Motor memory and spontaneous music making

[nodb]

I think Horowitz said that he never played a piece the same.
Different interpretation = different motions
What about the important motor memory while studying?
Does we have to decided the interpretation before (while studying) or is it spontaneous?
How do you think?

[birba]

Good question.  I think AS you're learning, practising, and studying the piece, your interpretation basically solidifies.  What's important is to ALWAYS practise with intention and avoid stale automatic repetition. Or at least minimize it.  Sometimes I find myself falling into a rut, and to change and revolutionize my ideas, I do wierd and opposite things.  A crescendo instead of a diminuendo, maybe a sudden ritard, etc.  This doesn't mean that I end up with these "artificial" intentions, but it sort of shakes me out of the rut and gets me back to REAL playing.
This is what always amazed me about Kempff's playing.  He NEVER played any piece the same way, and yet his interpretation was always basically the same.  It sounded as if he were composing the music as he played.  He was always honest in his approach, and, thus, it was always believable.
Good question.  I'm curious to hear what the others say.

[birba]

P.S. Don't get hung up in motor memory.  This is only one element of memory - and not the most important.

[nodb]

When you play slow pieces, you don't need the motor memory so much because you can follow everything with your brain. You can better improvise your interpretation (I think)
But when you play fast pieces, you have to trust this memory. (?)
You can't control every note with your brain in a fast tempo.

[slow_concert_pianist]

I think Horowitz said that he never played a piece the same.
Different interpretation = different motions
What about the important motor memory while studying?
Does we have to decided the interpretation before (while studying) or is it spontaneous?
How do you think?

There are several versions of this, but he was talking about the discovery tour and the fact we grow and change (thus) with every rehearsal. Jorge Bolet would only make a complete take for each recording. The reason he would not replay parts of a performance is (in his philosophy) the performance is a complete snapshot of its moment with all elements connected within. Therefore any changes would ruin the performance as they did not belong to that moment - i.e. synchronicity lost. Absolute perfection, but I think he had a point.

[indianajo]

I never learned anything but motor memory, it was so easy. Works fine on classical music.   But it is useless for playing by ear or with a pop group.  I am trying to learn to memorize chord structure the way fake books are organized, or the way professional musicians do gigs. A pro should be able to transpose a pop tune to any key by moving the chords around.   It's a real stretch at age 60, but since I just retired, I have all the time in the world.  Tuning the piano up to the standard pitch (the pro didn't, it costs more that way) allows me to play along with records, which is one way of training your ear if you don't have a bunch of teenage idiots like yourself to fill your garage with bad sounds, until you get it right. 

[nodb]

Does one have to practise the right motions for "the interpretation" of a piece?
Or is the motor memory only for remembering the fingering and the places on the keyboard?

[slow_concert_pianist]

Does one have to practise the right motions for "the interpretation" of a piece?
Or is the motor memory only for remembering the fingering and the places on the keyboard?

Ah that's rather different. Competent attention to technical exercises, scales and arpeggios harmonise 'motor memory'. Contained within an actual composition, there is an extension of this process. It, as it were, is all these individual elements harmonised severally. With very advanced works, special exercises many need to be written to build motor memory.