What is proper posture?

[Saturn]

I saw xvimbi say this in another thread:

By the way, the "back against the wall type posture" is NOT the correct posture and will lead to permanent muscular tension, particularly when combined with the "chest out" type posture!

I went to see a teacher who specializes in "injury-preventive piano technique" and he stressed the "back against the wall" type posture.  So if this is not correct posture, what is?

- Saturn

[donjuan]

I dont know, im still too young to even have the slightest idea.  We may need Bernhard on this one...

[Tash]

yeah i was wondering this sort of thing. my back is pretty straight when i play, even if leaning towards the notes, though i sit slightly back from the piano as well. i think it looks nicer and also i don't think slouching is all that great- i was at a piano recital last night and the pianist's shoulders were rolled forwards and his head sticking forward and i can't help but think that if you sit like that for hours on end you're going to become a hunchback eventually and i personally don't want that. other than that i don't really know what the 'proper posture' is...

[faulty_damper]

I have no idea what "proper posture" is but I would like to refer to Glenn Gould's posture as NOT being "proper posture".  But it's so comfortable that I'm crossing my left leg over my right and somewhat hunched over when I play.  Heck, I'm in that posture right now as I'm typing on the keyboard!  But it's quite comfortable.

My teacher says to rotate the hips forward slightly with the back straight.  This puts more force to your arms when you play so you can use your body more.  I can't say that I'm more comfortable in this position and I can't see the keyboard as easily as back against the wall.

[xvimbi]

I saw xvimbi say this in another thread:


I went to see a teacher who specializes in "injury-preventive piano technique" and he stressed the "back against the wall" type posture.  So if this is not correct posture, what is?

- Saturn

The basic idea is to have the bones do as much of the work as possible and the muscles as little as possible. For the upper body, this means the spine should be vertical (it's naturally curved, so of course it won't be perfectly straight), and the head should be aligned with the spine so that its weight is carried by the spine without the help of muscles in the neck and back. The spine, in turn, should also be aligned with the "sitting" bones, so that it doesn't have to be supported by muscles in the lower back. The shoulders are low and also aligned with the spine (not in front of nor behind the spine). This is the balanced posture. As a result, the back will be fairly straight with some curvature in the lower back region. This posture needs to be distinguished from the "back against the wall" posture that was usually taught by the military or moms in the 60's. "Chest out" was part of this particular type of posture. It was extremely upright and also included breathing in the chest region rather than where the diaphragm is (near the stomach region). This posture is not in balance, so it requires the action of muscles in the back to keep it stable. It is important to note that in the balanced position, there is no weight on the feet. The weight is entirely directed at the sitting area, i.e. the bench. The legs and feet need to provide stability for forward, backwards and lateral movements, but they are otherwise completely free, which is what's necessary for pedaling.
It could well be that your teacher was really teaching you the balanced posture, but called it "back against the wall", because, as I said, the back is fairly straight. So it might simply be semantic issue.

[Saturn]

It could well be that your teacher was really teaching you the balanced posture, but called it "back against the wall", because, as I said, the back is fairly straight. So it might simply be semantic issue.

Thanks for clarifying this!  I just wanted to make sure I wasn't being taught improper posture.  You're right, it does seem like a semantic issue.  Because he mentioned that the spine should be as straight and as vertical as possible, but that it will of course retain its natural curves.

One thing he mentioned is that I have high shoulders, which is usually a bad thing, but he also said that it's possible that I just have a naturally high shoulder position.  I'm not sure which is the case, but I can't seem to figure out how to lower my shoulders in any natural way (it always feels even more tense than in the high position).

When I was trying to figure out what proper posture was, I looked up some information about Alexander Technique and how to teach it to yourself (I'm hate spending money).  Most of what I saw seemed to be described so vaguely and with such eclectic terms that I felt like Alexander Technique was a cult of some sort.  There were some "exercises" to try, none of which made any sense to me because I wasn't sure what it was I was supposed to feel.

- Saturn

[xvimbi]

One thing he mentioned is that I have high shoulders, which is usually a bad thing, but he also said that it's possible that I just have a naturally high shoulder position.  I'm not sure which is the case, but I can't seem to figure out how to lower my shoulders in any natural way (it always feels even more tense than in the high position).

There will always be deviations from the "ideal" in any person, because every person is different. Yet, the basic principles still hold true.
However, there is a huge trap, and one has to be aware of it. The trap is that one gets so accustomed to bad posture that the proper posture will feel unnatural or even painful. An example: Many people don't have the head aligned with the spine. It's often in front of the spine. Therefore, muscles in the neck and back need to work to stabilize the head. As a consequence, those muscles will always be contracted (tense), not matter what. If one tells them to relax, they will attain a state of minimum tension, but there will be tension nevertheless. When you now correct the posture by moving the head backwards a bit, those muscles will still be tense and will pull the head even more backwards, so that one has the feeling that the head will fall back. "That can't be proper posture" is what many people say in this situation. The trick is to slowly teach the body to adopt the new posture. It will take some time (weeks, months) for the muscles to learn to relax. They essentially have to rebuild themselves. So, the best way is to figure out if you indeed have a problem and then work on it slowly over time to correct it.

When I was trying to figure out what proper posture was, I looked up some information about Alexander Technique and how to teach it to yourself (I'm hate spending money).  Most of what I saw seemed to be described so vaguely and with such eclectic terms that I felt like Alexander Technique was a cult of some sort.  There were some "exercises" to try, none of which made any sense to me because I wasn't sure what it was I was supposed to feel.
- Saturn

I am not very familiar with the Alexander Technique. I do know that it does stress balanced posture, though. Friends who have studied the Alexander Technique tell me that it is impossible to do it on your own, because, as you say, you just don't know what to look for. I'd recommend a class to find out for yourself if it's the right thing for you. Ultimately, I think, one has to get a private teacher to get the greatest benefits. The best is to find a piano teacher who is, at the same time, a certified Alexander Technique teacher (or Taubman or Andover Technique, for that matter).

Two more comments about those "Techniques":
1. I don't think one needs to resort to fancy names for correct posture. Alexander, Taubman or Andover Technique, to me, seem to be based on common sense. They are not voodoo. As such, a good understanding of the human body is usually sufficient to get by very nicely.
2. Those techniques have initially been put together to treat injuries. My peef with many pianists is that they learn about injuries only when they already have them. Then it's often too late, or a lengthy process of re-training is required. Most people focus on learning to play the notes, fewer on learning to understand the music (the composer's life, harmonic structures, etc.). Even fewer actually look at the mechanics of a piano to understand the sound producing mechanisms. And finally, only very few take the time to try to understand the human body, its capabilities and limitations, although this might very well be the most important aspect of making music.
Comments, such as "I don't know what good posture is, but I can play Flight of the Bumblebee", or "I have this immense tension in my forearm, but I built up more strength, and now I can play this octave run." make me very sad as I can see these people having all kinds of serious problems later on. There is a reason why 86% of pianists have injuries. The reason is neglect of the human anatomy!

[Saturn]

There will always be deviations from the "ideal" in any person, because every person is different. Yet, the basic principles still hold true.
However, there is a huge trap, and one has to be aware of it. The trap is that one gets so accustomed to bad posture that the proper posture will feel unnatural or even painful. An example: Many people don't have the head aligned with the spine. It's often in front of the spine. Therefore, muscles in the neck and back need to work to stabilize the head. As a consequence, those muscles will always be contracted (tense), not matter what. If one tells them to relax, they will attain a state of minimum tension, but there will be tension nevertheless. When you now correct the posture by moving the head backwards a bit, those muscles will still be tense and will pull the head even more backwards, so that one has the feeling that the head will fall back. "That can't be proper posture" is what many people say in this situation. The trick is to slowly teach the body to adopt the new posture. It will take some time (weeks, months) for the muscles to learn to relax. They essentially have to rebuild themselves. So, the best way is to figure out if you indeed have a problem and then work on it slowly over time to correct it.

Thanks for explaining this.  The teacher also pointed out that I have a forward head position, so I guess this is something I'll need to work on.

Two more comments about those "Techniques":
1. I don't think one needs to resort to fancy names for correct posture. Alexander, Taubman or Andover Technique, to me, seem to be based on common sense. They are not voodoo. As such, a good understanding of the human body is usually sufficient to get by very nicely.

That's what I thought too, but perhaps it's not as common sense as it seems.  After all, if it were, injuries wouldn't be so common, and there would be no need for such techniques.  Proponents of a technique always seem to stress the need for a trained teacher, based on the idea that the average person simply won't be able to figure this stuff out for himself.

There is a reason why 86% of pianists have injuries. The reason is neglect of the human anatomy!

I'm not just trying to pick an argument here, but is this the only reason?  After all, that's an awfully high injury rate.  Is it possible that the injuries are due not only to neglect of human anatomy, but also to the fundamental design of the piano?  Over the years, we've come to accept the design of the piano as fairly established, something that has reached its optimal form.  And we've also come to accept the injury rate as something that just goes with playing the instrument.  But can the piano be improved in any way, so that playing it isn't so "risky"?

- Saturn

[xvimbi]

That's what I thought too, but perhaps it's not as common sense as it seems.  After all, if it were, injuries wouldn't be so common, and there would be no need for such techniques.  Proponents of a technique always seem to stress the need for a trained teacher, based on the idea that the average person simply won't be able to figure this stuff out for himself.

It's common sense in that there are only a few very basic underlying principles that need to be obeyed in order to avoid most injuries. They are:
achieve a balanced posture
avoid co-contraction
avoid static muscular activity
avoid awkward positions in the joints
avoid excessive force

It's common sense in the way that when one realizes the mistakes and learns about the correct way, one would probably say "duh, that's so obvious". That's how I felt, anyways.

The need for the "Techniques" arises from the fact that people don't understand these basic principles, or don't even try to think about them in the first place.

I'm not just trying to pick an argument here, but is this the only reason?  After all, that's an awfully high injury rate.  Is it possible that the injuries are due not only to neglect of human anatomy, but also to the fundamental design of the piano?

What, you wanna pick a fight   Just kidding This is a great and important and utterly neglected topic.

I guess there are two ways to look at it. First, yes, the piano is far from being an ergonomically correct instrument. Many attempts have been made throughout the decades to fix this (curved keyboard, to mention just one modification). None of those caught on, because of the usual inertia that's inherent in humans.

The second way to look at it is, well, if we can't change the piano, so then let's adapt our motions so that they are anatomically correct while still allowing us to play that darn instrument. Most people do not take the time to educate themselves about what the correct way is. Yet, as flawed as the piano is in terms of ergonomics, piano playing is not inherently dangerous.

Over the years, we've come to accept the design of the piano as fairly established, something that has reached its optimal form.  And we've also come to accept the injury rate as something that just goes with playing the instrument.  But can the piano be improved in any way, so that playing it isn't so "risky"?

I highly doubt that the current form of the piano is optimal, but that's a different story (what is "optimal" anyway). However, if people have indeed accepted the high injury rate among pianists as an inevitable fact of piano playing, they are utterly misguided. As I said before, educating oneself about the human playing apparatus is crucial for staying healthy. What most pianists don't realize is that it also improves their technique as it reduces unnecessary motions and waste of energy. The playing becomes much freer and the sound will be better.

[f0bul0us]

Am I the only one that thinks a picture would be real helpful?

[xvimbi]

Am I the only one that thinks a picture would be real helpful?

Go to https://www.musicandhealth.co.uk/anatomy.html and check out the links there. Under "The ergonomics of piano playing", there is a link to a Powerpoint presentation that contains a lot of useful information. The slides are a bit sparse, one obviously needs a speaker who explains what's going on, but much of it will still be useful. Diagrams about good posture can be found in the slides at the end of the presentation.

There is also a lot of interesting stuff about human anatomy and piano playing, but some of the pictures are pretty gruesome...