More on keybedding/the real cause of tension/injury prevention

[nyiregyhazi]

I already posted this in the performance forum, but thought it might be especially relevant to people here:

https://pianoscience.blogspot.com/2011/09/keybedding-part-ii-achieving-direct.html

Basically, it illustrates how a very simple mental concept can reduce tensions that typically occur in response to finger actions.

[keyboardclass]

Jeez, aren't these people who push their blogs annoying?

https://keyboardclass.blogspot.com/

[escort]

Great read, and something that tends to come up from time to time described in different 'technical' methods (I apologize for not actually sourcing) but often in a vague and undetailed manner.  I also like your use of body awareness as a teaching method.  You mentioned Alan Fraser, so I'm guessing some of this comes from his support of 'Feldenkrais,' but have you read any of the other literature on 'body-mapping' and awareness exercises?  

There's a gold-mine in proper technique and teaching methods that people have not exploited, and the few methods that go into it currently are still riddled with contradictions, even when they try to be founded in body-mechanics and the most current views on psychology.  Like the 'Inner Game' series; immensely popular and helpful, but (especially in the 'Music' version) full of the author's bias and his own personal take on the method which I often find disagreeable (which would be impossible to avoid as an author!).

I'm continuously amazed that with our current technology and knowledge of how the mind operates and how the body moves, that we insist on teaching methods that quite honestly don't work.  None of this is 'rocket science'.  Some of the information that even university level instructors throw out there is just ridiculous; any Joe with a video camera and an anatomy book can find whether the instructor actually does what they describe in their own playing, regardless of how they perceive the issue when they play.  My playing in my undergrad went from bad to worse because of terrible instruction; the saving graces of someone that spurred me into actually looking at what was going on turned my playing around completely, and I began to solidify it with my own teaching (especially when I saw the rapid improvement in my students).

Anyways, keep up the great work!  I look forward to seeing your articles in the future.

[nyiregyhazi]

"Great read, and something that tends to come up from time to time described in different 'technical' methods (I apologize for not actually sourcing) but often in a vague and undetailed manner.  I also like your use of body awareness as a teaching method.  You mentioned Alan Fraser, so I'm guessing some of this comes from his support of 'Feldenkrais,' but have you read any of the other literature on 'body-mapping' and awareness exercises?  "

Absolutely. I discovered Feldenkrais through Alan Fraser and learned a lot from some group lessons- as well as from the actual piano lessons with him. I'm far from an "expert" in Feldenkrais itself (to put it mildly), but I have found it very useful to apply the basic ideals of low effort and directing awareness to more conscious development of particular areas. I've found that applying knowledge of how forces balance actually makes for a very useful point of focus when striving to maintain low effort in balance during movements. Feldenkrais is primarily about learning unconsciously but I believe it's useful to apply the general approach to making more willful adjustments. Although the concept of forces seems very theoretical, it actually makes for a very useful means of better perceiving what goes on in a movement. Thomas Mark's book has also been very useful.

"There's a gold-mine in proper technique and teaching methods that people have not exploited, and the few methods that go into it currently are still riddled with contradictions, even when they try to be founded in body-mechanics and the most current views on psychology.  Like the 'Inner Game' series; immensely popular and helpful, but (especially in the 'Music' version) full of the author's bias and his own personal take on the method which I often find disagreeable (which would be impossible to avoid as an author!)."

Yeah- while I'm not entirely dismissive of such approaches, in a way it amounts to flailing around in the dark and hoping to find something useful. These things can give a boost to whatever your base level is- but there's virtually no hope whatsoever of making serious long term development out of them, if the basic concept of movement is at odds with possibility. A good concept for movement is far better for releasing tension than positive thinking. It's only when you have truly sound basics in your conception of movement that attitude has the answers, if you ask me. It's also interesting how much confidence and positivity is improved by simply by developing better quality of movement independently.

"None of this is 'rocket science'.  Some of the information that even university level instructors throw out there is just ridiculous; any Joe with a video camera and an anatomy book can find whether the instructor actually does what they describe in their own playing, regardless of how they perceive the issue when they play."

Well, I'm not sure if I agree (fully)here. Some of what happens is virtually invisible to the eye. Those who can perceive it often do so only by acute perception of a number of indirect clues. For example, I've only just realised that repeated octaves (on the same notes) originate largely in the hand- not the arm or wrist. I could not play them at all without seizure until I realised that! Now my arm is almost totally passive- but it moves in the response to reactions. The eye would likely assume my arms are doing a lot more than they are. Some of the biggest problems come from taking things at face value- which also explains the nonsense that encourages people to strive to cease activity at the keybed as the norm (rather than learn how to redirect energy safely, after a confident, ongoing action). That said, if you don't rotate far enough for playing a note to have been physically possible via rotation, it wasn't rotation that produced the note. There's a lot of bullshine that can be exposed from this too.

By the way, I've also made some huge discoveries about two styles of finger movements that scarcely look different at all but change EVERYTHING about what the arm must do to maintain balance (and also feel notably different). I'll be covering at least some of that issue in my next post, I hope.

"Anyways, keep up the great work!  I look forward to seeing your articles in the future. "

Cheers. I hope to get the next one up soon. This is where it will really start getting into the meat of things!

[escort]

True that, the info about movements being too small, etc...  I think I was on a bit of a rant, and citing an example (involving advice from instructors that is observably in complete contradiction to what we know to be true about the body) more than a general idea, aha.  Along with that, a lot of the mental work in piano that changes our perception on playing is also quite invisible, and can be rather challenging to teach in a way that the student will understand.  I guess what I was going for was that there is so much knowledge in psychology, physics, etc... that is just evidently ignored by so many instructors.  The information they give can often be helpful, depending on how it's perceived, but it also can amount to a lot of confusion and misunderstanding.

[nyiregyhazi]

True that, the info about movements being too small, etc...  I think I was on a bit of a rant, and citing an example (involving advice from instructors that is observably in complete contradiction to what we know to be true about the body) more than a general idea, aha.  Along with that, a lot of the mental work in piano that changes our perception on playing is also quite invisible, and can be rather challenging to teach in a way that the student will understand.  I guess what I was going for was that there is so much knowledge in psychology, physics, etc... that is just evidently ignored by so many instructors.  The information they give can often be helpful, depending on how it's perceived, but it also can amount to a lot of confusion and misunderstanding.

Yeah, certainly. There's a lot of ludicrous metaphor passed off as being reality (rather than a subjective impression that will only help specific people with specific problems). The sheer number of contradictions in this particular approach is quite remarkable:

It's hard enough when the contradictions come from different people- without a single person making them in the same breath. Also, she doesn't seem to realise that it takes a lot more force to MOVE a hammer than to silently depress a key. There are elements that would be useful to some from a practical perspective, but other people could be harmed greatly by the explanation. How can it be "light" if the muscles of the upper arm supposedly move the keys  (as she says in other videos)? If the most basic elements of physics were simply understood, piano technique could be freed from all these contradictory explanations. Sadly, it's been tarred with the same  brush as some old and very impractical texts and remains virtually absent from most teaching. Taubmann claims to be scientific but is as a riddled with implausible nonsense as any approach.