- there must be some simultaneous contraction of antagonistic muscles that control the wrist such that a certain degree of fixation results. Otherwise any force applied to the keys by the fingers would push back against your wrist and minimize any sort of efficiency.

Granted, I agree that excessive muscular tension is bad. But it seems to me people come up with all these silly ideas about relaxation to eliminate these tensions when doing a few excercises will help them more.


---->Normal tension goes away immediately after ending the activity. Abnormal tension is more persistent (i.e. cramp-like, static) and can still be felt afterwards, and even before you started the activity. Just check yourself out. However, detecting tension is very difficult if you don't know what to look for. Try to lie down and relax completely. If you have not done this ever or haven't practized it for a long time, you'd be amazed how much tension there is still left in a body. That's bad!

Right, but when we wake up after a night's sleep, are muscles are in a much more relaxed state than other times, and at least, for me, that is the worst time to play the piano (until I am sufficiently "warmed up")


---->Regarding the term "proper technique": To me, it means - in a nutshell - getting the appropriate sound without harming the body (not the pianist's nor the listener's This includes "no tension", as tension is harmful and, over time, leads to many ailments that pianists are plagued with. Period.

When I watch clips of the great pianists play, I can see the necessary tensions in their bodies -- they are not completely relaxed at all. Watch Horowitz play the D# minor Scriabin etude -- I doubt ANYONE could do this without muscular tension.

---->Now, that IMO is incorrect, at least what concerns piano playing. During piano playing, muscles do not need to work at full capacity. Any healthy person has more than enough strength for that. I cannot see anywhere in the repertoire where any muscle would have to work at full capacity. Not even during practicing, unless it includes pushing the piano around. If you find any of your muscles working at full capacity, your technique is flawed, and you need to stop immediately! I can see that strength training would give the illusion of improvement in this case, but it is merely masking bad technique.

You never get tired when you play?


---->Every pianist should examine an illustration of the muscles and tendons of the arm and hand. A picture gives a vivid sense of the length of the tendons and their vulnerability to various kinds of mis-use. Looking at an illustration makes clear why awkward positions, excessive force, co-contraction, and static muscular tension (the four principal causes of injury described in "Pianist's Injuries") will put extra stress on the tendons. Pianists and teachers with this knowledge will be better able to prevent or recover from injury, and better able to help their students. (Good illustrations can be found in Netter, Atlas of Human Anatomy, or in Gray's Anatomy which is available online.)
(https://www.pianomap.com/tendonitis.html)

I've read quite a bit about this.

[xvimbi]

Granted, I agree that excessive muscular tension is bad. But it seems to me people come up with all these silly ideas about relaxation to eliminate these tensions when doing a few excercises will help them more.

Since we are getting mixed up with the terms again, I will use "unnecessary tension" from now on to distinguish the tension that is necessary (and sufficient) to produce a certain sound from the tension that stems from cramped, unnatural postures.

Right, but when we wake up after a night's sleep, are muscles are in a much more relaxed state than other times, and at least, for me, that is the worst time to play the piano (until I am sufficiently "warmed up")

Warming up should release tension, not introduce tension

When I watch clips of the great pianists play, I can see the necessary tensions in their bodies -- they are not completely relaxed at all. Watch Horowitz play the D# minor Scriabin etude -- I doubt ANYONE could do this without muscular tension.

It is not the occasional tension that causes muscle fatigue and potential injury, but the sustained, repeated, static tension.

---->Now, that IMO is incorrect, at least what concerns piano playing. During piano playing, muscles do not need to work at full capacity. Any healthy person has more than enough strength for that. I cannot see anywhere in the repertoire where any muscle would have to work at full capacity. Not even during practicing, unless it includes pushing the piano around. If you find any of your muscles working at full capacity, your technique is flawed, and you need to stop immediately! I can see that strength training would give the illusion of improvement in this case, but it is merely masking bad technique.

You never get tired when you play?

I get tired from the cardio-vascular activity, but I have never had sore muscles. I have had aches in my joints and carpal tunnel syndrome, which both come from flawed technique, but never a cramp.

---->Every pianist should examine an illustration of the muscles and tendons of the arm and hand. A picture gives a vivid sense of the length of the tendons and their vulnerability to various kinds of mis-use. Looking at an illustration makes clear why awkward positions, excessive force, co-contraction, and static muscular tension (the four principal causes of injury described in "Pianist's Injuries") will put extra stress on the tendons. Pianists and teachers with this knowledge will be better able to prevent or recover from injury, and better able to help their students. (Good illustrations can be found in Netter, Atlas of Human Anatomy, or in Gray's Anatomy which is available online.)
(https://www.pianomap.com/tendonitis.html)
 
I've read quite a bit about this.

Good! Now, you just have to understand it  

[johnreef]

Since we are getting mixed up with the terms again, I will use "unnecessary tension" from now on to distinguish the tension that is necessary (and sufficient) to produce a certain sound from the tension that stems from cramped, unnatural postures.

Warming up should release tension, not introduce tension

It is not the occasional tension that causes muscle fatigue and potential injury, but the sustained, repeated, static tension.

I get tired from the cardio-vascular activity, but I have never had sore muscles. I have had aches in my joints and carpal tunnel syndrome, which both come from flawed technique, but never a cramp.

Good! Now, you just have to understand it  

Dude, I understand it. I think strength matters in piano playing, you don't. You do realize we're not going to change each other's minds, right?

[bernhard]

Dude, I understand it. I think strength matters in piano playing, you don't. You do realize we're not going to change each other's minds, right?

Still that was a very interesting and enlightening discussion. Do keep at it.

[xvimbi]

Still that was a very interesting and enlightening discussion. Do keep at it.

Don't worry, we seem to be going at it still in the "Octave tremolo" thread in the same forum. Bernhard, you are my kind of guy. Enlightening discussions is what it's all about. And delighting discussions as well, I may add. Servus! (that was just a guess; perhaps, it must be pfiaddi or Moin Moin)

Dude, I understand it. I think strength matters in piano playing, you don't. You do realize we're not going to change each other's minds, right?

Probably not. But I may be able to save a couple of souls who are listening in to this discussion. Consider this: I am much stronger than my girlfriend, yet she plays a hundred times better, because her technique is better. Since you lift weights, you are most likely a lot stronger than such eminent pianists as Alfred Brendel and Martha Argerich, yet... Since you are lifting weights, I gotta be a bit more polite...  

[johnreef]

Don't worry, we seem to be going at it still in the "Octave tremolo" thread in the same forum. Bernhard, you are my kind of guy. Enlightening discussions is what it's all about. And delighting discussions as well, I may add. Servus! (that was just a guess; perhaps, it must be pfiaddi or Moin Moin)

Probably not. But I may be able to save a couple of souls who are listening in to this discussion. Consider this: I am much stronger than my girlfriend, yet she plays a hundred times better, because her technique is better. Since you lift weights, you are most likely a lot stronger than such eminent pianists as Alfred Brendel and Martha Argerich, yet... Since you are lifting weights, I gotta be a bit more polite...  

I suspect Mr. Brendel and Ms. Argerich, et al., are more naturally physically equipped for playing the piano, and therefore have had no real need for strengh-building as such. As for myself, I was not blessed with any "natural technique" and my hands are not naturally flexable at all; I have a fair amount of strength, however, which I believe has helped me overcome these obstacles to a great degree. Don't forget about Arturo Benedetti Michelangel, who orginized arm-wrestling competitions among his students, and reportedly always won.