complete beginner here, self-teaching; need advice about technique

[silph]

hello everyone!
so i'm someone trying to self-teach piano. (i cannot afford teachers). i have been playing for a few days now, using the karl merz method (which is in the public domain; i found it on the internet).

my background:
- i was heavily involved with music in my high school years (about a decade ago), where i played french horn for about a total of ten years. this means i know basic music theory and about playing things musically.

i have always enjoyed principles/theories/big-picture ideas more than actual application or creating something. i prefer, for example, training and drills in (say) a sport, rather than the actual game. in terms of learning piano, i am biased to learning about principles rather than learning pieces of music. this is perhaps why i want advice about technique right now?

you see, i seem to get conflicting information about proper piano technique, depending on what i look at:
- the karl merz method tells me to used curved fingers, and to lift my fingers "very high" from the knuckle joint, and to strike down "firmly". it also tells me to keep the other fingers absolutely motionless .
- but other sources (youtube, etc) tell me to keep my fingers very "calm" and not to move my fingers high.

the merz "high finger" technique is helping me to learn to move my fingers independantly, but it also feels .. kind of strange (even straining a little?). also, it's *really* difficult to lift my fourth finger very high.


could you discuss this for me? for example,
- what do you think the merz method is trying to teach me by telling me to lift my fingers very high from the knuckle joint?
- what, in your opinion, is proper technique? do you have any feelings about what the merz method is telling me to do?


thanks for any replies; i figure some support from real human beings might motivate me to trying to self-learn (which, i read, is not an easy thing to do)!

[zeroblackstar]

I was just reading over the Karl Merz method and I particularly like this bit:

"Avoid all unnecessary motion of head or hands as well as all contortions of face." 

I think what Mr Merz is getting at is to play the keys using your fingers. Rather than a compound action involving your shoulder, arm and wrist. And quite rightly so when first beginning to play. This is to build strength and coordination in your fingers and to help develop correct technique.

I wouldn't adhere to this method rigidly however, the idea is to teach you to keep a relaxed hand and to play with your fingers, don't go straining your hand trying to keep your fingers "high" or whatever. I would say that's counter productive. There are good guide lines on correct playing in the book, but do treat them as such, guidelines.

I'm also a self taught pianist and I would consider myself to be at an intermediate level so my input on this should perhaps be taken with a fist full of salt :p

Can any one else can offer more thorough advice...?

[drkz4ck]

I agree to zeroblackstar.
I think moving only the fingers is pretty nonsense. In actual playing you use a lot of muscles, depending on the piece, of course.

You can't follow that advice of always taking your fingers as high as possible evrytime you play something. It should only be done on particular exercises - probably ones to develop finger independence.

The point is to use only the muscles that are necessary and keep the others relaxed, so you don't biuld up tension and eventual fatigue.

[brogers70]

I'm just an amateur so take this with a grain of salt, but I think lifting your fingers really high is not a good idea. It's too bad you cannot get a teacher. You can try watching a lot of youtube videos of good pianists. Watch their fingers. See how little they move, most of the time. Then look for other methods available free. Check out posts from Bernhard in this forum. Have a look at C.C.Chang's book and website. You can't trust any one source completely. But worrying that you can't lift your 4th finger high enough is pointless (there are good anatomic reasons why not, anyway).

[ongaku_oniko]

what, in your opinion, is proper technique? do you have any feelings about what the merz method is telling me to do?

A very good question. This question doesn't only apply to piano, but everything. Proper technique, in my opinion, is practise which aids in the real thing. As such, there is no "proper way".

Take bowling for example. Normally people all use on hand to bowl. But now we see this Australian kid bowl with two hands, and winning world championships. At the start, people ridiculed him for not having proper technique, but people are starting to follow him after seeing his success.

There is no such thing as proper technique, and no offense, but to be so obssessed in playing proper technique is unhealthy, in my opinion. Technique is ALWAYS the means to achieving mastery at the real thing, it is never an end to itself. I cannot comprehend ANYONE liking practise more than the real thing, I can only assume that you are saying this because perhaps for some reason you have had a bad experience with a real performance when you are little, making you scared of doing the real thing.

Frankly, if you're only practising for the sake of "technique", I suggest you quit piano. What's the point of that?

[silph]

thanks for all your replies.

@zeroblackstar:

haha, i smiled, too, when i first read that part about not making "contortions of the face", lol!

so i am noticing that when i use his high finger method, i am feeling that i'm learning something about ways of using my fingers that i didn't know before. i am thinking that i'll continue trying this, but i'll keep in mind that this isn't the only way, and perhaps is only meant me to teach me the feeling of my fingers being able to move independantly.

i am very curious about you being self-taught. could you tell me what self-teaching was like? what resources did you use? what were your experiences/feelings at the beginning?


@drkz4ck
==
I think moving only the fingers is pretty nonsense. In actual playing you use a lot of muscles, depending on the piece, of course.
==
you say that you think this idea of "moving only the fingers" is nonsense, but do you personally think that it's helpful for a beginner to do when they're first learning? or are you saying that merz's suggestion, in your opinion, is a very wrong way to teach?


==
The point is to use only the muscles that are necessary and keep the others relaxed, so you don't biuld up tension and eventual fatigue.
==
this interests me a lot. i would be very interested in becoming aware of what muscles are necessary (or at least be aware of the feeling of using only muscles that are necessary). do you know of any exercises that help me develop awareness of what proper muscle usage feels like, vs fatiguing muscle usage?



@brogers70:
thanks for chiming in on your own feelings about merz's suggestion to "lift fingers high".
i actually skimmed through about half of chang's book already; i feel that i'll find more relevance from it better after a few more months. i should take a look at those posts by bernhard.


@ongaku_oniko:
i feel a little hurt and attacked by your post. (implying that i am strange or wrong if i like practicing exercises more than playing pieces is hurtful).  i feel that you may misunderstand what i was trying to communicate about my natural learning style, and what motivates me when i'm learning something new.

that aside, i hear you emphasizing that for you, there is no "one proper" technique, and "good technique" is what helps you do the craft, instead of being "good technique" for its own sake or because scholars say it's good technique or whatever.

i would like to try to re-communicate what i feel you may be misunderstanding, but using different words:
` i am someone who has always preferred theory over practice; big picture ideas vs application; the process of doing art instead of the final product. maybe some examples might clear up what i mean:

1) when i used to practice french horn, i spent more than half my time on exercises, rather than rehearsing pieces; not because this was the most efficient use of my time necessarily, but because its where i found the most pleasure. i loved playing scales and long-tones.

` i think i derive most pleasure from becoming aware of "internal feelings" or experiences or insights about what i'm able to experience internally. i also love intuitively realizing the "principles behind things". this is what exercises did for my french horn playing.
` much of this "internal exploration" wasn't "useful" for performance, at least not in a direct way. for example, in playing long tones, my tone may improved somewhat, but the *real* pleasure was feeling like i was "merging" with my instrument in some slightly mystical way; i was becoming somehow more aware of what was happening internally when i tried to make really beautiful tone, and i somehow "became" that tone. .... this pleasure didn't directly make me a better horn player in my repetoire, but it motivated me to continue practicing, and it was where my pleasure was derived.

2) when i used to do yoshinkan aikido, i was told by a number of teachers to "stop thinking so much! you only get better by DOING!", which frusterated me a lot, becuase i have trouble learning by "just doing". i'm always craving to understand the principles behind what i'm doing.
` luckily, one teacher i had understood my learning style. i absolutely ate up his "little pointers" that dealt with proper form ("relax those arms! engage your lats! extended fingers to help a feeling of extending your energy forward! straight back leg! keep your hips square!") as well as his "big picture ideas" that he told me (ex, "our basic training stance (called kamae) is there to give you a forward feeling, but one that is grounded. hopefully you will come to this feeling as you intuitively discover the essence of kamae"). all these "little pointers", in the context of "big picture ideas", helped me experiment with ways of doing aikido in the hopes of becoming more aware of the "nature" or "underlying principles" of the art.

` i am completely aware, though, that this is not necessarily the best (and certainly not the quickest) way to learn if i want to become a horn player who performs pieces really well or a person who can do aikido well. in other words, *performing* the art is not what motivates me.
` instead, the personal pleasure i get from *exploring* my own internal sensations and *exploring* the "nature" or "essences" underlying the art, is what motivates me.



having just explained all that in a different way, i can say that i'm guessing we have two fundamentally different perspectives on why we do music: to you, playing pieces is the "point" of music, and technique is there just to help you do it better; and to me, technique (as in "being more aware of the possibilities of how you / your body can engage in the art") is itself where i derive much of my pleasure, and pieces are there to help me discover the various internal experiences of technique.

[ongaku_oniko]

I can see why you feel offended by my post, and I'm sorry. I didn't mean to offend, exactly, but I am frustrated because I'm so passionate about music now, but you come here and tell us that you're not learning to play music, but learning for the sake of, well, nothing, really. To me, that's just like a robot.


You know what? I think big picture too. I never cared for highschool math classes, because everyone would just get a calculator and memorize formulas for an A. I never did that. I'm not interested in memorizing formulas, I'm interested in why those formulas work. I think that's the REAL big picture.

Learning techniques is like memorizing formulas. What's the point if you don't know why? Your akido example shows this. You need to know why you're doing those moves, not just how.

In the end, I usually get 60% in my math classes. However, during math competitions, I score in the top 500 in north america (118.5 in AMC12, one of the most prestigious highschool math contests in the world, part of the selection for the US team for the international mathematical olpymiad), top 20 in my province, perfect scores, etc, etc, etc, getting 20-30 points higher than the people who memorize formulas and get 100% in math class.

The big picture is "why", not "how". Doing the "right" mechanical movements isn't going to help you in anything but making those movements. Knowing why is the key.

Playing pieces isn't the point of music for me. Music is. I play for the music, not vise versa. And frankly I still can't quite believe anyone willingly enjoying the process more than the goal.

That's the reason people set goals; it's because the idea of a goal is much more tempting, it encourages people to work towards something. If you're just studying for the sake of studying, just exercising for the sake of exercising, I think anyone would not be able to last.

I still believe that there is something beyond your love for technique; there must be a psychological barrier of some sort.  Well, of course I could be wrong. But I've never met anyone who could work towards something without a goal at the end.

[silph]

@ongaku_oniko:

==
I can see why you feel offended by my post, and I'm sorry.
==
firstly, thank you for this; i'm a bit of a sensitive person and so this means a lot to me. apology accepted. i feel that you are trying to give me the freedom to enjoy piano the way that works for me, but at the same time it's jarring to you to hear that i like technique/process more than the music itself (partially because it seems so opposite to the richness you yourself have discovered in music), and possibly because it reminds you of people who play robotically as if it's a task to do, instead of actually *enjoying* playing the music.


i feel that there are a lot of interesting points you bring up in your latest post. i'm going to try to see if i can understand/ponder some of them.. .


1) it's funny to hear your experiences of high school mathematics. i relate very very much to what you wrote; i am /terrible/ at memorization, and i usually would learn how to derive a formula rather than use it.

reading this about your big-picture thinking, and the preference of "why" over "how" in mathematics, makes me wonder a bit more deeply; because i, too, enjoy the "why" much more than the "how".
` perhaps you see my love of technique as a "how" thing (perhaps, eg, "i need to play with certain technique, and so then i can say i'm doing it "properly"!"). the truth is that my love of technique is more of a "why" thing, or at least a process/exploration thing.


2) one thing that still seems a clear difference between us is that i still very firmly like process, far more than end result or goal. i don't agree that there is something psychologically wrong with me (ie because of some bad past experience, for example) because i value process more -- i think this is just how i'm wired --,
` ... but for what it's worth, i will admit that psychologically, goals are something that very much stress me out. i am the opposite of a goal-oriented person; and with very bad experiences with the mental health system (with cognitive-behavioural therapy, which is very goal-oriented and rational and scientific -- things that i am very /not/), it's true that i now do literally get tense and distressed if ever i'm told that i need to "set goals". unlike for other people, goals do not motivate me or excite me .. they do the opposite.
` if i were to try to exercise more, telling myself that i have a "goal" of getting (say) more muscular ... would demotivate me. what i'd do instead is be excited for the experience i'd have in the process. (is this because of some psychologically distressing past experiences? or because i'm wired to enjoy process more than the end result? or perhaps both?)

3)
==
And frankly I still can't quite believe anyone willingly enjoying the process more than the goal.
==
it's funny reading this, because this is EXACTLY who i am! i enjoy the process far more than the goal. in fact, my only "goal" is to explore the process more deeply.


okay, okay, this is not /entirely/ true. i may be somewhat distorting my love of process, in my attempts to explain my desire to learn technique:

a)  i admit i do have "goals".. but i could never think of such goals in order to motivate me to learn piano.
` it's true that i /do/ have some ... i wouldn't call them goals (because that word distresses me) but i'll call them "things that would be nice to do" when it comes to learning piano: i would love to be able to listen to country songs and videogame soundtrack pieces and play them by ear; i would love to investigate tonality and /why/ (say) melody and harmony has the *effect* it does on me; i would enjoy composing my own simple pieces.

but when learning piano? these "goals" aren't the reason i learn piano; i would be paralyzed by the pressure of learning piano if it was to "achieve" anything.

but that's okay that i don't have "goals" to motivate me from learning piano, because in *all honesty*, it really is true that for me, it is the /process/ that i get most of my enjoyment.


b) it's true i did enjoy playing horn music for its own sake... but as a beginner, i'm not sure if that's motivating enough for me?

it's true that i enjoyed playing the french horn music that i did, especially in the context of ensemble groups. but the truth is still that what motivated me to practice that music WASN'T the desire to play my part well in ensemble, but instead the enjoyment i have in the *process* of practicing -- discovering internal sensations, and different ways of using my body and embouchure to get different results ("technique") and all that.

as a beginning piano student, i'm finding myself falling back on my love of process/exploration/technique in order to motivate myself to practice. in honesty, i'm not even sure if i'll enjoy actually playing piano music itself! (but i would enjoy composing on the piano, if i get skilled enough).

i wonder if me saying just now about how goals won't motivate me to practice... makes it sound to you that i'm doing it for "no point", or that i'm not playing for "music"'s sake, but only for "technique's" sake?
` in truth, it is still the *music* that gives me pleasure... although it's the *process* of working with the music... not actually trying to get to a goal of playing the music well or enjoying the finished product, etc. for example, i enjoy /analysing/ the music, and i enjoy playing /parts/ of the music over and over again as part of the challenge of learning the music..
` but whether or not i will be able to enjoy actually playing a piece for piano, the same way i enjoy listening to the actual country song or the actual videogame music track? that remains to be seen.

but one thing i know is that i probably will enjoy the /process/ of learning piano (if i get the right guidance from kind and knowledgable forum people!).




i'm sorry for the length of my posts; i have trouble writing concisely. hopefully this gives you a better idea of where i'm coming from?

what's your reaction? do you relate to any of what i wrote, or is it still surprising and even arousing-suspicion (of psychological barriers, for example) to you, the way i'm saying i get pleasure from the process of learning music rather than the end result?

and do you feel like sharing more about your frusteration, given that you're so passionate about music but it seems that i'm doing it in a robotic way?

[ongaku_oniko]

I appreciate you posting your thoughts, and well, I usually don't know how to write in a friendly manner, so bare with me. But rest assured I really am not trying to offend you.

I'm definitely not saying there's anything "wrong" with you. And when I said no one enjoys the process more than the goal, that's not entirely what I meant. After you achieve a goal, or at least finish attempting it, you can look back and treasure the process, probably even more than the goal.

But what I really want to ask is, do you really never get bored by just learning techniques? The "goal" is like the light at the end of a dark tunnel for me, and I think many, if not most people. While I'm not at the goal, I try really hard to get to the goal as fast as possible, because the tunnel is scary and dark (or in this case, just plain boring). Perhaps after we get out, we can think oh, it wasn't that bad. But doing something without a goal is just like a tunnel with no end, how do you gather the courage to do that?

Thinking about this more, I realize that the sense of satisfaction doesn't really come from the goal; it comes from the feeling of achievement. Indeed, I could perhaps be satisfied with just practising techniques too, if for example I was finally able to play C+ at quarter note = 180 both hands evenly with no mistakes, I would feel a sense of achievement.

I think the reason why games attract people so much is that they set a lot of mini achievements, like leveing up, doing  quest, buying new armour, you can have so many little goals to achieve, and feel a sense of achievement when you get it.

However, most of the time, you don't eel you're improving at all while practising. If you really enjoy practising, I really envy you.

Anyway, going back to the original question,

- the karl merz method tells me to used curved fingers, and to lift my fingers "very high" from the knuckle joint, and to strike down "firmly". it also tells me to keep the other fingers absolutely motionless .
- but other sources (youtube, etc) tell me to keep my fingers very "calm" and not to move my fingers high.

I see this more of a "how" question. Which one is correct.  Furthermore, I find it absolutely impossible to describe with words.


If we move on to the "why" of it (sorry if I'm repeating what someone else said, I didn't read the other posts) I think it really depends on what you're doing.

I've had about 5-6 different music teachers, and everyone tells me at the start to play like you're holding a ball or an apple. That, I think is what you meant by "curved fingers". Indeed, you play with curved fingers rather than flat fingers, because you can get more power from it. I view the not moving other fingers part as a way of trying to explain how to not be tense. I was just learning the black keys etude the past few months, and found that even playing the 1:50 short piece, my hand got so tired it hurts, and on heavier pianos I can't even press the keys down towards the end. This is all because of tension.

In reality I don't think anyone can move one finger without moving the rest at all (except maybe your thumb) especially if you're putting force to it. So I think what the book is saying is to move your other fingers as less as possible, and not tense up. Striking down hard is a way of exercising your finger, I guess. And possibly the way power should be applied while playing the piano, but I can't say too much about that part yet since I'm only beginning to discover "how".

(side tracking a little) Sometimes you really just gotta "do it" like your akido teachers said. It's really hard to understand how or why otherwise. I mean can a person really swim or bike after reading about how the body words and stuff? You still need the practical experience. And playing piano is the same. There's a really big difference between how the key is pressed; I still haven't figured out how completely, all I know is that the sound I make is completely different from the sound my teacher made. It's a difference so clear anyone can hear it. I can use all my strength to press down on a key and it will sound smooshy and ugly, while my teacher (who was a petit woman) was able to get a much more crisp sound from the piano - and much louder too.

Now on to youtube videos: Well, youtube is a place where anyone can post a video. Heck, I posted a few videos of me playing, and there were a few people who thought it was good. LOL. So not really the best plae to learn. On the other hand, there are good things on youtube as well, and seeing how it's done is much better than reading about it.

In reality, you won't have time to play with your fingers held high everytime; during the fast parts you'll have to skim through with as little movement as possible to save time and energy. Some pieces also do not require loud notes, so it really depends on the piece you're playing.

You see, different techniques cater to different pieces, it's hard to say what is correct when there isn't a goal in mind.

One thing I was just thinking is, techniques are invented after music. Technique was made as a means of achieving music. Music was not made as a means to utilise technique. Except for etudes. So I don't know, what are you trying to understand from techniques? That you can't get from learning pieces? I think techniques don't show the real picture.You don't ned rubato in techniques. In fact, you never use it. It's bad if you get the wrong tempo. You don't change the loudness of the notes. There are a lot of things missing from just learning the techniques.

[tunneller]

Silph: if it keeps you company, I love practicing for purely technique.

E.g., there's something I'm working on now (fast chromatic downward descending scales in pp). Really tough for me to get it, and I've been working at it for well over a month.

Every once in a while I get a hint of something sounding truly awesome, and then it disappears and I'm back to sounding jerky again and I'm left yearning to recreate that moment.

So not to say that is technique is the only thing, but it is giving me a great deal of pleasure training to attain it.

[silph]

@ongaku_oniko:
i read your reply last night before i went to sleep, and i was thinking about some of the things you've said all day, as well as thinking about what i myself am looking for. i must say that it's not entirely clear in my mind, but i feel like i'm looking at my practice preferences in a way i hadn't given thought to before.

i'd like to give a thorough reply to your most recent reply, but i may take a couple of days. i daresay there's lots to consider that i hadn't before, and it's a little overwhelming, actually! so maybe by "writing out my thoughts" i might get more clarity.. .

[keyboardclass]

Hey silph, I like your attitude.  Here's something I post from time to time.

This is what I teach.   Initially you draw your fingertips in towards you to depress the key (as your finger bends the tip lowers, as the tip lowers the key must go down).  It is the most tension free position possible – it’s up to you if you want to add tension here or there later.  Adding tension is easy, resolving it not so.

1) Place your hands on the keys looking as they do when hanging at your side.  The only tension is in the biceps to hold your forearm up to stop your wrist sinking.  Do not turn your wrist either clockwise or counter-clockwise.  Allow your fingers the natural oblique angle that results from this.  At a later date you can turn your wrist (put your knuckles in a line horizontally) when you play but I don’t recommend it as it adds tension.

2) Using a finger ‘wipe’ the key as if you were brushing off a piece of fluff from a baby’s nose (without waking her).  DO NOT MOVE YOUR HAND.  Mostly I use the word ‘scratch’ instead of ‘wipe’ for a louder sound.  You see, just bending the nail joint will cause the key to go down the 3/8 inch needed.  The other joints will follow (though physiologically speaking it's the mid-joint that tenses first - you don't see that though).

Here are my three ways of bringing about key depression:
(the silent video below illustrates them)

1) scratching as discussed above (after some weeks the finger doesn't slide so it becomes gripping)

2) flicking (wrist starts from as low as it will go, flicks the key and ends up as high as it can go (hand hanging from the wrist))

3) drop and flop (hand hangs from the wrist (which it is already doing if you've just flicked), drop the arm weight and bite into key - flopping before reaching the keybed (add muscle when that's learnt))
 

 

The Thumb
Your thumb moves from the wrist.  Many mistakenly add some arm movement as well.  Hold your thumb under your index finger like you're creating a puppet where you draw lips on your thumb and finger.  Open those lips carefully from the corner of the mouth until the tip of the thumb has traveled 3/8ths of an inch - that's all the movement needed (keys only go down 3/8ths of an inch).

On tension:
There are plenty of techniques out there that purport to relax you.  I'm a bit dubious of all of them all.  The problem is, being relaxed is about not tensing unneeded muscles - and how do you NOT do something?

It takes some people years to retract their erroneous body control.  All I can recommend is:

1) Allow your elbows to hang loosely at your sides.

2) Sit at the piano with your breastbone pointed up.  A good way to achieve this is to roll each shoulder separately forward, up and back - placing and leaving the shoulder hanging down the back - then do the other one.

3) Place your hands with NO shape whatsoever on the keyboard.  Allow your wrists to fall away from you - right clockwise, left anticlockwise.

4) If your hands look beautiful, they are relaxed.  Between each note ALLOW them to return to their naturally beautiful state.

I think my favorite word of all time is allow.   

Also, here's a couple of kids I teach.  Notice how their hands start out 100% relaxed on the keyboard:
     

[silph]

@keyboardclass:

thank you very much for your reply!
i am finding it very difficult to feel like i'm making progress / be motivated, because i don't have a teacher -- it makes me really need specific things to try, and your post certainly gives me that!


first, can i share some of my experiences learning piano so far? this may help you understand how i am reacting to your post.

i have been reading some archived threads, and i have found that what i was doing with the merz method may actually be quite injury-producing. at first, i liked his "flexibility" exercises (holding down 1 and 5, and lifting high each finger of 2, 3, 4 in turn; then something similar for 1 and 5 except holding down two other fingers).
` but it freaked me out a few days ago when i was having really noticeable pains in my hand, and running *all the way to my elbow*.
` then i read a post by xvimbi saying he is always horrified when he sees excercises like merz's "flexibility" exercises... so i stopped doing them. but now i need some other ideas to take its place!

you see (and i think i'm thinking out loud here, i hope you don't mind),
you see, the reason i liked merz's exercises is because i really felt like i was "putting concentration" into the "subjective feeling" of playing every single individual note; it gave me a lot to explore in just doing a small movement [ie one finger].
` this is the learning style i'm most comfortable with, /especially/ when starting something new: ie, to look at very small things and explore all the different facets of them. i like going /slowly/. (i once took a pilates+yoga+breathing class, where you took something small like taking a single breath in and out while lying on your back, each time exploring different aspects of doing that breath ("feel your breath expand you inside horizontally... goo~~d; now take a breath in and feel yourself expand from top to bottom... goo~~~d" etc). she was worried that she was going too fast, but me, i wish she would even go slower!
` i know that this is the opposite to how most people are most comfortable learning -- that is, by actually /creating something/, and sort of looking at the details after they've gotten an overall, holistic feeling of doing the art (and the satsifaction of already having played 4 or 5 pieces through).

with merz, i found it challenging to lift my fingers high, from the knuckles, while keeping the other four fingers of my hand motionless. (this was especially difficult for my fourth finger). but i liked this, because:
- i eventually got better at it. it really felt i was improving. ("look! my fifth finger would always raise up in a jaggy, unsmooth motion; but now i see it raise up smoother! *i feel like i'm getting better!*)
- it was challenging to do, but it gave me lots of space to "get better" by take something small and doing it over and over again, really focussing my attention on that one movement and what my fingers were feeling and what was going on as i did it.
- i like applying imagery; the book made it sound like the fingers are "little hammers" that move completely independantly from each other; and this image made sense to me, and i tried to get my hands to "be" that image; to me, that image had an association of power and precision.
- i found it challenging to keep my fingers independant, but again, this challenge motivates me and makes me happy: i could feel myself getting closer and closer to that image of my fingers moving completely independantly. every time i played the (very very simple, quarter-note) exercises, i felt like i was spending that time in a way where i was "actually getting better, getting closer to the image of little hammers, finger independance, and lifting my fingers higher and more smoothly".
- as i got better, i felt .. some kind of feeling of "getting my fingers to be more "sure" of themselves as they strike the key", or getting a /feeling of individual confidence as each finger strikes/, and feeling that individual-finger confidence was pleasing to me.

so, it was a little crushing that this method, which seemed to suit my preferred learnign style perfectly... ended up causing me so much injury so quickly, that i have to reject it all!


so now i read your post...
.. which seems to be all about relaxation and NOT straining .. which is the opposite of what i've been doing, lol! i'm eager to explore and see what your ideas have to offer, but i'm wondering if i can ask you some questions to help me do that?

Allow your fingers the natural oblique angle that results from this.  At a later date you can turn your wrist (put your knuckles in a line horizontally) when you play but I don’t recommend it as it adds tension.

1) do you mean that my knuckles won't be parallel to the keyboard, but instead be tilted so that my my pinky knuckles are closer to the keyboard than my thumb knuckles?

2) why do books, then, tell me to keep them parallel? what are the advantages and disadvantages of each, do you think?

The Thumb
Your thumb moves from the wrist.  Many mistakenly add some arm movement as well.  Hold your thumb under your index finger like you're creating a puppet where you draw lips on your thumb and finger.  Open those lips carefully from the corner of the mouth until the tip of the thumb has traveled 3/8ths of an inch - that's all the movement needed (keys only go down 3/8ths of an inch).

3) i'm not entirely sure what you mean by the thumb moves from the wrist;
4) or what it looks like for someone to add arm movement? (am i doing that? i'm not even sure, 'cause i don't know what it looks like!)
5) could you put the movement you suggest for the thumb in different words? (i didn't understand the "open the corner of the puppet's mouth" instruction well enough?
6) i've so far been using the thumb to press down directly downwards, perpendicular to the key. i think i did this partially because merz tells me to bend all fingers "from the knuckles and only the knuckles", and partially because i have this image that that's the most powerful, deliberate movement for a "little hammer" to make. do you think this motion is actually not good (and why)?


i hope these questions are okay for me to ask!

and i have one more?
7) what are some things i can think about as i practice, when i use these suggestions of yours, for improving? that is, my preferred learning style always likes an image of what i'm trying to get at, and elements to keep in mind that help direct my attention more detailedly to what's going on inside my body. are there good things i can try to become more aware of to try to do more as i play (or bad things to be aware of that i may be doing, that i should stop doing)? what does playing that is really good, in your philosophy of teaching, feel like -- what image can i keep in mind that i'm trying to get towards?



i hope it's not too much to ask these questions; but i really feel like getting ideas from people who know this art much better than i do is just what i need to be successful in self-teaching! (plus it's nice to talk with other people, too :-) )

[silph]

@tunneller:
yes, i think we relate to enjoying exercises and technique! it IS fun to get glimmers of "wow, i did that well!" and then try to attain it later on, isn't it? and it's fun to have a challenge, and to see yourself get closer to it!

[keyboardclass]

1) do you mean that my knuckles won't be parallel to the keyboard, but instead be tilted so that my my pinky knuckles are closer to the keyboard than my thumb knuckles?

2) why do books, then, tell me to keep them parallel? what are the advantages and disadvantages of each, do you think?

I believe your hand will pronate when it needs to if you allow it.  It will then return to the least tense position.  I'm unusual in this but you won't find a mention of keeping the knuckles straight pre-mid19th century.  If it was that important then surely Deruta, Couperin, CPE Bach, Turk, Hummel etc would have mentioned it?

3) i'm not entirely sure what you mean by the thumb moves from the wrist;

The thumbs 'knuckle' - it's first joint, is at the wrist.

4) or what it looks like for someone to add arm movement? (am i doing that? i'm not even sure, 'cause i don't know what it looks like!)

Laters.

5) could you put the movement you suggest for the thumb in different words? (i didn't understand the "open the corner of the puppet's mouth" instruction well enough?

From a puppet site: A profile hand puppet uses the side of the hand so that the thumb and forefinger form the mouth so that the puppet has a talking or chomping action. These puppets are great for littlies as they love the idea that something is coming to gobble them.

6) i've so far been using the thumb to press down directly downwards, perpendicular to the key. i think i did this partially because merz tells me to bend all fingers "from the knuckles and only the knuckles", and partially because i have this image that that's the most powerful, deliberate movement for a "little hammer" to make. do you think this motion is actually not good (and why)?

'Little hammers' will damage you.  Play from the fingertips (the bit of the finger you eat with) - it's most sensitive.

what does playing that is really good, in your philosophy of teaching, feel like -- what image can i keep in mind that i'm trying to get towards?

Funny you should say that.  The first thing my teacher (you'll find extracts from her DVD at youtube/ISSTIP) used to teach was how to stand up.  It always puzzled me what that should feel like so I startd looking into it last year.  I've since published three articles on what it should feel like.  I'll private mail them to you.

[silph]

i look forward to the guidance on how it should feel like to stand -- guidance like this is the kind of stuff i love!

about the thumb: i'm still unclear what you are suggesting. if i make a puppet out of my thumb and forefinger, and i open it's mouth by lowering my thumb, my thumb doesn't go straight down perpendicular to the keys, but instead it goes on a more diagonal angle. is this what you are suggesting is the best movement to use for the thumb?

[keyboardclass]

about the thumb: i'm still unclear what you are suggesting. if i make a puppet out of my thumb and forefinger, and i open it's mouth by lowering my thumb, my thumb doesn't go straight down perpendicular to the keys, but instead it goes on a more diagonal angle. is this what you are suggesting is the best movement to use for the thumb?

Yes, a tiny crack where the thumb and forefinger meet will get you the 3/8" required for the key to go down (3/8" is as far down as they go).

[mussels_with_nutella]

Silph, I am also self-taught and I can give you a bit of feedback about learning alone:

Don't discourage when you see at the big masters, and don't listen to those who discourage you: you can play as well as them, but with a proper period of practising (and efficient practise hahaha)

My "career" playing alone is this, if you want to have an idea of my pianolife as selftaught:

I first played with only one hand as I had never seen a pianist, and I thought that was playing piano  Then I realised that... piano was playing with two hands and a little more dificult, in an ironic way of course hahaha Then I decide to PLAY the piano

• First year: I learnt tune accompanigment like mission impossible's with left hand and the melody with right hand. Meanwhile I learnt what chords were and some melodies with chord accompanigment. My great jump was when I managed to play perfectly Pianojohn's lady madonna tutorial, from youtube.
• Second year: I almost mastered simple chord accompanigment and began arpeggio accompanigment, as well as moving along the keyboard with the left hand. I learnt (just a bit simplified) The Sting's theme, which is Scott Joplin's The Entertainer. After that, I began learning some songs like Maple Leaves and then my favourite song, as it was my piano ambition and as you should have noticed (began xDDD) i am a bit impatient: Slavonic Dances opus 72 no. 2. Its level is quite high, but after playing all this you are prepared.
• Third year: I learnt the fifth Brahms's Hungarian Dance, and somewhat of easy poprock stuff (a pair of hours per song, they will be so easy for you xD) and began improvising. The third year was all about improvisation. I began memorising the C pentatonic scale and, when mastered, learnt what the cycle of fifths is. After this, I looked on youtube some improvisations and played, played, played, combining techniques like Chopin's first étude (not learnt, but that technique xD) and reaching the so subjective level of making a great masterpiece of art from an improvisation
• Nowadays I am learning the Rachmaninov's piano concerto no. 2, which is my last piano ambition, and ending Debussy's first arabesque and Chopin's revolutionary étude, just because both are really beautiful. In respect with the piano concerto, my progress is really good, so i think that if you follow my path or, better, a shortcut, you will have rach2 level.

However, there is something I must warn you: Practice reading. I had never read scores (although I know how, but sooo slowly...) and learnt scores by my own means (spending three days in turning a score into a perfect midi file so that the pc can reproduce it in a virtual piano... and more pathetic methods xDD), and although I am learning rach2 quite fast, If I had practiced I would be learning it now a lot quicklier, so keep practicing on reading!

The most important thing when you are learning is to know that you can be better, but not only know it "because you are humble", but because you realize which are your weak points or which technique you don't have/master. Don't say "I know that i know nothing" but "I know what something I unknow"  I am not native speaker and I don't know if my words are understandable. That's the something I unkonw xD

But my best advice is: Love music and love piano. You will notice when improvising that piano should be consider a living being, as you can express to her what you feel and she express into your heart her notes, pure feelings. So love music, feel, and enjoy during your piano journey! 

[silph]

@mussels_with_nutella

firstly... do you *actually* like mussels with nutella!? (sounds kind of ... unappetizing, lol!)

more seriously,
just want to say thanks for sharing your experiences with me. it interests me that you learned without learning to read at first; i think it's pretty cool that you managed to learn, more or less without knowing what you were doing, lol! you just followed your intuitions and stumbled along, but you ended up really knowing how to improvise and play chords and stuff!
` i have a feeling that my path will be very different than yours, but i do appreciate you sharing your experiences; it's encouraging to me to hear from someone else who self-taught. and .. lol, i may be wrong about my path being different than yours; and your sharing your experiences makes it more likely for me to stumble upon similar experiences that would work for me, personally.

[nickmeads]

Frankly, if you're only practising for the sake of "technique", I suggest you quit piano. What's the point of that?

This is the second time I've seen you be this negative and suggest someone to quit piano, and I just joined a day ago. I'm sure in your 600 something posts you've got a ton more of these. I'm surprised a mod hasn't banned your disgusting attitude yet.

I don't care how hard you play your piano toys all day long or how amazing you think are, with that attitude you won't get far in life. Quit acting like you've made it.

[silph]

nickmeads, i can understand if you are really sore about ongaku_oniko's post on your thread; to tell you the truth, i was really quite shocked when i read ongaku_oniko's post on your thread. it was probably why i felt so moved to post the response i did in your thread.

this sentence that you quoted here by him/her also hurt me, too, and i communicated that to him/her, and s/he apologized (which took out all of my resent). in his/her apology, ongaku_oniko mentioned that s/he has trouble writing in a sensitive way... i guess some people have that personality/difficulty.

i was hurt by his/her post in my thread (before the apology), and that was much, much, MUCH less harsh (in my opinion) than what s/he wrote on yours, so i'm not surprised that you're really angry. i'm sure when you read what you did in /this/ thread, it arose your disgust again.


i'm sorry that you got such a bad experience here, especially given that you *just joined* this forum! since his/her apology, i am looking forward to continuing correspondance with ongaku_oniko (i really like some of the ideas s/he later replied with). hopefully s/he may realize how hurtful his/her responses can be... but who knows, maybe s/he realizes this but can't change it, i don't know. but again, i'm sorry you got burned by it, and i hope you find more supportive correspondance here in these forums.

[ongaku_oniko]

I'm not sure if there's anything else for me to respond to in this thread, other than to say that I can assure you I've NOT made it; I'm not even a musician;

And that in all my 600 posts I've not once told people to quit before these two posts you mention.

I completely meant what I did in that other thread; not so much in this thread. It was more of a misunderstanding with sliph. That's why I apologized.