relaxation paradox

[drazh]

Hi
Most  teachers say we should play with relaxed arm and shoulder at the same time we should play with arm and shoulder not just by fingers .isn't that a paradox ?
Thanks

[Bob]

As relaxed as possible.

Using the the right muscles at the right time.

There's also the skeleton -- You can set that up so it's doing more work and the muscles can do less work.

There are a lot of concepts that can be "wrong" if you look at them in a different context.  "Practice daily,"  ... but not if you've got teneditius.

Generally relax the arm and shoulder and relax as much as possible.  It's ok to firm them up a bit when they're needed, sometimes like a pulse of firmness to play the notes.

[nyiregyhazi]

Generally relax the arm and shoulder and relax as much as possible.  It's ok to firm them up a bit when they're needed, sometimes like a pulse of firmness to play the notes.

But what does that actually convey? If "relax as much as possible" really means "try to be as comfortable as possible" that conveys about as much practical information as if a teacher just says "try to play better". Also, seeing as it's often misinterpreted as being literal, many other students play with arms that slump lazily against their sides and cause a wealth of problems. The most useful thing I discovered, regarding the arms, is that it's much more useful to concentrate on improving the activities that ARE required, than to strive blindly towards release. I'm far more comfortable from this approach, than aiming for all-round relaxation ever made me. Here's a post about the simplest way of improving on necessary activity in the arms:

https://pianoscience.blogspot.com/2011/04/hunched-shoulders-why-do-they-really.html

Also, my most recent post is about the problems with tension/release thinking in general, and quite how little it actually contributes to an understanding of how to play with efficient ease and comfort:

https://pianoscience.blogspot.com/2011/04/hunched-shoulders-why-do-they-really.html

When it comes to explanations of relaxation, the majority of explanations are still in the dark ages. There are many fine teachers who use these explanations- but it's not talking about relaxation that makes them great teachers who get results. It's what they DO with students. When you only have the words of these woefully simplistic relaxation explanations, at best they tend to remind people to aim to be comfortable- which is hardly a revelation. At worst, they end up overrelaxing in ways that specifically hinder the act of moving the keys and and are hence forced to tense up even more to compensate. Just look at the film of 'relaxation guru' keyboardclass trying to play Grieg with his "relaxed" hands.

[Bob]

You can purposely relax your arm, but there's only so far it will relax.  It's something that can be improved over time.  Relaxed muscles are good, but you do need to activate the muscles at some point, so saying something like "Be totally relaxed" can't be taken too literally.  You only need to use the muscles required to play the instrument though, and those movements can be refined with practice. 

It is possible to relax a lot more if you're not playing.  During a rest for example.  Then the muscles can really be limp since they're not being used.  If it's a long rest, then you could have just dead weight for an arm.  But that could be reduced down -- If it's one count of rest, you could relax everything except what's need to hold the forearm in place, and probably the hand itself so it doesn't look stupid.  Even then, you only need as much muscle use as it takes to hold the arm or hand up.  I've thought the experiment where someone taps your hand upward is interesting.  You don't need any muscles pushing your arm down (tension if another set is pushing up), so if someone taps under your arm, your arm should move up since there should be little muscle use pressing it down. 

And if the time between notes is less than a full rest, you can still relax during that little time.  The firming up of the just the muscles needed to play could be more of a pulse (and then relax) instead of having the arm/hand firm the whole time.

There's a balance between doing it perfectly and still playing right now and still working on the piece right now.  There's always some amount of trapped tension.  You could work on that by itself forever, but in reality you can just relax "as much as possible."

[pianoplayjl]

we should play as relaxed as possible, until we come across sections where we require the forearms and wrists to come in and do the work. I think the arms and fingers have to work together in the right way to play effectively.

[cjp_piano]

I think it's more about being AWARE of what your body is doing. There's no such thing as actually being completely relaxed when you play piano, it's impossible, but what you want is to have the minimum amount of tension needed to execute a particular passage. So while you're practicing a section, notice what your body is doing. Are you unnecessarily tightening your shoulder? Are you clenching your jaw? (That's what I do!). It's like the Alexander technique, check it out if you don't know.

[Bob]

If you did go completely relaxed at the piano, you could still pull off playing a cluster of notes FFF with your forehead one time when you tip over.

[rachfan]

Long ago when I was a kid, one of my teacher's professors at the New England Conservatory of Music in Boston had studied with Albion Metcalf, himself a student of Tobias Matthay, an exponent of relaxation in performance and prolific author on the subject.  So a necessary amount of relaxation method came my way, as you can imagine, especially relaxed arm weight.  

The relaxed arm weight concept cannot be taken literally though.  The idea is NOT for the arms to be so totally relaxed that they go into free-fall due to gravity, thereby allowing the hands and fingers to crash into the keyboard.  Relaxed arm weight actually needs to be directed by the upper arm (for accuracy), and secondly there has to be just sufficient enough control during the descent that the hands and fingers drop and sink into the keys so as to produce a rich tone.  Key velocity which transfers to hammer velocity is the main element in tone production.  But it goes deeper than that.  Consider a would-be pianist who brutally forces the keys down leading to fast hammer velocity yet results in unpleasant "pounding" or "banging" as we say.  That is not a rich tone!  If that same person is then shown how to relax the arm and allow it to descend with gravity--but with a modicum of control for accuracy in depressing--not crashing into-- the correct notes--the banging will, with practice, be replaced by a rounder and richer tone.  So there is a bit of deliberate tension mixed in with the relaxation, which is why "relaxed arm weight" is figurative, not literal.  Obviously this is not an objective scientific principle; rather, its more subjective.  It's not so much quantitative as it is qualitative.  But I believe it to be essential in attaining a beautiful tone.

Back to key/hammer velocity for a moment, Ortmann believed that the same key velocity achieved by a finger, pencil, or umbrella tip would create the same tone.  He was probably right so far as that statement goes. But the major fallacy is that the pianist plays not a single, isolated tone all the time, but usually many tones including chords.  The piano, of course, is essentially a percussive instrument.  The job of the pianist then is truly to be an illusionist.  We have to create the illusion of a connected melodic line through rich tone production, phrasing, legato touch in cantilena or bel canto passages, pedaling, dynamics, rubato, and nuances, etc.  Scientists can poke a key with a pencil, a huge oversimplification, but they cannot account for the numerous variables or complexities in creating the illusion that I have just mentioned. Indeed that's what separates science from art.  

Here is another aspect of it.  During a grueling practice session, who here has never experienced a buildup in tension affecting the whole playing apparatus?  Probably nobody!  If ignored, it will soon spread to the neck, which will make the discomfort even more noticeable.  While tension builds, concentration, accuracy and artistry are all diminished.  Now if the pianist gets up, moves away from the piano, swings the loose arms parallel to the body, then swings the arms in front of the body such that they cross one another forming an X, and then bends over from the waist a bit, dangles the arms while shaking and rotating them like two ropes being blown randomly about by the wind, like magic all tension is released immediately, and back at the piano relaxed arm weight is resumed leading to restored artistry. So this is an empirical effect that we can directly observe and feel thereby informing us that relaxation benefits artistry.

One qualifier: Although the fingers are part of the playing apparatus, they can NEVER be relaxed.  Instead they always need to be taut, otherwise articulation will sound more like wet noodles or cotton.    There is usually an exception to every rule, and the fingers are the exception to relaxed arm weight.  Is it a paradox?  Yes, but life is a paradox too.

I hope this will be helpful.  

David

  

[ted]

I would like to add that the consequences of not paying regular attention to the things David describes can be can be far reaching and unpleasant. The fact that I am untutored in technique does not disqualify me from commenting, as the number of even highly trained professionals who injure themselves is quite ridiculous.

Bad physical habits are very insidious and treacherous, because we usually acquire them for the noblest of musical reasons. It would be nice if beautiful sounds could only be made through supple and correct movements, but alas this is not so. Unfortunately, it is quite possible to create absolutely superb sounds through atrocious and damaging movements. To add insult to injury, they are often inaudible and invisible to trained observers. I know this because I asked trained pianists when I felt something was going astray, and they said there was nothing at all wrong and they wished they had my technique - not their fault, but utterly unhelpful.

I recovered all right over the last two years, but it isn't a fight I would wish on anybody. It's no good going into detail here because these issues are very personal to the player. However, in retrospect all the signs of trouble were there for a long time. I just paid them insufficient heed.

So pay attention to this stuff David is on about because prevention really is much better than cure. If something feels peculiar, weak, painful or awkward then it isn't right for you. Never mind what other people can or cannot do. Stop and think. Analyse. Don't just bullock your way forward through tension.

[Derek]

Bob said "use the right muscles at the right time." That's a great way to sum it up. Once you gain enough experience of thinking about how your muscles are moving, (and you should think about it, a lot), you'll notice that sometimes, the inclination is for several muscles to pull on the same finger at once, within the forearm, against one another. This produces the illusion that you have more control over that finger. It uses more energy and puts unnecessary stress on the tendons. With a lot of fast movements, all that tugging and shoving that you're doing could be done with a single twitch of the correct set of muscles for the finger you're trying to trigger.

I find staccato practice to often quickly isolate the fewest required muscles for a given movement. I suppose it is possible if you're completely unaware of how your muscles feel to remain tense during staccato play, but I think it encourages relaxation between the "important" movements of the muscles. It helps in so many ways, both for accuracy and for reducing tension.

One interesting example is trilling with the 4th and 5th fingers. I've noticed, in my hand (and I think everyone's??), that the 4th finger is tied by some conflicting set of tendons with the 3rd finger. They tend to want to move together beyond a certain point. To do a fast 4/5 trill, I found I must practice an almost un-noticeable relaxation of the conflicting muscle that pulls the 3rd finger when the 4th finger goes down. To ignore the 3rd finger, usually adds tension to the 4th because there's something in there that pulls on it.

*edit* the above observation seems to only affect my right hand. I haven't had to think about the 3rd finger much in the left hand for a 4 5 trill, either the tendons are stretchier or more supple over there or the whole thing is built differently. I'm not sure.

*edit* another example is time based pulling/pushing. Take the fast octave tremolos that Beethoven likes to use. Without careful practice, these create a lot of tension. They're very tricky to execute fast, with relaxed hands/muscles. I think the problem is that one tends to be pulling back and forth as the wrist rotates such that the muscles pull against themselves, out of sync. Staccato practice and a metronome seems to help dramatically with this, so when you hit the top note, only the muscles required to rotate right are used, and when you hit the bottom note, only the muscles required to rotate left are used. No pulling the other direction.

It'd be nice if our hands were designed neatly like robots, wouldn't it? But it's sort of a mess in there, so we have to get a feel for how that mess works to make our fingers move the way we want. Don't want to end up like Schumann or Scriabin.

[rachfan]

Hi Ted,

Thanks so much for sharing your unfortunate experience here, and we're glad you recovered from it. Your message is right on!  If any motion at the piano causes pain, forget the motto, "No pain, no gain."  It's complete nonsense.  Your admonition is correct: STOP!  Take a break to rest.  Later, analyze what's happening, see if an alternative motion is more comfortable and effective.  And yes, we don't have to look far for famous examples of serious injuries at the piano--Gary Graffman, Leon Fleisher, etc.  You know, I'm very familiar with office ergonomics principles, and I'm convinced that we all need to start thinking about ergonomics at the piano similar to the way we do so at the keyboard of a PC for example.  How do we sit at the instrument?   At what height?  How do we align ourselves with the keyboard?  How should we position and extend the arms, wrists and hands?  I make it a point to apply these principles when I interface with my piano at home and believe it has kept me out of trouble so far.  But yes, the relaxed arm approach to playing is also key in my opinion.  

David

[lostinidlewonder]

Ahh I love this type of discussion, please excuse my enthusiasm.

I teach relaxation almost in every single lesson with my students of all ages and of all levels. Often the relaxation comes from considering fingering and subtle differences in doing it right and wrong. From mastering our fingering in passages one can then develop more relaxation through the entire body. Liszt even says "Technique is fingering and returns to it."

Incorrect fingering causes all sorts of trouble through the entire body. And the problem is that although you might hit the right notes with the right fingers your fingering may have subtle inefficiencies. The way to correct your problem is to focus on the fingers and hand, not so much the other parts of the body. If the other parts of the body are merely loose and not tight that is enough, focus on your hands and fingers.

When I play the piano all I am thinking about is the hands and fingers as well when it comes to what I have to do. I hardly think about my arms, shoulders, back, even the pedaling that breathes with the piano you hardly think about the foot! But the hands and fingers, generally your body's connection to the keyboard, this is what you constantly feel changing forms and gives you the physical feeling of pleasure playing the music! I feel the rest of the body reacts with the hands and fingers not the other way around when playing piano.

As relaxed as possible.

Using the the right muscles at the right time.

Generally relax the arm and shoulder and relax as much as possible.  It's ok to firm them up a bit when they're needed, sometimes like a pulse of firmness to play the notes.

This is important point Bob has brought up "controlled tension". To say everything you do is always relaxed and without any effort is a lie because otherwise we would be able to play with full force at the age of 90, which is not the case. When play loud forte ranges we must be able to direct energy through parts of our whole body to create the sound. If we have rapid position changes we need the ability to constantly turn on and off the tension, which taxes you no matter how good your technique is, but the better you are the more you can do it with less effort but produce the same sound, which in the end increases your chances of producing the desired sound and hitting all the right notes.

How on earth can we describe it in words what controlled tensions is like, I can only imagine saying: Flicking with a push immediately followed by a release (which can keep the fingers resting gently on the notes or withdraw them). The energy can come from all parts of our body but is felt draining through the hand/fingers. I generally visualize: fingertips as (pppp), 1st knuckle (ppp), 2nd knuckle (pp), 3rd knuckle (p), under palm (mp), above palm (mf), wrist (f), forearm (ff), shoulders (fff), back (ffff). When we produce the volume dynamic or accent we feel the energy coming from these parts of our body but it is draining through our hands/fingers, so what is happening here is most important and will control the rest of the body, not the other way around.


I always tell my students to feel lazy when they play, when the body does not need to be activated or tense do not let it be. Sometimes this is very difficult for a student to notice while they are playing that is why a teacher is helpful to direct your attention to subtle points that you might otherwise play over.

How a student sits is often an important issue commanding relaxation. I demonstrate this to all my beginners by getting them to try and play their left hand while it crosses the center of their body then asking them to give their LH more space by moving their center more to the right (or by leaning back slightly if they are forced into crossing their center with the LH), then things become more free. There are many more issues much more subtle than this one though, but if certain issues are not taken care of or noticed it may be quite difficult to acquire relaxation while putting yourself in disadvantageous positions.

Most relaxation problems however I find are from the fingering of the notes. As a teacher I focus on getting the students to master their fingering, this then almost always controls the rest of their body. We indirectly change how the rest of their body moved by efficiently solving how our hands/fingers should move at the keyboard.

I think it's more about being AWARE of what your body is doing. There's no such thing as actually being completely relaxed when you play piano, it's impossible, but what you want is to have the minimum amount of tension needed to execute a particular passage.

I think points of relaxation recover more energy than points of exertion take from us when we play a piece. If we cannot produce this feeling while playing a piece the piece tends to tax a lot of our energy and things can become more uncontrolled. Of course there is nothing wrong with a little bit of lactic acid building up when you play long strenuous passages, but how do you release that tension and recover from it? Fortunately there are not many long pieces where it is 100% maximum output from start to finish, there are always points of recovery.

It is not good just thinking that just because a passage is difficult and is supposed to tax you that after we escape it we must carry on the feeling of tiredness and exertion. After points of exertion we know how to relax and recover our energy fast so that our muscles do not get tired. Growing up on a very heavy action grand piano I had to learn how to conserve energy while playing from the beginning. This type of skill has passed on now that I learn on lighter action pianos but play pieces that demand much more technical acrobatics which our body must try to solve efficiently first with good technique and then secondly learn to relax after this exertion if we are to be able to play at that standard with effortless mastery.

If you did go completely relaxed at the piano, you could still pull off playing a cluster of notes FFF with your forehead one time when you tip over.

lol, use of gravity and natural body movement is a friend for us pianists, this is a good point!



I like rachfan's responses,

....especially relaxed arm weight.  

...The idea is NOT for the arms to be so totally relaxed that they go into free-fall due to gravity, thereby allowing the hands and fingers to crash into the keyboard.  Relaxed arm weight actually needs to be directed by the upper arm (for accuracy), and secondly there has to be just sufficient enough control during the descent that the hands and fingers drop and sink into the keys so as to produce a rich tone.  

This is very important for playing patterns that move positions especially chords but not neglect other patterns of movement. What is important is that the connection we make with the keyboard which is made with our hands/fingers activate a moment of muscular memory form to control the flow of this energy, then we deactivate this movement in our hands, relax, and allow the relaxed arm weight to take over. But the arm weight even is guided by the feeling it produces into our hands/fingers, so again this points many times to our hands/fingers being the most important points of consideration.

Key velocity which transfers to hammer velocity is the main element in tone production.  But it goes deeper than that.  Consider a would-be pianist who brutally forces the keys down leading to fast hammer velocity yet results in unpleasant "pounding" or "banging" as we say.  That is not a rich tone!  If that same person is then shown how to relax the arm and allow it to descend with gravity--but with a modicum of control for accuracy in depressing--not crashing into-- the correct notes--the banging will, with practice, be replaced by a rounder and richer tone.  So there is a bit of deliberate tension mixed in with the relaxation, which is why "relaxed arm weight" is figurative, not literal.  Obviously this is not an objective scientific principle; rather, its more subjective.  It's not so much quantitative as it is qualitative.  But I believe it to be essential in attaining a beautiful tone.

Someone who reads an intense forte marking in a score and merely pounds at the keyboard with no consideration to what they have previously played, are playing and will play, merely plays with technique out of musical context. If we understand the music we are playing then we will know how to bring our instrument up to certain tiers of volume. To merely pound at the piano highlights little understanding of your volume control, unless the note you are playing needs to be the loudest note you can possibly produce there should be no need to pound the piano. So pounding has its place but only if you need literally the maximum volume possible, this is not called for in most pieces written and merely highlights uncontrolled playing much more often than not.

Sensitive players certainly feel and understand all the shades of volume pppp through to ffff and beyond. Not many pieces are written which demand such a broad spectrum of volume shading but certainly there are some which focus on shades of p or f in sections which really highlight if someone knows what they are doing or not. Rachmaninov can have such shades of forte but the lesser pianist will come off as pounding or harsh, the elegant one will pull off the different shades and seem to get the volume tiers just right making the climaxes simply explosive (even more so than pounding which might produce more dB!).

Back to key/hammer velocity for a moment, Ortmann believed that the same key velocity achieved by a finger, pencil, or umbrella tip would create the same tone.  He was probably right so far as that statement goes......But the major fallacy is that the pianist plays not a single, isolated tone all the time, but usually many tones including chords.  

He has a point but it certainly limits the amount of music you can play I think it highlights a point that we should not get overly interested in what a single finger does but what a group of fingers produce in the whole phrase of music. Some people can get overly interested in how to bring out a single note melody while playing so much so that they do all sorts of strange things with their fingers to make that note stand out, we should always see things connected in context with each other, not separate them and look at them individually. I think that might be what Ortmann was on about also. I have also caught myself doing strange things to bring out a melodic note sometimes and have to correct myself from doing these unnecessary mannerism to draw the note out (I can only describe it in words like keeping a certain part of my fingers tense which are producing melodic notes while they hold the notes or move to another while all the others are relaxed, although I have played pieces which require this type of tension and can produce it without problems it often is unnecessary and merely isolating my thinking without looking at the whole picture).

.... During a grueling practice session, who here has never experienced a buildup in tension affecting the whole playing apparatus?  Probably nobody!  If ignored, it will soon spread to the neck, which will make the discomfort even more noticeable.  While tension builds, concentration, accuracy and artistry are all diminished.  Now if the pianist gets up, moves away from the piano, swings the loose arms parallel to the body, then swings the arms in front of the body such that they cross one another forming an X, and then bends over from the waist a bit, dangles the arms while shaking and rotating them like two ropes being blown randomly about by the wind, like magic all tension is released immediately, and back at the piano relaxed arm weight is resumed leading to restored artistry. So this is an empirical effect that we can directly observe and feel thereby informing us that relaxation benefits artistry.

This is another way of describing how points of rest replenish more energy than points exertion will ever take from us. Our body will seize up and refuse to go on if we exert ourselves too much, then we recover energy quite fast and can carry on. Most beginners who learn the piano will have to contend with feeling tired and worn out. You challenge yourself to play in a way which prevents it, learn to recover from it and try again. But you need to actually have this worn out feeling to know what it is like so you can work against it. Even when I study new pieces when I play certain passages I will feel tension creeping in and it prompts me to investigate what the culprit is. So tension although it should be avoided, acts as a compass steering us in the right direction.

One qualifier: Although the fingers are part of the playing apparatus, they can NEVER be relaxed.  Instead they always need to be taut, otherwise articulation will sound more like wet noodles or cotton.    There is usually an exception to every rule, and the fingers are the exception to relaxed arm weight.  Is it a paradox?  Yes, but life is a paradox too.

If we totally relax our hands our fingers will curl up in a fashion that is not really suitable for piano playing. So merely extending our fingers to place them on the keyboard is more tense than being totally relaxed. Then to be able to sit up right, to have our feet on the pedal, butt on the edge of the seat etc, these points cause more tension to our body than our fingers merely resting on the keys. So in relation to the rest of our body while we sit at the keyboard, our hands resting on the keyboard is without tension. Your back will get tired much faster before your hands get tired resting at the piano. Just sit at the piano with your hands resting on the keys for 1 hour without moving and see what part of your body get tired first My back go first, soon after my ass starts getting numb before any of my main piano playing apparatus ever start failing!

[nyiregyhazi]

"The energy can come from all parts of our body but is felt draining through the hand/fingers. I generally visualize: fingertips as (pppp), 1st knuckle (ppp), 2nd knuckle (pp), 3rd knuckle (p), under palm (mp), above palm (mf), wrist (f), forearm (ff), shoulders (fff), back (ffff). When we produce the volume dynamic or accent we feel the energy coming from these parts of our body but it is draining through our hands/fingers, so what is happening here is most important and will control the rest of the body, not the other way around."

"we"? I remember you mentioned this one before, but I can't personally make any sense of this. Myself, I'd be feeling from the knuckle all the way from the softest dynamics through to some of the loudest of all. The arm would be an optional extra to much the same action when it gets really loud. There's nothing wrong with a metaphor if it works for you, but I don't understand how a person could possibly differentiate between pppp and ppp- considering that the 1st knuckle is the only means of moving the fingertip. For that matter, 99% of humans cannot move the first knuckle separately from the 2nd- so there's effectively no difference between any of those three.  I have no problem with the idea of looking to imagine more of the arm being involved in louder playing, but I cannot understand the purpose of an attempt to be so specific about it- when it's clearly an extremely subjective metaphor.

"If we totally relax our hands our fingers will curl up in a fashion that is not really suitable for piano playing. So merely extending our fingers to place them on the keyboard is more tense than being totally relaxed. "

This simply isn't true. Dangle your fingertips lightly against the keys from above and slowly draw your wrist backwards and ease it down. It's not hard to find a way of moving where the reaction from the keyboard will straighten out the fingers for you (without a single key being moved). Also, I don't see how a curled up relaxed finger is in an unsuitable position to move the keys. I frequently start from such a position. Unless the wrist is ultra-low and the knuckle ultra-high, the dangling position is not all that extreme.  

That said, those who harp on dogmatically about the importance of starting from a "natural position" also neglect this. There are many different positions that a totally relaxed hand can end up in, hence there are many "natural" positions- not just the rather slight curve Chopin spoke of. When people say what the relaxed position is supposed to look like, ironically enough they can make the hand even stiffen in a bid to force this "relaxed" position to happen. Anyway, the point is that here are countless useful positions that can be formed without effort and there are also useful ones that do involve some prior use of the muscles. There are no hard and fast rules here.

However, it's when a key has been depressed that a "rule" does come into it- by simple laws of nature. A finger cannot keep a key depressed without activity. Whatever finger is keeping the key down has a vital role to play, both at doing that and in determining how the rest of the hand shapes itself. When that finger acts in the right, it's possible to be an extremely functional hand position with complete release of all other fingers. Again, there may be a purpose to other efforts, but this is exactly when most pointless efforts come in- typically because the fingers that should be balancing are acting poorly. Unfortunately, this is where the short-sightedness of the tension/release approach wreaks havoc. When the useful efforts are willfully released, everything else has to stiffen to balance out.

Recently, I've noticed that Bach fugues are the biggest test of this issue. If you keep the activity in fingers that have already played (continuing to lightly push the knuckle up in the air) the hand can stay very free. Only these fingers necessarily maintain activity. It's when I lose focus in this ongoing action, that I find my hands starting to stiffen. If the fingers start relaxing, other actions start kicking in to make sure the palm cannot collapse down. The more clearly the supporting fingers perform their role, the more everything else can relax. But when they misjudge their role, subconscious reflexes basically send out panic signals instructing the hand to brace itself. The idea of relaxing fingers after sounding notes (rather than accurately perceiving the small activity that they need to maintain and deploying it efficiently) has been disastrous for countless pianists. It's only when you achieve a sense of refinement and focus in the activity that DOES serve a purpose, that you have any hope in hell of releasing ones that do not.

[cjp_piano]

I think points of relaxation recover more energy than points of exertion when we play a piece. If we cannot produce this feeling while playing a piece the piece tends to tax a lot of our energy and things can become more uncontrolled. Of course there is nothing wrong with a little bit of lactic acid building up when you play long strenuous passages, but how do you release that tension and recover from it? Fortunately there are not many long pieces where it is 100% maximum output from start to finish, there are always points of recovery.

It is not good just thinking that just because a passage is difficult and is supposed to tax you that after we escape it we must carry on the feeling of tiredness and exertion. After points of exertion we know how to relax and recover our energy fast so that our muscles do not get tired. Growing up on a very heavy action grand piano I had to learn how to conserve energy while playing from the beginning. This type of skill has passed on now that I learn on lighter action pianos but play pieces that demand much more technical acrobatics which our body must try to solve efficiently first with good technique and then secondly learn to relax after this exertion if we are to be able to play at that standard with effortless mastery.

This was in response to my quote "I think it's more about being AWARE of what your body is doing. There's no such thing as actually being completely relaxed when you play piano, it's impossible, but what you want is to have the minimum amount of tension needed to execute a particular passage. "

I'm not sure I follow you. Were you agreeing with me? Disagreeing? Expanding?

[lostinidlewonder]

LOSTINWONDER SAID
"The energy can come from all parts of our body but is felt draining through the hand/fingers. I generally visualize: fingertips as (pppp), 1st knuckle (ppp), 2nd knuckle (pp), 3rd knuckle (p), under palm (mp), above palm (mf), wrist (f), forearm (ff), shoulders (fff), back (ffff). When we produce the volume dynamic or accent we feel the energy coming from these parts of our body but it is draining through our hands/fingers, so what is happening here is most important and will control the rest of the body, not the other way around."

"we"?

Using "we" in a sentence is quite normal and should not inspire confusion to normal readers of English.

I remember you mentioned this one before, but I can't personally make any sense of this. Myself, I'd be feeling from the knuckle all the way from the softest dynamics through to some of the loudest of all. The arm would be an optional extra to much the same action when it gets really loud. There's nothing wrong with a metaphor if it works for you, but I don't understand how a person could possibly differentiate between pppp and ppp- considering that the 1st knuckle is the only means of moving the fingertip.

Like I said, there are players who are more sensitive than others, if you have experience with hundreds of pieces which play a whole range of dynamics then you will have greater appreciation. I really do not have the wish to describe each of these volume levels with a few hundred musical examples and neatly presenting all permutations and combinations of volume and how your body is effected so my general description is more than enough. If it interests you furthermore then you can investigate it.

For that matter, 99% of humans cannot move the first knuckle separately from the 2nd- so there's effectively no difference between any of those three.

If you read carefully I said you visualize the energy coming from certain points, this does not mean that you physically need to move from that point, there lies the problem with your understanding of my concept, which is afterall much easier to describe in person and with context of your music.

I have no problem with the idea of looking to imagine more of the arm being involved in louder playing, but I cannot understand the purpose of an attempt to be so specific about it- when it's clearly an extremely subjective metaphor.

It is because you have simplified my idea by considering that that is where the action or movement or whatever must come from. I have taught this idea of volume to hundreds of students all who appreciate the idea quite easily and it helps them visualize where the energy comes from. To merely think that my idea is a scientific measuring stick that can measure everything and controls every single musical action you need, that is just being silly, because context of music will always command what you exactly have to do, my idea of volume from the body is merely a compass guiding you in the right spot, a tool that is quite common for musicians to use.
 
LOSTINWONDER SAID:
"If we totally relax our hands our fingers will curl up in a fashion that is not really suitable for piano playing. So merely extending our fingers to place them on the keyboard is more tense than being totally relaxed. "

This simply isn't true. Dangle your fingertips lightly against the keys from above and slowly draw your wrist backwards and ease it down.

Your fingers will be pressing against the keyboard and the fingers will become more straight compared to if you where totally resting like if you where lying on your bed going to sleep. Check your hand form then, it is certainly curled up and not suited for piano playing. As soon as your fingers extend they have more tension than if they where 100% relaxed, I really don't care if you disagree because most normal people will understand this.

....Also, I don't see how a curled up relaxed finger is in an unsuitable position to move the keys. I frequently start from such a position. Unless the wrist is ultra-low and the knuckle ultra-high, the dangling position is not all that extreme.  

Well if we all play simple music then you can get away with it, but try to play like that with all music and you will find playing very difficult.

There are many different positions that a totally relaxed hand can end up in.....

There is only one TOTALLY RELAXED hand position and it does not conform with normal positions for the hand at rest at the keyboard. Discussions with nyiregyhazi is always difficult because his concept of definitions is always skewed. I don't think we are on the same ball when I was talking about total relaxation. Total relaxation does not exist in piano playing or any other physical activity. If it did exist then paralyzed people could play the piano, an old 90 year old could play with full force just like a 20 year old etc. Just stop trying to twist simple definitions that are not even a main point of discussion and then go off onto a tangent of talking to yourself. Thus much of the rest of your posts is ignored because it falls into this state of confusion.

This was in response to my quote "I think it's more about being AWARE of what your body is doing. There's no such thing as actually being completely relaxed when you play piano, it's impossible, but what you want is to have the minimum amount of tension needed to execute a particular passage. "

I'm not sure I follow you. Were you agreeing with me? Disagreeing? Expanding?

Agreeing and elaborating.

[keyboardclass]

I can see from the above few posts where this thread's headed.

My contribution:  Of course arms/shoulders must be 100% relaxed - only during the moment of key depression is there any need for tension.

[cjp_piano]

My contribution:  Of course arms/shoulders must be 100% relaxed - only during the moment of key depression is there any need for tension.

This is impossible. 100% relaxed means you would even be able to hold them up, they would be dangling at your sides.

[keyboardclass]

This is impossible. 100% relaxed means you would even be able to hold them up, they would be dangling at your sides.

As in fact they should (excluding the forearm of course).

[wsmith]

This is impossible. 100% relaxed means you would even be able to hold them up, they would be dangling at your sides.

As in fact they should (excluding the forearm of course).

Would you mind demonstrating this 'dangling arm' - technique with, say, the Presto con fuoco section of Chopin's second ballade?

[keyboardclass]

Would you mind demonstrating this 'dangling arm' - technique with, say, the Presto con fuoco section of Chopin's second ballade?

It's nothing to do with speed or dynamics.  If you are playing at the extremes of the keyboard obviously the upper arms go away from the sides.

[wsmith]

It's nothing to do with speed or dynamics.  If you are playing at the extremes of the keyboard obviously the upper arms go away from the sides.

There is no way you can play that section with dangling, totally relaxed arms. Without active support from the upper arm a linear execution of that section is impossible.

[keyboardclass]

Well if you will choose an extreme.

[nyiregyhazi]

Using "we" in a sentence is quite normal and should not inspire confusion to normal readers of English.
Like I said, there are players who are more sensitive than others, if you have experience with thousands of pieces which play a whole range of dynamics then you will have greater appreciation.

When something is accepted as common knowledge, yes, But if I said, we regard quieter playing as green, louder playing as red etc? Both are subjective metaphors and ought to be portrayed as such.

I really do not have the wish to describe each of these volume levels with a few hundred musical examples and neatly presenting all permutations and combinations of volume and how your body is effected so my general description is more than enough. If it interests you furthermore then you can investigate it.

I tried it. I simply cannot relate to what it could possibly mean. If you get results from using it, I don't wish to take anything away from that. However, I am just saying that out of the context of the other elements that you obviously teach, I cannot personally make any sense of what the difference between thinking of the finger tip and the finger joint that moves that tip might actually mean.

It is because you have simplified my idea by considering that that is where the action or movement or whatever must come from.

No, I tried taking it less literally too. I don't have any problem if this works for you, but I simply find it puzzling that such a subjective concept (which could never work the same for all) comes with such a specific listing. Why not just imagine it in your own way, if you want to go down the chakra approach? Why prescribe in such detail?


is only one TOTALLY RELAXED hand position and it does not conform with normal positions for the hand at rest at the keyboard. Discussions with nyiregyhazi is always difficult because his concept of definitions is always skewed. I don't think we are on the same ball when I was talking about total relaxation. Total relaxation does not exist in piano playing or any other physical activity.

Firstly, I never argued that all muscles can be literally relaxed, so could we leave the strawman arguments aside? However, I am saying that a hand can be LITERALLY relaxed, prior to playing a key, in a functional way. You respond as if you didn't actually read my post? Did you miss my explanation of how an entirely literally relaxed hand can be in various positions- when  resting lightly on the keys? When resting against the keys, without depressing them, the keys can keep the fingers straighter- not merely 'tension'. There are countless ways in which literal relaxation (of the HAND- the whole arm and body is not being implied as also literally relaxed) can form different positions. Chopin's position is just one such position- which is entirely functional, yet only one of the many valuable ways to align the hand. These include the literally relaxed and those that feature activity.

[cjp_piano]

Using "we" in a sentence is quite normal and .....

who are you quoting and why didn't it show up?

[nyiregyhazi]

who are you quoting and why didn't it show up?

That was from lostinidlewonder. I don't have the patience to copy and paste multiple quotes, so I tend to use either quotation marks or italics- when responding to multiple points.

Incidentally, does anyone else agree that there is only a single possible relaxed hand position, that this position is too curled up for the fingers to play well from (contrary to what Chopin said about his relaxed hand position being relatively flat) , or that any other position requires tension in the hand? It makes about as much sense to me as claiming that there's only a single position that a corpse can fall into and that if lands any other way it must be using muscle tensions and not dead at all. All you have to do is dangle your hand from the wrist and slowly move it up and down- to see how many different alignments the most literally relaxed fingers possible can get into. Start resting them on a surface (eg. a piano key, prior to depression) and there are even more possibilities- for shapes that are not created by muscular activity in the hand.

[nyiregyhazi]

I can see from the above few posts where this thread's headed.

My contribution:  Of course arms/shoulders must be 100% relaxed - only during the moment of key depression is there any need for tension.

So, is this a major rethink to your ethos, or do you just not care for consistency? Or are you just trolling, even? You have repeatedly stated elsewhere that fingers should relax after playing the keys and that no arm-weight should rest on them. You've also said that the weight should be entirely supported at the shoulder. So do you honestly feel that weight is supported by an act of "relaxation"? Or are you simply not bothered by such an evident full-blown contradiction?

If you're talking about comfort, why is it being lost during key depression before having to be reinstated? Why excuse that? Why not stay "relaxed" at all times, if "relaxed" is taken to mean "comfortable" rather than taken in reference to muscular release?

[keyboardclass]

Might I suggest you bark up another tree?  I've no interest in your questions.

[mcdiddy1]

I heard a very interesting quote from a great musician about the three different stages of knowledge that I think applies to argument about arm weight

The first stage is where the poetic stage- where anything goes, everything is simple and idealistic, and easy. The second stage is the know-it-alls that annoy everyone and say "it is a slur" or it must be this way until the end of time. The third stage is when you realize there are multiple ways of doing anything and certain people just do things differently.

I think that alies with the arm-weight argument as well. Isn't it possible that "100 percent " relaxation for someone is different for another person? Isn't it possible that " 100 percent" relaxation may be refered to muscle relaxation in the arms and not tendons which actually do the work to hold up muscles and bones? It is possible to have your inner arm muscles relaxed and have your forearms being held up by tendons. Also people are not all built the same so we do we expect everyone to play the same? Maybe for some people they have to have a bit of tension to make the key press while others need to concentrate on being relaxed just to achieve the best musical results for them. Just because a view point is different does not make them wrong, just different from our own.

Fundamentally, there has to be he right amount of balance on certain tissues to hold up the bones, and a relaxation of certain muscles in the hand and arm in order to produce the right tone and have good dexterity on the piano. All the scientific definition and words will not convince anyone until the experience exactly what you are talking about and see it for themselves.

[nyiregyhazi]

I think that alies with the arm-weight argument as well. Isn't it possible that "100 percent " relaxation for someone is different for another person? Isn't it possible that " 100 percent" relaxation may be refered to muscle relaxation in the arms and not tendons which actually do the work to hold up muscles and bones? It is possible to have your inner arm muscles relaxed and have your forearms being held up by tendons. Also people are not all built the same so we do we expect everyone to play the same? Maybe for some people they have to have a bit of tension to make the key press while others need to concentrate on being relaxed just to achieve the best musical results for them. Just because a view point is different does not make them wrong, just different from our own.

But the issue is not so much about whether an individual is right or wrong. Accomplished professionals have all kinds of bizarre perceptions that could not possibly reflect reality, but which do work for them. The issue is how much others can learn from something. As I said in a previous post, if relaxation is taken to mean "comfort", at best it's stating the blindingly obvious. At worst, it's taken to mean something altogether different and can literally send a pianist backwards- by discouraging the most important activities of all.

Good teachers show students how to FEEL comfort, by teaching what IS needed to play efficiently. They don't just keep saying "relax". The problem is that so many teachers fail to clarify what they do mean, or what activities need to be developed, that they risk passing on almost nothing at all- except that the student is supposed to intend to relax. Intending to relax doesn't make it happen. Many widespread explanations of relaxation are far more likely to discourage inexperienced players to miss out on the activities that are essential for high-level playing, than to make them any more relaxed.

"All the scientific definition and words will not convince anyone until the experience exactly what you are talking about and see it for themselves."
   

How will "and then relax" (without definition) get anyone any close to that? The fact that "and then relax" is so vague and has no immediately recognisable or precise meaning is exactly what makes it so inept and widely misleading as advice. It can rarely convey anything remotely useful, unless the person has learned exactly what they do need elsewhere. Ambiguity of meaning is not a mitigating circumstance for an explanation. It's exactly what makes it a bad explanation- except when it is merely the very surface of rounded teaching, that would almost certainly depend heavily upon physical touch. Outside of that, it's virtually meaningless advice at best and harmful advice at worst.

[mcdiddy1]

But the issue is not so much about whether an individual is right or wrong. Accomplished professionals have all kinds of bizarre perceptions that could not possibly reflect reality, but which do work for them. The issue is how much others can learn from something. As I said in a previous post, if relaxation is taken to mean "comfort", at best it's stating the blindingly obvious. At worst, it's taken to mean something altogether different and can literally send a pianist backwards- by discouraging the most important activities of all.

Good teachers show students how to FEEL comfort, by teaching what IS needed to play efficiently. They don't just keep saying "relax". The problem is that so many teachers fail to clarify what they do mean, or what activities need to be developed, that they risk passing on almost nothing at all- except that the student is supposed to intend to relax. Intending to relax doesn't make it happen. Many widespread explanations of relaxation are far more likely to discourage inexperienced players to miss out on the activities that are essential for high-level playing, than to make them any more relaxed.

"All the scientific definition and words will not convince anyone until the experience exactly what you are talking about and see it for themselves."
   

How will "and then relax" (without definition) get anyone any close to that? The fact that "and then relax" is so vague and has no immediately recognisable or precise meaning is exactly what makes it so inept and widely misleading as advice. It can rarely convey anything remotely useful, unless the person has learned exactly what they do need elsewhere. Ambiguity of meaning is not a mitigating circumstance for an explanation. It's exactly what makes it a bad explanation- except when it is merely the very surface of rounded teaching, that would almost certainly depend heavily upon physical touch. Outside of that, it's virtually meaningless advice at best and harmful advice at worst.

I would not go so far to say being relaxed and comfort is blindingly obvious. To many students minds the fast you play ,the harder it must be. Many translate harder music to requiring tension and that's why it is very easy for even advanced players to resort to tense up often without realizing it.anything taken to an extreme can be misinterpretated and send students down the wrong path even of you are specific. For example if you tell a student they need to have their fingers relaxed and their hand muscles taut by words, you do not know the degree of tension already in the hands and the student may blindly decide to play like that thinking this will improve their playing despite the consequence of them following your directions created an unintended result of tension they did not need. I just argue words do not encourage change but rather experimentation, discovery and most importantly results is what counts.

Telling students to relax their muscles is somewhat vague and meaningless unless the teacher explains what that means but it certainly not bad advice just because if is not specific. It certainly means something to a number of players. I have seen piano players who refuse to use their thumb and play with flying fingers and never had a piano teacher who taught them what it means to relax muscles in their hand. While they managed to play something surprisingly well, of course they were extremely limited in what they could do. To your point constantly reminding them to relax will not change their behavior but teaching them exercise and steps to getting there will. It doesn't make the statement of relaxing in valid just requiring thoughtful consideration of the student and the the overal goal.

The only harm I could see from this advice is for the student to take fold on to the advice apply it to every aspect of piano technique regardless of curcimstance. While this is possible from my experience in teaching large number of students in public schools and private, I have not seen a student misuse the advice and have harmful results. Many students were simply never even taugh any sort of relaxation and a large number of them suffer from expensive tension. I think their are many times where a student may need finer modifications in their technique in certain situations or someone telling them they are over doing something but I wouldn't say the fundamental concept of starting with a relaxed hand position is going to useless or create harm especially if it is taugh well

[nyiregyhazi]

"I would not go so far to say being relaxed and comfort is blindingly obvious. To many students minds the fast you play ,the harder it must be. Many translate harder music to requiring tension and that's why it is very easy for even advanced players to resort to tense up often without realizing it."

Sure, but this can be disproven in just one lesson. If the teacher has to keep saying "relax" they are too busy talking and not busy enough showing the bigger picture- which includes what needs to activate in order for certain relaxations to have any chance of happening.

"I just argue words do not encourage change but rather experimentation, discovery and most importantly results is what counts."

Of course. But those who make the dogmatic statement "and then relax" completely disrupt this. That is where much talk of relaxation is so short-sighted and destructive. Students need to learn how to balance comfortably on the piano keys. Those who do not understand how to focus the ongoing hand activity are almost always those who have the biggest tension problems.

"Telling students to relax their muscles is somewhat vague and meaningless unless the teacher explains what that means but it certainly not bad advice just because if is not specific."

Without that which good teachers support it with, it really is. Where is the value in a statement that can mean almost ANYTHING- one meaning implying a totally dysfunctional relaxation of hand activity between keys, that renders rapid playing impossible?


"To your point constantly reminding them to relax will not change their behavior but teaching them exercise and steps to getting there will. It doesn't make the statement of relaxing in valid just requiring thoughtful consideration of the student and the the overal goal."

No, but it shows how utterly worthless the statement is in isolation- and how much more is needed to actually achieve comfort than a completely non-specific command that can mean a thousand different things to different people.

"The only harm I could see from this advice is for the student to take fold on to the advice apply it to every aspect of piano technique regardless of curcimstance. While this is possible from my experience in teaching large number of students in public schools and private, I have not seen a student misuse the advice and have harmful results."

I don't know if I've ever seen a student who uses their hand actively enough. Even among some pretty good students, I have scarcely seen a single one who uses their thumb well enough for extreme rapid scales. There's too much of the prod the arm then slump approach.

https://pianoscience.blogspot.com/2011/11/action-and-reaction-in-practise-part-i.html


With the above approach, there's no extraneous effort that can possibly be released. Even the best students I teach have to reminded over and over again to properly finish the activity rather than let their hands keep sagging into incapable flaccidity, in the very instant the key sounds. Every time I remind them and show them how to exaggerate, I see a huge difference. Their arms loosen and they start moving quicker and with less effort. However, every time they go away and practise for the week they seem to come back moving lazily again and I have to remind them to bring the activity in all over again. It really takes time for these things to become "normal". Also, I have others who let the arms slump very lazily against their sides- creating a totally dysfunctional hand position and little room for movement. The tendency to overrelax in certain places runs as deep as the tendency to be stiff in others.

Relax means nothing useful whatsoever, unless you have a concept of both what to relax into (which means knowing what activity to keep up) and how to relax the parts that don't need to be active. It's the absolute surface of good teaching- even if most teachers (myself included) do use the terminology. If the word were banned, good teachers would not be hampered at all- because they students HOW (and in the context of what is possible while actually playing). 

[nyiregyhazi]

Incidentally, the fact the OP is baffled is ample illustration of how a vague and inadequately objective portrayal of relaxation can be so harmful. Is it any wonder that he is baffled by something that is explained in a totally implausible way? Personally, I'm a firm believer in the idea that a lot can be understood through the right mental conception and understanding of movement. However, there's no way that a vague and ambiguous explanation can ever mean terribly much to anybody- unless it's simply a reminder of the vastly more specific things that they learn elsewhere.

[lostinidlewonder]

Using "we" in a sentence is quite normal and should not inspire confusion to normal readers of English.
Like I said, there are players who are more sensitive than others, if you have experience with thousands of pieces which play a whole range of dynamics then you will have greater appreciation.

When something is accepted as common knowledge, yes, But if I said, we regard quieter playing as green, louder playing as red etc? Both are subjective metaphors and ought to be portrayed as such.

You are avoiding the fact that using "we" in a sentence is NOT confusing yet you thought it important enought to quote the use of "we" a totally irrelevant issue in any case. Using colors is an irrelevant comparison to my concept.


I really do not have the wish to describe each of these volume levels with a few hundred musical examples and neatly presenting all permutations and combinations of volume and how your body is effected so my general description is more than enough. If it interests you furthermore then you can investigate it.

I tried it. I simply cannot relate to what it could possibly mean. If you get results from using it, I don't wish to take anything away from that. However, I am just saying that out of the context of the other elements that you obviously teach, I cannot personally make any sense of what the difference between thinking of the finger tip and the finger joint that moves that tip might actually mean.

Just because you cannot understand it is also irrelevant. If one cannot understand to VISUALIZE the energy from these points then I cannot help you unless you pay for a lesson in person, and I do not have space for new students atm sorry.


It is because you have simplified my idea by considering that that is where the action or movement or whatever must come from.

No, I tried taking it less literally too. I don't have any problem if this works for you, but I simply find it puzzling that such a subjective concept (which could never work the same for all) comes with such a specific listing. Why not just imagine it in your own way, if you want to go down the chakra approach? Why prescribe in such detail?

Again, your failure to understand my concept doesn't add anything to the discussion at all.You want to take it even further and compare it with Chakras?? Again, missing the point and merely throws the discussion off on a tangent of irrelevance, something of which you seem to be a master at.


is only one TOTALLY RELAXED hand position and it does not conform with normal positions for the hand at rest at the keyboard. Discussions with nyiregyhazi is always difficult because his concept of definitions is always skewed. I don't think we are on the same ball when I was talking about total relaxation. Total relaxation does not exist in piano playing or any other physical activity.

.....However, I am saying that a hand can be LITERALLY relaxed, prior to playing a key, in a functional way. You respond as if you didn't actually read my post?

You can go on talking to yourself, my point of total relaxation was not even a main point of discussion yet you are trying to make it an issue (of which no one else is really interested in because we all know 100% relaxation does not exist in piano playing or any other physical activity.)

I admitted that I ignored much of your posts because when I start reading people going off on tangents talking to themselves I feel I have better things to read.

[nyiregyhazi]

" You are avoiding the fact that using "we" in a sentence is NOT confusing yet you thought it important enought to quote the use of "we" a totally irrelevant issue in any case. Using colors is an irrelevant comparison to my concept."


While I didn't have any wish to dwell on this, the point is that both are very subjective and neither is a standard approach or rooted in anything that would be widely agreed upon. "We" suggests something to be normal. I was simply pointing out that it is not. I am sorry if it bothers you, but I don't see that this needs to be any major issue.


Just because you cannot understand it is also irrelevant. If one cannot understand to VISUALIZE the energy from these points then I cannot help you unless you pay for a lesson in person, and I do not have space for new students atm sorry.


No, just because it's clearly extraordinarily subjective. I pointed out very specifically that it's fine if it works for you. I did not say anything about it being "irrelevant", so please stop portraying a dismissive attack. What I said is simply that subjective metaphors are never universal. If somebody happens not to have the faintest clue as to how energy can be transferred from an isolated fingertip (with no involvement of the joint that moves it) it is not because that person is insensitive. It's because they have no clue as to how this metaphor might translate into any tangible reality. If it does for you, that's great. My point was that something so subjective is not going to mean anything to one and all. If you're not interested in responding to my honest enquiry with clarification or expansion, clearly this is a waste of time.

Again, your failure to understand my concept doesn't add anything to the discussion at all.You want to take it even further and compare it with Chakras??

If energy flows from such specific points (unrelated to where movement occurs, as you said) what else it supposed to be, if not some metaphorical and holistic "energy"? Furthering the discussion was precisely my intent. However, if you're not interested in furthering your initial explanation in response, so be it. Clearly this isn't going to be going anywhere.

I admitted that I ignored much of your posts because when I start reading people going off on tangents talking to themselves I feel I have better things to read.

Better things like replying under the pretence of addressing my points, yet without having bothered to read them or consider them? Clearly you just took umbrage at being corrected on the claim you made that falsely portrayed limits of physical possibility. I am sorry if that bothered you, but I think it's important to be clear that the idea that a (literally) relaxed hand might only form one single position over a keyboard is not true. This is a discussion about relaxation and tension, not a competition. I responded for no other reason than because what you claimed was untrue. I'm sorry if you interpreted my post as something personal, but I just think that it would be very misleading to tell people that fingers cannot be straightened without tension. The lightest of contact with a piano can do that. I happen to feel that it's very important to perceive how many different positions a literally relaxed hand can be in- hence my correction. If you want to add anything to that subject then by all means do so, but if you perceive some kind of personal battle, I'm afraid that I have no interest in anything outside of the topic.

[lostinidlewonder]

" You are avoiding the fact that using "we" in a sentence is NOT confusing yet you thought it important enought to quote the use of "we" a totally irrelevant issue in any case. Using colors is an irrelevant comparison to my concept."

While I didn't have any wish to dwell on this, the point is that both are very subjective and neither is a standard approach or rooted in anything that would be widely agreed upon. "We" suggests something to be normal. I was simply pointing out that it is not. I am sorry if it bothers you, but I don't see that this needs to be any major issue.

You still persist in trying to prove that the use of "we" needs to fall in line with your ideological perspectives, who really cares? Probably only youself. Don't be afraid that I am confident in the tools I use to teach, I have used it for many individuals and they all understand it quite fine. Like I said you might need a lesson in person with a teacher who has this perspective on energy transfer through the body and how we visualise it.




Just because you cannot understand it is also irrelevant. If one cannot understand to VISUALIZE the energy from these points then I cannot help you unless you pay for a lesson in person, and I do not have space for new students atm sorry.

No, just because it's clearly extraordinarily subjective. I pointed out very specifically that it's fine if it works for you. I did not say anything about it being "irrelevant", so please stop portraying a dismissive attack.

You are reading wrongly, I said what YOU are trying to type is irrelevant to what the main issue is about. The energy is not subjective as you would have some try to believe, why don't you try to produce an ffff by visualising the energy trickling out of your finger tips only? It doesn't seem as subjective anymore then does it? Why don't you try to produce a pppp touch with your forearms dropping into the note? Oh is it that subjective?



Again, your failure to understand my concept doesn't add anything to the discussion at all.You want to take it even further and compare it with Chakras??

If energy flows from such specific points (unrelated to where movement occurs, as you said) what else it supposed to be, if not some metaphorical and holistic "energy"? Furthering the discussion was precisely my intent. However, if you're not interested in furthering your initial explanation in response, so be it. Clearly this isn't going to be going anywhere.

I doesn't have to go much further because it merely INTRODUCES the concept of visualising where your energy comes from. If you have experience with many pieces you will understand how this visualisation helps, however if you merely are all theory you have no tools to test it practically.


I admitted that I ignored much of your posts because when I start reading people going off on tangents talking to themselves I feel I have better things to read.

Better things like replying under the pretence of addressing my points, yet without having bothered to read them or consider them?

And again I will take only a sentence because what follows it is rambling again and talking to oneself. Why should I take points from you when you write things which are irrelevant to the discussion? Perhaps with other members you might get that but I refuse to tangent when you cannot even address the crux of peoples posts.

[nyiregyhazi]

If you're stuck on the "we" issue, who exactly was referred to by "we"? When no context has been established, it is typically used to illustrate standard procedure.


You are reading wrongly, I said what YOU are trying to type is irrelevant to what the main issue is about. The energy is not subjective as you would have some try to believe, why don't you try to produce an ffff by visualising the energy trickling out of your finger tips only? It doesn't seem as subjective anymore then does it? Why don't you try to produce a pppp touch with your forearms dropping into the note? Oh is it that subjective?

I'm rather more interested in the idea of pppp from the fingertip, without involving the joint itself. That is spectacularly subjective- considering there is no means of transferring any energy from there independently of the joint. As I said previously, all three of your first ones can only involve the same movement- and the same energy source. Before, you insisted it was not about where the movement occurs. But now you're claiming the tip literally transfers energy, independently of any means of moving it? And that there is a verifiable and objective distinction between visualising energy coming from three areas that are all moved by the same action and energy source?

Also, I personally produce all quiet dynamics from the knuckle. I find the idea of isolating the very tip extremely unusual. I have seen very few pianist isolating the ends of the fingers in passages that require fine control of soft dynamics. I also know many pianists who like to use the whole arm to control quiet dynamics. I didn't say that the whole arm would not be used more for louder playing. In fact, I specifically said that more would be used for louder playing. My question was about the reason for being so SPECIFIC (rather than GENERAL) in each and every dynamic and about what the physical difference might be. I'm still interested in what the actual difference might be between those three soft dynamics, if you are saying this is founded upon something literal, rather than on imagery.



"And again I will take only a sentence because what follows it is rambling again and talking to oneself. Why should I take points from you when you write things which are irrelevant to the discussion? Perhaps with other members you might get that but I refuse to tangent when you cannot even address the crux of peoples posts. "

Then deal with the point I made in my first post about the PPPP, PPP and PP instead. I was trying to keep it to the topic, but you didn't follow up on the topical points that I started with. If you're not going to do so, this is a total waste of time.

Also, had you read the first "tangent" you would have been in a position to discover that it was actually in specific reference to your claim about the single position a relaxed hand can supposedly enter.

[lostinidlewonder]

If you're stuck on the "we" issue, who exactly was referred to by "we"? When no context has been established, it is typically used to illustrate standard procedure.

"We" means those who are applying the parts of the body energy VISUALISATION. If I have to be so exact in every single word I type then things will become extremely long, most people would not even consider things in such detail unless they merely want to pick at irrelevant things and ignore the main issues.



You are reading wrongly, I said what YOU are trying to type is irrelevant to what the main issue is about. The energy is not subjective as you would have some try to believe, why don't you try to produce an ffff by visualising the energy trickling out of your finger tips only? It doesn't seem as subjective anymore then does it? Why don't you try to produce a pppp touch with your forearms dropping into the note? Oh is it that subjective?

I'm rather more interested in the idea of pppp from the fingertip, without involving the joint itself.

You stated that my concept of the visualisation of energy was extremely subjective so there lies a main ideological stance of yours that you wrote a number of times. I asked you if it is with such intense subjectivity why would one consider a ffff touch by VISUSALISING the energy coming only from their finger tips?

That is spectacularly subjective- considering there is no means of transferring any energy from there independently of the joint.

Visualisation can help a great deal, if you cannot appreciate the fact that one gets a different feeling visualising energy coming from their fingertips as opposed to visualising it coming from another joint, then you merely need more playing experience, if you still cannot appreciate it then you might not be as sensitive a player as other people and might indeed solve it another way (music can be approached in many ways).

Unfortunately one cannot rely on measuring sticks which cannot contort to a given piece of music, you cannot scientifically measure how to do each volumes based on which body part needs to visualize the energy flow, but we can have guides, and visualising where your volumes come from by points of the body is a helpful guide, this means it is not the complete picture because you need context of the music, but coupled with the music the picture becomes more complete. So if you want to take my visualisation of energy under more scrutiny then you need to apply it to many many PIECES, not just talk theory. Like I said already I am not prepared to discuss this in full detail with hundreds of pieces or even a few pieces (because a few pieces will not answer the whole issue.) One only needs to consider then if you have no pieces to test, how you would visualise playing an extremely soft touch vs and extremely loud one and my visualisation points run in line with this as a basic point of explanation.

....But now you're claiming the tip literally transfers energy, independently of any means of moving it? And that there is a verifiable and objective distinction between visualising energy coming from three areas that are all moved by the same action and energy source?

I never said that the fingertips transfer energy INDEPENDENTLY of any means of moving it. I said that visualising the energy coming from the fingertips only as opposed to then visualising other joints of the finger while playing will produce a different feel to the sensitive player. If you play pieces which focus on shades of p then you will understand this, if you merely try to feel a difference between pppp and ppp by playing a few notes it just wont cut it, one needs musical context.

Also, I personally produce all quiet dynamics from the knuckle.

This is fine and runs in line with my energy visualisations, however I break down the points furthermore. If you cannot feel the extra points then maybe you obviously have no need to utilise it. This is also fine, but this does not mean that when others expand upon it they are wrong. I especially know I am not wrong because I have the evidence of hundreds of students and teachers who I have shared this with and discussed in great detail in person and at a piano and with pieces of music.

...My question was about the reason for being so SPECIFIC (rather than GENERAL) in each and every dynamic and about what the physical difference might be. I'm still interested in what the actual difference might be between those three soft dynamics, if you are saying this is founded upon something literal, rather than on imagery.

There is nothing wrong with being so specific because the visualisation generally runs in line with producing those type of dynamics in a given piece of music. I could even expand upon it futhermore highlighting intensity of energy coming from certain points based on a given piece of music. For example I have found playing rapid fff sections one has no time to visualise points of energy coming from the shoulders thus much of the energy is emphasised on the forearm. But if you had sustained fff chords you would want to visualise the energy from the shoulders. So the forte power visualisation remains near the points of the body I described. One would not try to produce f ranged by visualising the energy coming from the fingers.


"And again I will take only a sentence because what follows it is rambling again and talking to oneself. Why should I take points from you when you write things which are irrelevant to the discussion? Perhaps with other members you might get that but I refuse to tangent when you cannot even address the crux of peoples posts. "

If you don't wish to read them, I only ask you not to reply in a way that has already been rendered obsolete ....

Obsolete in your mind only. I choose not to respond because the thread will tangent into irrelevance, of which I know you take great joy in and thus I won't pleasure you with that.

[nyiregyhazi]

"We" means those who are applying the parts of the body energy VISUALISATION.

I apply visualisation. Just not your specific listings. So, "we" means anyone who uses YOUR specific scheme of visualisation.


You stated that my concept of the visualisation of energy was extremely subjective so there lies a main ideological stance of yours that you wrote a number of times. I asked you if it is with such intense subjectivity why would one consider a ffff touch by VISUSALISING the energy coming only from their finger tips?

I do not visualise energy from the fingertips (in isolation from the whole finger) in any dynamic level. Anyway, I am talking about your very SPECIFIC listings- not such an obvious generalisation, that I agreed with a long time ago and also in my last post. If you believe your explanation is objective rather than subjective, please deal with my (now frequently repeated) point about the identical energy source for PPPP etc. All I've asked is for you to acknowledge subjectivity where it lies or to illustrate objectivity.

visualising energy coming from their fingertips as opposed to visualising it coming from another joint, then you merely need more playing experience, if you still cannot appreciate it then you might not be as sensitive a player as other people and might indeed solve it another way (music can be approached in many ways).

Cut the patronising tone please and deal with the point I made. How does a person differentiate between three styles of visualisation that all involve the same movement and energy source? And how is this anything other than totally subjective? The point about the shoulder is it can OBJECTIVELY provide real energy. A fingertip CANNOT- especially not in isolation from both the joint that moves it and the joint that must also move for that joint to be able to move!


This is fine and runs in line with my energy visualisations, however I break down the points furthermore. If you cannot feel the extra points then maybe you obviously have no need to utilise it. This is also fine, but this does not mean that when others expand upon it they are wrong.

I never said it does. I asked for you to expand upon the principle.

I especially know I am not wrong because I have the evidence of hundreds of students and teachers who I have shared this with and discussed in great detail in person and at a piano and with pieces of music.

I have never encountered a single teacher or concert artist who spoke of visualising energy coming from the fingertip, at any dynamic level. Conversely I know a great many who recommend controlling soft dynamics from the knuckle. That is why I was asking for more details on what you are actually talking about.
 

"One would not try to produce f ranged by visualising the energy from the fingers."

Really? I frequently use hand actions for forte. In fact, I play the chords prior to the coda of the 4th Ballade with virtually zero arm pressure, but with explosive squeezes of the hand. Single forte is hardly a test of the hand's limits. I'm just saying that these things are not as clear cut as you seem to wish to claim. If you want to argue the toss then fine, but there are a LOT of different combinations for virtually all dynamics- whether we look at literal energy sources or an esoteric means of visualising non-literal energy sources.

[lostinidlewonder]

"We" means those who are applying the parts of the body energy VISUALISATION.

I apply visualisation. Just not your specific listings. So, "we" means anyone who uses YOUR specific scheme of visualisation.

Was anyone else talking about parts of body energy visualisation in this thread? No. So it is unnecessary to be so exact since mine is the only one here.



You stated that my concept of the visualisation of energy was extremely subjective so there lies a main ideological stance of yours that you wrote a number of times. I asked you if it is with such intense subjectivity why would one consider a ffff touch by VISUSALISING the energy coming only from their finger tips?

I do not visualise energy from the fingertips (in isolation from the whole finger) in any dynamic level. Anyway, I am talking about your very SPECIFIC listings- not such an obvious generalisation, that I agreed with a long time ago and also in my last post. If you believe your explanation is objective rather than subjective, please deal with my (now frequently repeated) point about the identical energy source for PPPP etc.

If you do not visualise the energy from the fingertips then that is fine for you, but that does not mean that others cannot do it, don't feel alienated by this.


visualising energy coming from their fingertips as opposed to visualising it coming from another joint, then you merely need more playing experience, if you still cannot appreciate it then you might not be as sensitive a player as other people and might indeed solve it another way (music can be approached in many ways).

How does a person differentiate between three styles of visualisation that all involve the same movement and energy source? And how is this anything other than totally subjective? The point about the shoulder is it can OBJECTIVELY provide real energy. A fingertip CANNOT- especially not in isolation from both the joint that moves it and the joint that must also move for that joint to be able to move!

Go study many pieces, I AM NOT about to describe this to you in detail with hundreds of pieces like I have said numerous times. I am not here to teach people but to share ideas. If I do not want to elaborate on a point which in all essence IS NOT THE MAIN POINT OF MY INITIAL POST, you have to accept that I do not have to suffer such a request since it requires too much effort, pay me and I might be interested.


This is fine and runs in line with my energy visualisations, however I break down the points furthermore. If you cannot feel the extra points then maybe you obviously have no need to utilise it. This is also fine, but this does not mean that when others expand upon it they are wrong.

I never said it does. I asked for you to expand upon the principle.

I didnt say you said it does, but one only has to look at my points of visualisation to notice that the finger joints represent some of the p touches which runs in line with your idea. Shock horror!


I especially know I am not wrong because I have the evidence of hundreds of students and teachers who I have shared this with and discussed in great detail in person and at a piano and with pieces of music.

I have never encountered a single teacher or concert artist who spoke of visualising energy coming from the fingertip, at any dynamic level.

One cannot VISUALISE the energy from the finger tips at all? What happens if you do? It's impossible to visualise it? The brain actually cannot literally do it and will shut down? If you have not met someone that doesn't mean much.



"One would not try to produce f ranged by visualising the energy from the fingers."

Really? I frequently use hand actions for forte.

Since when is the hand a finger?

[nyiregyhazi]

"Was anyone else talking about parts of body energy visualisation in this thread? No. So it is unnecessary to be so exact since mine is the only one here."

Standing alone justifies a "we" rather than an "I"? Interesting logic. Anyway, I'm done here. This is is a total waste of time. All I've asked is for you to either acknowledge subjectivity where it lies, or to illustrate objectivity. Clearly this isn't going to lead anywhere.

What you don't seem able to acknowledge is that just because a person does not perceive energy originating in the fingertip (for a prescribed dynamic level), does not mean they have no sensitivity or that their fingertips are dead to the world. That is why I referred to "chakra"- an energy that is perceived, but something altogether different to scientific energy. If you want to patronise me for having a different subjective way of perceiving such entirely personal sensations (rather than acknowledge the subjective nature of your own and discuss them on that basis) fire away. If I gave your description to the pianists I know, I'm confident that at least 90% would give me a puzzled look. I'm not going to spend any more time here.

[lostinidlewonder]

"Was anyone else talking about parts of body energy visualisation in this thread? No. So it is unnecessary to be so exact since mine is the only one here."

Standing alone justifies a "we" rather than an "I"? Interesting logic. ...

I have to say "We" because many of my students have used these visualisations it is not only me.

What you don't seem able to acknowledge is that just because a person does not perceive energy originating in the fingertip (for a prescribed dynamic level), does not mean they have no sensitivity or that their fingertips are dead to the world.

Is that so?

....If you cannot feel the extra points then maybe you obviously have no need to utilise it. This is also fine, but this does not mean that when others expand upon it they are wrong.

....Visualisation can help a great deal, if you cannot appreciate the fact that one gets a different feeling visualising energy coming from their fingertips as opposed to visualising it coming from another joint, ..... you might not be as sensitive a player as other people and might indeed solve it another way (music can be approached in many ways).

[keyboardclass]

'perceive energy'!? - more crazy talk.   It's pretty straight forward what the nervous system is capable of attending to and energy is certainly not one of them.

[nyiregyhazi]

....If you cannot feel the extra points then maybe you obviously have no need to utilise it. This is also fine, but this does not mean that when others expand upon it they are wrong.

Indeed. And I have never either implied that nor stated that it does. What I have stated is that it's fine to use it, but it's important to be clear that it is a SUBJECTIVE and very PERSONAL way of looking at it.

....Visualisation can help a great deal, if you cannot appreciate the fact that one gets a different feeling visualising energy coming from their fingertips as opposed to visualising it coming from another joint, ..... you might not be as sensitive a player as other people and might indeed solve it another way (music can be approached in many ways).

adding "might" does not make it any less patronising to suggest that people who do not visualise imaginary energy being transferred from the fingertip "might" not be as sensitive as those who do. This is not a standard way of approaching soft playing and none of the professional pianists I have worked with have ever suggested divorcing the fingertip from the knuckle for soft playing, or visualising a mysterious energy flow from there. If it works for you that's fine,. But if you're seriously going to portray metaphorical energy flow as if it is a sign of heightened sensitivity compared to others, and attempt to generate an air of superiority, I am afraid that doesn't cut it. Because a pianist does not refer to any kind of chakra flowing from their fingertip does not mean they do not have a sensitive contact between finger and key (as evidenced by a wealth of concert artists). It means that they do not use imprecise hippy terminology to attempt to describe that experience.

[lostinidlewonder]

What I have stated is that it's fine to use it, but it's important to be clear that it is a SUBJECTIVE and very PERSONAL way of looking at it.

It is not subjective. Like I said, try to produce ffff through only your fingertips, it doens't work. Thus the points of the body represent a general measuring stick for the volume dynamic. And again I point out to you that this concept is not a main discussion in my initial post. If I am to elaborate on every single small point I make then my posts will go on forever.  

....Visualisation can help a great deal, if you cannot appreciate the fact that one gets a different feeling visualising energy coming from their fingertips as opposed to visualising it coming from another joint, ..... you might not be as sensitive a player as other people and might indeed solve it another way (music can be approached in many ways).

adding "might" does not make it any less patronising ....

This is exactly the same issue you had with me using "we". Do you really want to start arguing the use of a single word again? You have already admitted it leads nowhere when we discussed the single word "we" so why bother doing it again now with "might"? You are also tangenting from the fact that I DID NOT SAY that those without the sensitivity to visualise energy from their fingertips are lesser pianists, the reason why I had to copy paste my quote.

.....If it works for you that's fine,.

It not only works for me but hundreds of students I have taught it to. I am not the only teacher who teaches this. I know a number of teachers who I have discussed it with and they use it in their lessons. It is not a major tool because we are focusing on musical context, that is the score more so than what our body has to do, however it is sometimes helpful to have some concept of where the energy will come from. If you have no need to visualise the energy this way then that is fine but every single person I have demonstrated this to understands it and then realises how context of pieces also effects this measuring stick.

But if you're seriously going to portray metaphorical energy flow as if it is a sign of heightened sensitivity compared to others, and attempt to generate an air of superiority, I am afraid that doesn't cut it.

You are trying to say that my ideas are elevated and try to belittle others, not me. The mind and body are very closely connected, many people will admit this. Science proves it with many tests, for example a pain test for heat, one can increase their pain threshold imagining icy cold places. With martial arts we can feel the energy flowing from one person through the other, pushing hands in Kung Fu is a perfect example. So too is visualising energy while playing piano quite a helpful tool, if you do not think so then you are totally entitled to it, but to try and discredit my musical ideas by saying it is all subjective, has an air of superiority, etc etc, it is not constructive.

[nyiregyhazi]

"It is not subjective. Like I said, try to produce ffff through only your fingertips, it doens't work. Thus the points of the body represent a general measuring stick for the volume dynamic. And again I point out to you that this concept is not a main discussion in my initial post. If I am to elaborate on every single small point I make then my posts will go on forever.  "

You're not even paying the slightest attention to the points I made. I AGREED that there is SOME correlation. However, a single instance of correlation does not "prove" anything else in a very SPECIFIC list to be objective. That ffff cannot be done with the fingertips, proves that pppp should objectively be felt at the fingertip (and not at the joint that moves)? It takes but one counterexample to disprove a rule. Your differentiation between PPPP and PPP etc. is 100% subjective.

This is a total waste of time. If you are unable to recognise subjectivity, there is no value in continuing. I am not going to respond to any of the strawman arguments- in which you attempt to imply that my disagreement with your personal specifics suggests that I disagree with concepts altogether. Disagreeing with YOUR subjective specifics does not mean I disagree with the broad concept of considering where energy comes from. Disagreeing with a personal and very specific take on a broader idea does not imply rejection of that broader idea.

[lostinidlewonder]

"It is not subjective. Like I said, try to produce ffff through only your fingertips, it doens't work. Thus the points of the body represent a general measuring stick for the volume dynamic. And again I point out to you that this concept is not a main discussion in my initial post. If I am to elaborate on every single small point I make then my posts will go on forever.  "

I AGREED that there is SOME correlation. However, a single instance of correlation does not "prove" anything else your very SPECIFIC list.

I am not trying to prove it because I already admitted that it would require hundreds of examples, but by showing that this one instance runs in line (one could also consider producing the quietest P effects with the forearm would be also quite unnecessary), you can see it is not completely subjective but certainly requires context of a piece of music to make more sense.

The fact that energy cannot be applied from the a fingertip without being moved by the joint shows that your list is subjective. Your differentiation between PPPP and PPP etc. is 100% subjective. This is a total waste of time. If you cannot recognise that, there is no value in continuing.

I think most of the confusion is because I cannot describe to you what the feeling of visualising the energy coming from the fingertips feels like when you are playing. If you dip your fingertips in some paint you will have more of a sensation and realisation of your fingertips, more so than the rest of your finger parts. When playing the piano I can get the sensation when playing the softest rangest that the fingertips are like they are dripped in paint. PPP then feels like more paint is dipped, up to your first knuckle. And there you have it, the visualisation of energy and how it might feel, however again I admit, this is not proving the point as that would require a lot of music. And I have already admitted that if you had to produce an fff which I said one would visualise the shoulders, sometimes with context to the music it is not satisfactory to feel the energ from these points if we physically would feel greater efficiency if it came from a point closer to our hands.

[nyiregyhazi]

"I am not trying to prove it because I already admitted that it would require hundreds of examples, but by showing that this one instance runs in line (one could also consider producing the quietest P effects with the forearm would be also quite unnecessary), you can see it is not completely subjective but certainly requires context of a piece of music to make more sense."

So you're okay to focus on a lone instance of very general correlation, yet have no interest in anything that shows how subjective your specific details are? Do I have to repeat once again that my quibble was with your extreme SPECIFICS- not the general concept? Regarding applying this to music- you are the one who made an extremely detailed list that is totally abstracted from music!

I think most of the confusion is because I cannot describe to you what the feeling of visualising the energy coming from the fingertips feels like when you are playing.

Precisely the point I have been making. Yet you keep claiming you are dealing in the objective, rather than subjective descriptions.

[cjp_piano]

alright guys, that's enough, now kiss and make up 

[lostinidlewonder]

alright guys, that's enough, now kiss and make up 

Don't worry cjp_piano I am not upset at all. I never take discussion online personally and only want my ideas to be as clearly understood as I can make it (without writing a thesis on the issue!).


"I am not trying to prove it because I already admitted that it would require hundreds of examples, but by showing that this one instance runs in line (one could also consider producing the quietest P effects with the forearm would be also quite unnecessary), you can see it is not completely subjective but certainly requires context of a piece of music to make more sense."

So you're okay to focus on a lone instance of very general correlation, yet have no interest in anything that shows how subjective your specific details are? Regarding applying this to music- you are the one who made an extremely detailed list that is totally abstracted from music!

Subjective means that it depends on the persons view, contextual means that it depends on the piece of music. My description is contextual not subjective.

I think most of the confusion is because I cannot describe to you what the feeling of visualising the energy coming from the fingertips feels like when you are playing.

Precisely the point I have been making. Yet you keep claiming you are dealing in the objective, rather than subjective descriptions.

And I offered you a way to try and experience what we feel when visualise the energy flow through only our fingertips. I am dealing with contextual descriptions which stand quite happily alone as a general description.

[nyiregyhazi]

If you seriously think you are in command of absolutes, where a specific part of music dictates that energy should correctly be visualised from something so specific as either the fingertip or a specific joint, I am truly bemused. I have nothing more to add except this:

You should contact Volodos and tell him that his way of playing the piano is objectively wrong- seeing as he often uses whole arm movements for his softest dynamics of all. Why not send him your objective list- so he can find out the correct joint from which "we" visualise the energy coming from?