relaxation paradox

[cjp_piano]

Seriously guys, do you have anything better to do than boost your egos? How about making a pumpkin pie? 

[mcdiddy1]

Seriously guys, do you have anything better to do than boost your egos? How about making a pumpkin pie? 

Lol ....funny. Yes, it is thanksgiving. Why not agree to disagree, move on and enjoy the holidays!

[drazh]

Hi
I see relaxation is really a paradox. But in summary I concluded this ,use those  muscles only when they
 Are necessary. Don't tap the keys when your finger reach a key stop a little bit and then continue.be as relax as possible
Thank you

[nyiregyhazi]

Hi
I see relaxation is really a paradox. But in summary I concluded this ,use those  muscles only when they
 Are necessary.

What is necessary though? Without being 100% clear on what serves a purpose, I think that approach can be surprisingly harmful. When people fail to realise that the hand needs to play a balancing role when the keys are at the keybeds, necessary actions are left out and unnecessary tensions occur to compensate- without means of prevention. Virtually all my students suffer from fixations that are caused by insufficient movement in the hand. They can't just decide to release them. I have to get them to move their hands more.

 I am still having to go out of my way to make thumbs massively more active and also to ensure that my shoulders support in the right way rather than slumpy inwards. That certainly doesn't mean more "tense", but neither does it mean more "relaxed". It's through the combination of properly activating the thumb for balance and supporting enough of my arm weight, that I make it possible for my arms to relax better. This is why I think it's at least as important to be objectively clear on what positive actions make it possible for the most all-round relaxation.

[mcdiddy1]

What is necessary though? Without being 100% clear on what serves a purpose, I think that approach can be surprisingly harmful. When people fail to realize that the hand needs to play a balancing role when the keys are at the keybeds, necessary actions are left out and unnecessary tensions occur to compensate- without means of prevention. Virtually all my students suffer from fixations that are caused by insufficient movement in the hand. They can't just decide to release them. I have to get them to move their hands more.

 I am still having to go out of my way to make thumbs massively more active and also to ensure that my shoulders support in the right way rather than slumpy inwards. That certainly doesn't mean more "tense", but neither does it mean more "relaxed". It's through the combination of properly activating the thumb for balance and supporting enough of my arm weight, that I make it possible for my arms to relax better. This is why I think it's at least as important to be objectively clear on what positive actions make it possible for the most all-round relaxation.

While we agree that having a excessive tension is harmful just like over relaxation is undesirable and and incorrect, what evidence is there that excessive relaxation is harmful. Do you mean physically harmful or physiologically? Is this fault a subjective opinion observed by you based on personal experience or is it backed up by multiple piano pedagogues?

While carpal tunnel is a pretty widespread problem for pianist, I have never heard of injury from excessive relaxation or not activating the thumb for balance and supporting arm-weight. I don't disagree with the concept because I feel it does describe an element of technique which is important. What I am curious about is whether this advice is usually a concept that is usually learned by most piano students through common sense or through modeling because it is generally not brought up. There are many piano teachers that help students reach high levels of playing without bringing up some of the thumb concepts you bring up.

[escort]

While we agree that having a excessive tension is harmful just like over relaxation is undesirable and and incorrect, what evidence is there that excessive relaxation is harmful. Do you mean physically harmful or physiologically? Is this fault a subjective opinion observed by you based on personal experience or is it backed up by multiple piano pedagogues?

While carpal tunnel is a pretty widespread problem for pianist, I have never heard of injury from excessive relaxation or not activating the thumb for balance and supporting arm-weight. I don't disagree with the concept because I feel it does describe an element of technique which is important. What I am curious about is whether this advice is usually a concept that is usually learned by most piano students through common sense or through modeling because it is generally not brought up. There are many piano teachers that help students reach high levels of playing without bringing up some of the thumb concepts you bring up.

I will offer myself up as a case of one who was injured through excessive relaxation.  You mention yourself that it is undesirable; as it certainly doesn't offer the means to play the most efficiently, other motions must be brought to the table in order to compensate.  My upper forearms became tight and sore, and my thumb pulled up and locked into the side of my hand (incidentally compounding the problem).  Simply 'relaxing' caused me to put more effort from my shoulders to make the sounds, and my wrist also tightened in compensation.  When 'relaxing' my whole body, my concept was to feel 'comfortable,' except that comfortable for me involved relying on large muscles and completely ignoring small muscles.

Here's the thing; this doesn't mean that saying "be completely relaxed" will be harmful for everyone; in fact, to some this may trigger the feelings that take them to new heights.  We have to realize as instructors that what we say will be interpreted in an extraordinary number of ways. Even in an instance when something is interpreted the same way, how the actual idea is carried out will vary simply because each of us have different conceptions on how our bodies feel 'best' in movement.  I enjoy many of lostinidlewonders posts, but (and I recognize that I'm not sitting in with a lesson with him to actually work over this idea) my interpretation of this particular idea left me pulling with my fingertips for the quietest sounds, and mashing with my upper arms for loud sounds, both things that began to trigger past motions that led me to injury.  As well, I was unable to see a great variety in the application of touch through this model, though again, without working him I have no way in seeing the actual possibilities therein.  

In my own teachings, I stress a certain balance in posture.  I myself use visuals to help attain this (picking up a pen off the keyboard, or taking a bowling ball and dropping it at one end), yet in my lessons I work with students directly, using other means in order to help them 'feel' what I want them to feel.  I also rely on the idea of reactions in order to build proper motions, such as how a whip might transfer injury in a such a rhythmic and graceful motion.  So here, I am also using a large variety of visuals.  They are very subjective ideas, yet I spend time with my students 'shaping' them; I would never put these ideas out there and say "this is it, this is how it all works." I would have to explain the concrete motion behind it that I am trying to achieve; this is mostly unnecessary in my teachings because I have the opportunity to 'shape,' though I myself understand the motions and principals behind it.

[mcdiddy1]

I will offer myself up as a case of one who was injured through excessive relaxation.  You mention yourself that it is undesirable; as it certainly doesn't offer the means to play the most efficiently, other motions must be brought to the table in order to compensate.  My upper forearms became tight and sore, and my thumb pulled up and locked into the side of my hand (incidentally compounding the problem).  Simply 'relaxing' caused me to put more effort from my shoulders to make the sounds, and my wrist also tightened in compensation.  When 'relaxing' my whole body, my concept was to feel 'comfortable,' except that comfortable for me involved relying on large muscles and completely ignoring small muscles.

Here's the thing; this doesn't mean that saying "be completely relaxed" will be harmful for everyone; in fact, to some this may trigger the feelings that take them to new heights.  We have to realize as instructors that what we say will be interpreted in an extraordinary number of ways. Even in an instance when something is interpreted the same way, how the actual idea is carried out will vary simply because each of us have different conceptions on how our bodies feel 'best' in movement.  I enjoy many of lostinidlewonders posts, but (and I recognize that I'm not sitting in with a lesson with him to actually work over this idea) my interpretation of this particular idea left me pulling with my fingertips for the quietest sounds, and mashing with my upper arms for loud sounds, both things that began to trigger past motions that led me to injury.  As well, I was unable to see a great variety in the application of touch through this model, though again, without working him I have no way in seeing the actual possibilities therein.  

In my own teachings, I stress a certain balance in posture.  I myself use visuals to help attain this (picking up a pen off the keyboard, or taking a bowling ball and dropping it at one end), yet in my lessons I work with students directly, using other means in order to help them 'feel' what I want them to feel.  I also rely on the idea of reactions in order to build proper motions, such as how a whip might transfer injury in a such a rhythmic and graceful motion.  So here, I am also using a large variety of visuals.  They are very subjective ideas, yet I spend time with my students 'shaping' them; I would never put these ideas out there and say "this is it, this is how it all works." I would have to explain the concrete motion behind it that I am trying to achieve; this is mostly unnecessary in my teachings because I have the opportunity to 'shape,' though I myself understand the motions and principals behind it.

I see. From your account sounds like you were involved relaxing the wrong the "muscles" and as a result had excessive tension in other places. If your thumb was "locked" to side of your hand and wrist was "tightned", it sounds like your muscles were active and not fall under the definition of relax. I think your point is pretty well received though that teaching phrases can misunderstood and warped to create undesirable result. I also found it interesting you misunderstood  lostinidlewonders advice which is supposed to be used as a tool to understand energy and activation of certain muscles into "pulling with my fingertips for the quietest sounds, and mashing with my upper arms for loud sounds" which unintentionally lead to injury. I think the same way someone may take nyiregyhazi's advice and misinterpret it to mean tension and tighting and something that is not intended.  It makes me think there should be a "Do not attempt without a trained professional in vicinity" so there would not be a misunderstanding because I do feels words that make perfect sense to our environment can easily be misused by someone eles.

[keyboardclass]

Hi
I see relaxation is really a paradox. But in summary I concluded this ,use those  muscles only when they
 Are necessary. Don't tap the keys when your finger reach a key stop a little bit and then continue.be as relax as possible
Thank you

Thank you.

[nyiregyhazi]

While we agree that having a excessive tension is harmful just like over relaxation is undesirable and and incorrect, what evidence is there that excessive relaxation is harmful. Do you mean physically harmful or physiologically? Is this fault a subjective opinion observed by you based on personal experience or is it backed up by multiple piano pedagogues?

The point is that it CAUSES tension. The playing mechanism is not one single muscle that can relax or be tense. People always look at the tense places and say that's the problem. But it's often the symptom. If you try relax everything, you simply relinquish control over the activities that produce sound. That works for those who know how employ efficient actions.  For those who don't it not causes uncontrolled tension but often a state of denial about the existence of that tension.  Relax a muscle in a way that causes inefficiency and it's a given that others must compensate with tension. 


There's a ludicrously oversimplistic view that the only necessary tweaking is always that of relaxation. It's not true. Tweaking involves both getting certain parts to relax and others to activate for the task that are supposed to do. If you don't do the latter, there's no hope of relaxing tensions that exist in compensation.

[nyiregyhazi]

 I enjoy many of lostinidlewonders posts, but (and I recognize that I'm not sitting in with a lesson with him to actually work over this idea) my interpretation of this particular idea left me pulling with my fingertips for the quietest sounds, and mashing with my upper arms for loud sounds, both things that began to trigger past motions that led me to injury.  

Absolutely. I'm sure that his overall approach works for him in his teaching. However, given such an explanation in isolation I too would take it literally. I was tremendously held back by the idea of the upper body providing "energy" for regular piano playing and ideas that the arms can do thing "instead of" the hand. I think it's extremely problematic when metaphorical concepts are not clearly differentiated from literal ones.

[nyiregyhazi]

I think the same way someone may take nyiregyhazi's advice and misinterpret it to mean tension and tighting and something that is not intended.  

I did specifically say that neither tension nor relaxation are desirable, as an end in themselves. I don't believe in anything that is ever perceived as "tension". I'm actually working on an approach that entirely replaces the concept of "bracing" or "solidifying" or whatever terms might be used and approaching it exclusively in terms of movement and balance. Even for loud chords and octaves, I've thrown out the idea of a hand that only "transfers weight" altogether. I never brace, but instead employ actual hand movement through the keys for everything. In fact, especially for loud chords and octaves. My point is that, before you can employ healthy activites, you have to understand the purpose that is being served by them. Not that tension is fine. A generic sense of tension never has value, but a sense of purpose and awareness of the activities that are brought in is vital.

[escort]

I see. From your account sounds like you were involved relaxing the wrong the "muscles" and as a result had excessive tension in other places. If your thumb was "locked" to side of your hand and wrist was "tightned", it sounds like your muscles were active and not fall under the definition of relax. I think your point is pretty well received though that teaching phrases can misunderstood and warped to create undesirable result. I also found it interesting you misunderstood  lostinidlewonders advice which is supposed to be used as a tool to understand energy and activation of certain muscles into "pulling with my fingertips for the quietest sounds, and mashing with my upper arms for loud sounds" which unintentionally lead to injury. I think the same way someone may take nyiregyhazi's advice and misinterpret it to mean tension and tighting and something that is not intended.  It makes me think there should be a "Do not attempt without a trained professional in vicinity" so there would not be a misunderstanding because I do feels words that make perfect sense to our environment can easily be misused by someone eles.

I actually understood the energy concept quite well; this idea can certainly be used with a myriad of actual physical techniques.  The problem is that as soon as my awareness shifted among different parts of my playing mechanism in order to create a different sound, this came as an automatic physical result.  Afterall, the visuals and concepts are a way of trying to create new sounds and to reorganize physical motions.  For this particular example, I got similar reaction assuming a literal standpoint of "move X joint for X dynamic," though that involved a greater degree of isolation.  I have no doubt that lostinidlewonder is able to use this to success with students, but on it's own there are dangers within it.

For the other point, if it were as simple as "just relax/engage only the right muscles," certainly I would not be bothering to discuss ideas on an internet forum, and would instead be enjoying my life concertizing!  You are correct, the reason those muscles tensed is in response to inadequate reactions in other areas of my playing mechanism.  I certainly started off quite "relaxed."  I had no hope of being perfectly comfortable and still having the ability to get all the notes in.  This is why in my own teaching my concepts center around such ideas as I mentioned before; relaxation (a term I choose to avoid and replace with other descriptions) is still a core idea, yet I simply approach it in a different manner than "just relax." 
 

[mcdiddy1]

I actually understood the energy concept quite well; this idea can certainly be used with a myriad of actual physical techniques.  The problem is that as soon as my awareness shifted among different parts of my playing mechanism in order to create a different sound, this came as an automatic physical result.  Afterall, the visuals and concepts are a way of trying to create new sounds and to reorganize physical motions.  For this particular example, I got similar reaction assuming a literal standpoint of "move X joint for X dynamic," though that involved a greater degree of isolation.  I have no doubt that lostinidlewonder is able to use this to success with students, but on it's own there are dangers within it.

For the other point, if it were as simple as "just relax/engage only the right muscles," certainly I would not be bothering to discuss ideas on an internet forum, and would instead be enjoying my life concertizing!  You are correct, the reason those muscles tensed is in response to inadequate reactions in other areas of my playing mechanism.  I certainly started off quite "relaxed."  I had no hope of being perfectly comfortable and still having the ability to get all the notes in.  This is why in my own teaching my concepts center around such ideas as I mentioned before; relaxation (a term I choose to avoid and replace with other descriptions) is still a core idea, yet I simply approach it in a different manner than "just relax." 
 

I think this is pretty interesting. I try and avoid putting my thoughts of technique out on a forum because I feel without supervision the idea can easily be misused. In my opinion piano technique should be done in more of a discovery of what your personal hand and body can do. I personally talk to my older adult students about the idea of using the skeleton of the hand, forming arches in the knuckles, allighnment of finger tip, muslcles that are not constricted,, tendons that hold the muscles and bones etc. sometimes music dynamics can be done with shifting the weight of the body to one leg,using shoulders correctly,etc. in my opinion I find it is more important to understand human anatomy and the relationship to the key rather than focusing on moving one joint or being tense or relax. I think tension forms by over reliance on the muscles rather than the bones, hand shape etc.

I don't mean to simplify piano technique to just relax and engage  the right muscles but I honestly do not deal with muscles to often. I also agree that saying just relax is not effective as well. I just don't feel there is a magic formula for technique other than exploring different ways of performing an action with a knowledgable teacher and finding a way to produce the right tone with the most comfort. In my opinion over compensation with one muscle group is an indication of thinking about over reliance on a specific muscle, joint, or area of the body rather than working toward a balanced, whole body approace toward piano technique.

[nyiregyhazi]

I think tension forms by over reliance on the muscles rather than the bones, hand shape etc.

Surely that is just a tautology? Also, everyone is reliant on the muscles- no matter how well they align. The only difference lies in the matter of efficiency (which governs how much of your effort actually translates into sound and how much is just wasted) and how much effort it takes to maintain stability. I think that analysis of what governs efficiency is the only way to get to the heart of what causes tensions and what permits others to play with little effort. Subjective methods can be extremely useful at creating efficiency when applied in the right way, but I don't think there's any reason why the factors that govern either tension or efficiency need remain a mystery. Alan Fraser talks in terms of the bones- but I personally think it's far more revealing to understand the nature of efficiency. The bones are always the same. The differences are easier to understand if you view it in terms of what starting positions are more efficient and what style of movement from that position is more efficient. It's a matter of mechanics- whether a person views it that way or not. When there is poor mechanical efficiency, the brain triggers tensions to help out.

This might be a controversial thing to say, but I sincerely believe that in most cases tension forms because it serves a purpose. Sadly, it's just not a very effective way of serving a purpose. When a pianist moves in a style where more normal use of a specific muscle will cause poor efficiency of energy transfer or poor control, they tend to stiffen to improve the efficiency with which they can move the key and the control they have over it. Of course, there are many subjective approaches that can help. However, I personally believe that it saves a hell of a lot of time, if you have an objective understanding of where in the mechanism the efficiency is being screwed up. Even if you go on to use a subjective approach, it can give a rather clearer idea of which ones would be likely to help- and which ones have potential to cause utter disaster.

[mcdiddy1]

Surely that is just a tautology? Also, everyone is reliant on the muscles- no matter how well they align. The only difference lies in the matter of efficiency (which governs how much of your effort actually translates into sound and how much is just wasted) and how much effort it takes to maintain stability. I think that analysis of what governs efficiency is the only way to get to the heart of what causes tensions and what permits others to play with little effort. Subjective methods can be extremely useful at creating efficiency when applied in the right way, but I don't think there's any reason why the factors that govern either tension or efficiency need remain a mystery. Alan Fraser talks in terms of the bones- but I personally think it's far more revealing to understand the nature of efficiency. The bones are always the same. The differences are easier to understand if you view it in terms of what starting positions are more efficient and what style of movement from that position is more efficient. It's a matter of mechanics- whether a person views it that way or not. When there is poor mechanical efficiency, the brain triggers tensions to help out.

This might be a controversial thing to say, but I sincerely believe that in most cases tension forms because it serves a purpose. Sadly, it's just not a very effective way of serving a purpose. When a pianist moves in a style where more normal use of a specific muscle will cause poor efficiency of energy transfer or poor control, they tend to stiffen to improve the efficiency with which they can move the key and the control they have over it. Of course, there are many subjective approaches that can help. However, I personally believe that it saves a hell of a lot of time, if you have an objective understanding of where in the mechanism the efficiency is being screwed up. Even if you go on to use a subjective approach, it can give a rather clearer idea of which ones would be likely to help- and which ones have potential to cause utter disaster.

No, I don't think tension and over reliance on the muscles are the same thing.I think you underestimate the usefulness of the bones of the fingers. When the fingers bones do not align we get flabby, flat fingers which do not articulate well and a collapsed hand shape. Of course some muscles are used to straighten up but if you do not aligned your bones write you get collapsing finger tips and mush sounds.i think you right on in terms of the end goal being efficiency but the problem is how to specifically describe what efficiency is and what it looks and feels like. It think that's where the idea of feeling balanced, well aligned, soft yet active and ready to play are good descriptions of what it should feel like and help students toward a healthy, comfortable technique.

I dont think what you said is controversial. Tension serves multiple purposes in the body and is not in of itself a bad thing. It makes sense that some pianist stiffen to improve efficiency but in problem solving I think there is invisible excess tension happening all the time. Like you said, pointing out the areas where tension occurs is aiming at a symptom and not the cause. Also most students do not want an anatomy lessons when they are in a lesson, so I feel finding a way to communicate what it should feel like, exercises they may do, getting feedback about how it feels would be better than pointing out where the mechanism screwed up.

[nyiregyhazi]

No, I don't think tension and over reliance on the muscles are the same thing.I think you underestimate the usefulness of the bones of the fingers. When the fingers bones do not align we get flabby, flat fingers which do not articulate well and a collapsed hand shape. Of course some muscles are used to straighten up but if you do not aligned your bones write you get collapsing finger tips and mush sounds.i think you right on in terms of the end goal being efficiency but the problem is how to specifically describe what efficiency is and what it looks and feels like. It think that's where the idea of feeling balanced, well aligned, soft yet active and ready to play are good descriptions of what it should feel like and help students toward a healthy, comfortable technique.
.

I think you misunderstand my point. From your description, I'm quite certain that we're looking at the same phenomeon. However, my point is about how a person comes to really understand it from the inside. Objectively you cannot be overreliant on the muscles in general- in the sense that the muscles need to perform key activities in efficient use too. It's one of those things that the wrong person will misunderstand- potentially causing flaccidity and random compensatory tensions. If understood in terms of the nature of efficiency, I believe it can be made clear to all. It's about the an efficient combination of muscles- which can be missed by both overuse and underuse. Efficiency is the only way to really pinpoint what defines the combination with anything approaching clarity.

In my post on efficiency, I've talked about the idea of negative movements and positive movements- where one direction helps and the opposite direction hinders. It's an extremely simple guide to have and it's been very useful to me. In future posts I'm going to explore specific ones that commonly occur and show a person can feel the simplest ways to eliminate them- without resort to stiffness. I do like the subjective idea of bones doing work for you- but it doesn't quite get to the heart of exactly HOW you can make such an illusion happen or where the holes are. Wishing to feel "balanced" and aligned etc. never quite did it for me. In fact I'd even say it was in the name of such things that I stiffened in certain places with undue effort. I didn't have a clear understanding of the fact that easier alternatives to bracing could provide balance and alignment.

Breaking it down to what is useful and what is a hindrance has given me a great deal more clarity- and I've found it very useful in getting students to actually feel for themselves where the holes are. Ultimately, I've now refined it to a basic position (that is achieved by a very slight act of extending the thumb out, and hanging the fingers down) and a specific style of extending the fingers out to play keys. The simplicity has never been greater.


"I dont think what you said is controversial. Tension serves multiple purposes in the body and is not in of itself a bad thing."

I don't mean any muscle tension. I mean those that are colloquially regarded as tension ie the bad sort. These too serve a purpose- just extremely badly. While some tensions of this kind are just habitual and occur independently of piano playing, I'd say that most occur specifically due a need to compensate for inactivity in important places.

"getting feedback about how it feels would be better than pointing out where the mechanism screwed up."

Why not do both? Why should one preclude the other? When I'm practising, I need to understand where the holes lie- if I am to train myself in the feel of what should have been happening.

[nyiregyhazi]

Just realised that I hadn't actually linked the post I mentioned, regarding the issues of efficiency and how a lack of it leads to tension (I accidentally linked the same post twice before). This is the one:

https://pianoscience.blogspot.com/2011/11/theres-hole-in-my-bucket-issues-of.html

[pianoplunker]

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

No, it is not a paradox.  In order to have relaxed fingering, you need to do two things. Drop, and roll as much as possible between any two notes.  If you do that you will be including your fore-arm and shoulders naturally. Instead of "stretching" fingers between two notes you drop on the second note while releasing the first note.  This will create the "roll" .  And the result is far more relaxed fingers which leads to far more accurate and expressive playing.  This is because you are using the wrist to control the fingers, the forearm to control the wrist , and the shoulder to control the forearm.

[nyiregyhazi]

No, it is not a paradox.  In order to have relaxed fingering, you need to do two things. Drop, and roll as much as possible between any two notes.  If you do that you will be including your fore-arm and shoulders naturally. Instead of "stretching" fingers between two notes you drop on the second note while releasing the first note.  This will create the "roll" .  And the result is far more relaxed fingers which leads to far more accurate and expressive playing.  This is because you are using the wrist to control the fingers, the forearm to control the wrist , and the shoulder to control the forearm.

You say this as if it's guaranteed. It isn't. Rationally, the only way of moving a key without major inefficiency and poor control is to either fix the finger solidly or be moving it. When I depended on the above approach, I ended fixing my fingers solidly, to compensate for the hopeless inefficiency of relaxed fingers. Unless the above approach triggers movement, it will almost certainly trigger fixation instead. That style of intention is often actively harmful to those with underdeveloped hand movements.

I know the above works for some, but I had to learn to move my finger to control my fingers.

[matmilne]

Fluid but firm, it is a contradiction, but they're not mutually exclusive.

try playing some big chord pieces with more delicate interludes between. 
the chords develop the wrist, arm and shoulder movements, the interludes encourage looser fingers.  Lots of Chopin and Beethoven pieces feature the required technique.

[keyboardclass]

No, it is not a paradox.  In order to have relaxed fingering, you need to do two things. Drop, and roll as much as possible between any two notes.  If you do that you will be including your fore-arm and shoulders naturally. Instead of "stretching" fingers between two notes you drop on the second note while releasing the first note.  This will create the "roll" .  And the result is far more relaxed fingers which leads to far more accurate and expressive playing.  This is because you are using the wrist to control the fingers, the forearm to control the wrist , and the shoulder to control the forearm.

Agreed.  Drop and Flop! (as my teacher used to say)

[thalbergmad]

Drop and Flop!

HAHA, I like that. All that is required to play the piano efficiently summed up in three words.

I learned how to play the piano efficiently by watching my cat catch grass-hoppers. Speed, grace and power in an almost effortless motion.

My advice to all students is to go and watch cats catch grass-hoppers.

Thal

[keyboardclass]

HAHA, I like that. All that is required to play the piano efficiently summed up in three words.

Great you appreciate it.  My, now sadly departed, teacher used to say to me "All I teach is drop and flop and yet they pay me £45 an hour!"     

[rachfan]

Carpal tunnel syndrome at the piano is more than likely caused by incorrect sitting height at the piano. This means pianists who sit too low or high.  Forearms and wrists/hands should be parallel to the floor and naturally and neutrally extended (that is, all three should form a straight line from the elbow to the keyboard). The elbow should be at the same level as the keyboard surface, or no more than a half inch (about 1 cm) lower than the keyboard.  When one sits high such that the lower arms slope downward toward the keyboard it means that the wrists are automatically up-flexed.  If one sits low, then the forearms are angled upward toward the keyboard while the hands are level on the keyboard producing a down-flexing of the wrists.  Prolonged up-flexing or down-flexing of the wrists is dangerous, while naturally, neutrally extended wrists do not suffer those positional tensions, making them safer and far less likely to be vulnerable to carpal tunnel syndrome.

Note: The above description is not how to play the piano per se.  It is guidance on how to get the height of the seat correct such that the forearms, wrists and hands are level and naturally/neutrally extended to the keyboard.  This is a preliminary that enables one to better play the piano in relative safety.

One thing I've observed though is that if pianists are sitting incorrectly and putting themselves at risk, they seldom listen to advice and persevere until they injure themselves.  I understand that many people have to learn from experience, even if it's a very painful and debilitating experience possibly involving surgery.  I've been playing the piano for 59 years now without injury.  It's because I sit correctly at the piano.  I realize, of course, that most will disregard this message--as I say, they usually do--but if it helps just one alert pianist, then it will have been well worth taking the time to write it.  

David  
  

[pianowolfi]

Good advice, Rachfan! Thank you very much for summing this up so clearly and simply!

[rachfan]

Thanks wolfi,

I can't tell you how many videos I watched here and cringed at some of the unnecessary risks people are taking!

David

[pianowolfi]

Thanks wolfi,

I can't tell you how many videos I watched here and cringed at some of the unnecessary risks people are taking!

David

Indeed. Some of them seem to think that there's only one goal: to hit the "right keys" but they forget about everything else.

[nyiregyhazi]

Carpal tunnel syndrome at the piano is more than likely caused by incorrect sitting height at the piano. This means pianists who sit too low or high.  Safe posture at the piano means thighs parallel to the floor and making a 90 degree angle with the lower legs when feet are flat on the floor.  It means forearms and wrists/hands being parallel to the floor and making a 90 degree angle with the upper arms; and naturally and neutrally extended forearms, wrists and hands (all three should form a straight line to the keyboard). The elbow should be at the same level as the keyboard, or no more than a half inch lower than the keyboard.

Are we talking about keyboards of adjustable height or something? How is a pianist supposed to form parallel thighs AND sit at a height where the elbow is level- if not pure coincidence or an adjustable keyboard? And why should the legs be at 90 degrees? It would make pedalling impossible without sitting extremely close to the piano. I find such an angle rather unhealthy myself. I'd say that the feet should always be at least slightly forwards- in order to distribute balance properly and spread the two points of support (feet and buttocks) . Having the feet straight down puts almost the whole load on the lower back. Far from being healthy, I think a 90 degree angle is a very bad idea, personally. I see a lot of students sitting very stiffly by not spreading their weight. And also with the upper arms. If you're anywhere near a 90 degree angle, you've got no chance of reaching extremes of the keyboard with both hands.

When one sits high such that the lower arms slope downward toward the keyboard it means that the wrists are automatically up-flexed. If one sits low, then the forearms are angled upward toward the keyboard while the hands are level on the keyboard producing an automatic down-flexing of the wrists. Prolonged up-flexing or down-flexing of the wrists is dangerous, while naturally, neutrally extended wrists do not suffer those positional tensions, making them safer and far less likely to be vulnerable to carpal tunnel syndrome.

That is not necessarily true. If it were, the positions many people sleep in would be far more dangerous still. It depends on how much impact occurs. I agree that people should be very cautious about this, but it depends how you use an angled wrist. Also, sitting low does not guarantee an angled wrist. Sitting a long way back, like Horowitz, makes it possible to maintain alignment. Similarly, many pianists who sit a little high maintain alignment.

Recently, I've found it very useful to practise very slowly while both standing up and kneeling on the floor. Both are extremely informative and are doing wonders for my ease of movement- but there are very specific things that you need to look for when working from such extremes. The pitfalls of both low and high sitting are not avoided altogether, simply by sitting at a regular height. By working to eradicate problems within the most extreme positions (where they are most likely to show up, unless you get the movements just right) you can make yourself 100x less likely to fall into those same traps in a regular seated position.

[keyboardclass]

  Safe posture at the piano means thighs parallel to the floor and making a 90 degree angle with the lower legs when feet are flat on the floor.   

What rubbish.  Thighs inclined as in horse riding is much better for the lower back.

[rachfan]

Hi nyiregyhazi

As I said, WHEN feet are flat on the floor.  That is meant as a neutral starting point for performance.  Of course, once the pedals are being used that angle will open.

No, the keyboard is not adjustable.  I'm talking about acoustic pianos here.  But an artist bench or stool are totally adjustable.

The arm position I give is a virtual 90 degree angle which will vary slightly by individual, of course.   Again this is a starting point position.  Obviously, the upper arms will have to direct the playing apparatus away from the body to play in the treble and the bass, which will again mean that the angle opens up by necessity.  Nowhere did I suggest that 90 degrees is a permanent angle.  It's a start and rest position angle whenever the arms are positioned directly in front of the body, not reaching out to the treble and bass.  Otherwise, all we could play would be a one-octave scale directly in front of us.

On how we must use the angled wrist as you say, it's true.  For example, it's useful to arch the left wrist in playing a forte octave in the contra-bass.  Of course there will be exceptions while playing!  Again, similar to your question about the legs and arms, what I am pointing out is not all the exceptions, but rather the starting norm.

Regarding your last point on getting movements right, I completely agree on the necessity of choreography of the hands, or the entire playing apparatus whenever necessary. Hands co-habitating over the same notes, for example, might require a momentary raising of one wrist and a lowering of the other to allow the latter to slide under the former.  Here again, we're talking about exceptions rather than norms.  I get the exceptions!  They're a reality and unavoidable and it will be necessary for those sitting correctly AND incorrectly.  That's where synthesizing and integrating motions come into play.  But that is not to say that we need to ignore and disregard the norms when and where those special demands are nonexistent.  Nor does it suggest that in most scores that constant up- or down-flexing of wrists should be the rule.

David  

[rachfan]

Hi keyboardclass,

Probably then you should play Schubert's "Earlking".  But if you're suggesting that thighs should be inclined at the piano, I would have to disagree.

David

[nyiregyhazi]

As I said, WHEN feet are flat on the floor.  That is meant as a neutral starting point for performance.  Of course, once the pedals are being used that angle will open.

But this is my primary point of disagreement. I wouldn't want that to be my neutral point- because it doesn't distribute balance well.

No, the keyboard is not adjustable.  I'm talking about acoustic pianos here.  But an artist bench or stool stool are totally adjustable.

So how are you supposed to find a height where you can satisfy both requirements? Unless by pure coincidence of physical proportions, both requirements cannot be met. Maybe this is case for yourself, but most people will have to choose between the parallel arm and parallel legs. They can't do both unless the keyboard adjusts in height- so it's not even possible to apply your prescription for what is supposed to be desirable. It seems pretty clear that you are describing your personal preference but failing to account for how physically different people are.

The arm position I give is a virtual 90 degree angle which will vary slightly by individual, of course.   Again this is a starting point position. Obviously, the upper arms will have to direct the playing apparatus away from the body to play in the treble and the bass, which will again mean that the angle opens up by necessity.

But what what if you're playing "un sospiro"? Or even Chopin's op. 10 no. 1? You push yourself back from the piano to make room, before pushing the bench back in later? How do you open up the angle? Why not START with it open and have that as your point of departure? A default position is not a very versatile position unless it already leaves adequate space for the arms to get beyond middle C. I've scarcely seen a single pianist who comes even close to 90 degrees (other than when leaning notably forwards)- apart from amateurs who lock their arms against their sides. Sorry, but I cannot think of a worse basis for a seated position- except perhaps for Bach.

Nor does it suggest that in most scores that constant up- or down-flexing of wrists should be the rule.

Certainly- but my main point is that sitting high or low does not necessarily cause these things to excess.

[keyboardclass]

Hi keyboardclass,

Probably then you should play Schubert's "Earlking".  But if you're suggesting that thighs should be inclined at the piano, I would have to disagree.

David

It's an Alexander Technique and Feldenkrais thing.  You can't deny the lower back has a more natural shape when the thighs are inclined.

[rachfan]

Hi kyeboardclass,

Inclined thighs as I picture it means that the thighs are angled upward toward the key bed as opposed to declined thighs which would be sloping downward.  I play a Baldwin Model L Artist Grand.  Like most pianists, my knees are about an inch or two underneath the piano case (or key bed), and are touching the wood there.  The only way to do that would be to lower the Jensen artist bench which is already nearly as low as it goes. Even if I could lower the bench more, then the wrists would become down-flexed rather than neutrally extended. Frankly, I wouldn't want to invite the risk associated with that.

David

[nyiregyhazi]

It's an Alexander Technique and Feldenkrais thing.  You can't deny the lower back has a more natural shape when the thighs are inclined.

A lot of tall pianists sit with parallel thighs in order to be low enough relative to the keyboard. Few other than Glenn Gould have ever sat lower. Arguably, parallel is about on the boundary between what is likely to be workable and what is going to be deeply strenuous. With parallel legs, I think it's important for the feet to be notably forwards and not to sit far back on the stool- in order to be sure that weight can still be distributed. Once you get lower than that, the legs cannot offer any notable support.

[rachfan]

Hi nyiregyhazi

Regarding distributing balance, as you move significantly off center toward the outer reaches of the keyboard compass, the left leg in particular (if not engaged with the soft pedal) needs to help balance and brace the body.  So for things happening in the bass, it will by necessity have to move the left leg to the left to provide more support support and security for the trunk.  Sometimes too it will need to move behind the right leg to add support for playing in the high treble for instance.  Again, never have I asserted that the legs must be locked stationary in "home position" (unless both soft and damper pedals are in use leaving little choice).  But once support is no longer needed, the left leg is not going to hold position, but will instead move more to center again.  Again I think there is a basic misapprehension at play here.  I sense you're thinking of my posture suggestions in freeze frame.  Not at all!  The freeze frame unfreezes as the body has to make natural motions and adjustments  to accommodate the demands of the score.  But the return is always to approximately to neutral position. 

Regarding parallel thighs and/or arms: First, I cannot deny that people are different.  If my body proportions dictated that a choice be made, I would always choose arms parallel to the floor, as that is where the risk of carpal tunnel lies.  That is, I would adjust accordingly to avoid the greater risk.

Given the pieces you named as examples, I might open the arms angle to 130 degrees or so, but certainly not 180.  I tend to sit with my knees about two inches underneath the key bed, which is quite common.  Yes, in certain passage work I might have to lean back a bit, but usually not much.  A time when I do lean "way back" as you say, is to play ppp or pppp to get a floating sensation in the arms which assists in attaining that dynamic.  Similarly if playing fff or ffff I draw closer to the keyboard.  Otherwise I sit with a fairly straight back on the bench.

I have to tell you, just from watching videos here, I've seen amazing up-flexed wrists, caused by up-sloping (toward the shoulders) forearms in turn caused by sitting way too high with no apparent justification for it.  Those pianists in my opinion are injuries just waiting to happen. Yes, you might argue that Rubinstein sat high and Horowitz low and neither incurred injuries that we know of.  To that I would say I'm glad they were fortunate.

There is plenty of flexibility needed to play the piano.  I grant you that, and have given several specific examples above to illustrate it.  But that that's not to suggest that we ought not have a sitting posture that serves as our ideal for efficiency, comfort and safety.  In a piece, we might have to deviate from our ideal a 100 times; but once a pianistic demand has been answered, we should then return to that ideal if the composer allows us to do so.

My sense, as I read and respond to your inquiries, is that we're not as far apart on this issue is you might believe.

David

[nyiregyhazi]

Regarding distributing balance, as you move significantly off center toward the outer reaches of the keyboard compass, the left leg in particular (if not engaged with the soft pedal) needs to help balance and brace the body.  So for things happening in the bass, it will by necessity have to move the left leg to the left to provide more support support and security for the trunk.  Sometimes too it will need to move behind the right leg to add support for playing in the high treble for instance.  Again, never have I asserted that the legs must be locked stationary in "home position" (unless both soft and damper pedals are in use leaving little choice)

Sure- but I'm wondering why it's home position at all. I tried it just now and my connection to the keyboard felt totally wrong. All the sense of "weight" was held back, resting heavily on the buttocks. Shift the legs forwards a few inches and everything spread out nicely again and the connection to the piano is improved. Why suggest 90 degrees for the home position at all? It doesn't balance well. Also, now you're referring to pedalling the home position? So are your legs at a right angle while pedalling? Or is the home position just never 90 degrees to start with? Surely the latter? Perhaps you meant 90 degrees as only the roughest of guides, but why be so specific, just because it's not too far off it? While the difference in degrees may be as few as 10 or 20, the difference in the result is huge! If you specify an angle, some people will take that literally.

Given the pieces you named as examples, I might open the arms angle to 130 degrees or so, but certainly not 180.

Sure, I would never suggest suggest a thing. I was just pointing out how much restriction would be imposed by feeling 90 degrees is either a "correct" angle or even a good reference point to depart from. Whatever angle leaves space for the arms to reach both halves of the keyboard without the pianist feeling they have to massively reach to get to the piano is good. There's no rule- but to have space is an essential requirement, that a right angle renders impossible.

I tend to sit with my knees about two inches underneath the key bed, which is quite common.  Yes, in certain passage work I might have to lean back a bit, but usually not much.  A time when I do lean "way back" as you say, is to play ppp or pppp to get a floating sensation in the arms which assists in attaining that dynamic.  

Yeah, absolutely. Actually, this is quite similar to the sensation I get if my legs are at 90 degrees. I need to move my feet forward, or this feeling is basically permanent.

I have to tell you, just from watching videos here, I've seen amazing up-flexed wrists, caused by up-sloping (toward the shoulders) forearms in turn caused by sitting way too high with no apparent justification for it.  

Yeah, I do agree there. I think many pianists sit too high. My point is just that good technique can deal with potential problems- even if the stool position causes problems to be more likely. Practising while standing up has recently revealed a huge amount to me about proper hand movement. I think the problem is that most pianist on high stools press very hard with the arms- rather than develop good hand movements. I'd include Brendel to a large extent here. Although he can obviously play the piano, his fortissimos are absolutely hideous.

[rachfan]

HI nyiregyhazi

I think the problem is that most pianist on high stools press very hard with the arms- rather than develop good hand movements. I'd include Brendel to a large extent here. Although he can obviously play the piano, his fortissimos are absolutely hideous.

Yes, a couple of things about that: Sitting high often leads to a drier sound.  The reason the fortissimos are hideous is that the high-sitting pianist tends to force the notes from the upper or "top" arms. It's ugly!

Sure- but I'm wondering why it's home position at all. I tried it just now and my connection to the keyboard felt totally wrong. All the sense of "weight" was held back, resting heavily on the buttocks. Shift the legs forwards a few inches and everything spread out nicely again and the connection to the piano is improved. Why suggest 90 degrees for the home position at all? It doesn't balance well. Also, now you're referring to pedalling the home position? So are your legs at a right angle while pedalling? Or is the home position just never 90 degrees to start with? Surely the latter? Perhaps you meant 90 degrees as only the roughest of guides, but why be so specific, just because it's not too far off it? While the difference in degrees may be as few as 10 or 20, the difference in the result is huge! If you specify an angle, some people will take that literally.

I need to better differentiate here for clarity.  Checking out the sitting position is a pre-practice or pre-performance task that takes a couple of seconds in a practice room, for example.  At home, once you set the bench or stool to a good height, then presumably you would not have to touch it again (unless others in the household are changing it).  That's it. Once that's done, you're sitting correctly and it's time to move on to music making.  

Once your bench is set, of course you can put your feet on the pedals or or at least more them forward. No, pedaling is not in"home position".  I had been referring to moving the left leg back closer to "center", as it might be needed in a different position to support the body in a different way once the last task has been completed, use the soft pedal, etc.  So if you had to move the left leg over considerable to the left, then the need has been fulfilled, why leave it way over there?  Once playing, think of home position as being nothing more than the body's natural alignment with the piano.  

It would be near impossible to pedal at the 90 degree angle. Again, simply think natural alignment with the piano.  If your feet are moved forward nearer the pedals, super!  And yes, the 90 degrees is a rough guide as everyone is different.  That's why I've inserted "approximately" when taking about that earlier. Approximately allows some leeway, latitude, etc.  That angle will always open up as the arms leave the sides of the body to reach for more remote parts of the keyboard.

It's possible that you read more into my remarks than I intended, or maybe I should have been more descriptive.  I hope we have this ironed out.  

David

[nyiregyhazi]

Yes, a couple of things about that: Sitting high often leads to a drier sound.  The reason the fortissimos are hideous is that the high-sitting pianist tends to force the notes from the upper or "top" arms. It's ugly!

Yes, absolutely. Barenboim is another culprit. I've actually been learning a lot from sitting high recently for a lot of my practise- although the forcing bit is what I'm making extremely sure to avoid. It can be good training for the fingers- if you keep arm pressures out of it. But I'd never sit extremely high in a concert.

It would be near impossible to pedal at the 90 degree angle. Again, simply think natural alignment with the piano.  If your feet are moved forward nearer the pedals, super!  And yes, the 90 degrees is a rough guide as everyone is different.  

I see what you mean- but I think virtually everyone is going to be somewhere in the general region of that anyway. I don't think it needs to be said. I think the problem with giving 90 degrees as a guideline is that some people will think they are supposed to be closer to it- when some angle is actually healthier and more natural. The only guideline I'd personally be specific about is the idea of the parallel forearm.

Approximately allows some leeway, latitude, etc.  That angle will always open up as the arms leave the sides of the body to reach for more remote parts of the keyboard.

It's actually when the arms come in that I'm thinking of- when the right hand goes very low or the left hand very high. If you start at a right angle, there's virtually no scope to get over there. I recently realised that I often tended to sit way too close and caused my arm to get squashed in against my torso. If I played with my elbow at a right angle, I'd be squashed in further still. I think the incline of the upper arm is extremely important, as the baseline position.

[rachfan]

Hi nyiregyhazi

If I played with my elbow at a right angle, I'd be squashed in further still. I think the incline of the upper arm is extremely important, as the baseline position.

Once in awhile a piece is written predominantly in the higher treble, for example.  Sometimes pianists, to avoid the problem you cite here, will actually skew the bench toward that part of the keyboard to create more freedom of movement for the whole duration.  It's considered acceptable to do so.

David

[keyboardclass]

Inclined thighs as I picture it means that the thighs are angled upward toward the key bed as opposed to declined thighs which would be sloping downward.

In that case I mean declined.  Again, as in horse riding.  To do it you block up the back legs of your stool by about an inch.  I have two purpose built blocks made by a cellist.

[nyiregyhazi]

Hi nyiregyhazi

Once in awhile a piece is written predominantly in the higher treble, for example.  Sometimes pianists, to avoid the problem you cite here, will actually skew the bench toward that part of the keyboard to create more freedom of movement for the whole duration.  It's considered acceptable to do so.

David

But it need not even be extreme. Take the hand crossings in the Pathetique. If a pianist needs to adjust his bench for that passage, he needs to find a better default position. If there's not enough space to cross over for such instances, there's a serious problem. This is why being at a 90 degree angle for the default posture would be disastrous. The torso would be in the way. There are far too many instances where this would happen, for such needs to be thought of as unusual. Standard seating must leave enough space, to be effective.

[rachfan]

Hi keyboardclass,

Now that you've redefined the direction of the slope, I'm more OK with what you're doing. (Yes, I've ridden horses.) The reason is that it still allows you to have level arms in approaching the keyboard to avoid excessive up-flexing and down-flexing in the wrists.

David

[rachfan]

Hi nyiregyhazi

I edited the post to remove references to angles, so that should simplify things to avert confusion.

David

[drazh]

hi
Finally i found this
Muscles which elevate  shoulder should be passive
Muscles which move arm jaterally and medially should be active
Arm and forearm muscles should be active but not tense
Thanks

[keyboardclass]

hi
Finally i found this
Muscles which elevate  shoulder should be passive
Muscles which move arm jaterally and medially should be active
Arm and forearm muscles should be active but not tense
Thanks

As you say, the arm is composed of two sections - forearm and upper arm.  You can't proscribe for both at the same time.  The upper arm in my book has very little lateral work to do.  As active but not tense!?  That just doesn't make sense.

[drazh]

Hi
Arm can move in every direction but only media and lateral movement is important in piano
Forearms move only in flexion and extension
Wrist move in many directions
Fingers move only in extension and flexion
By tense I mean all muscles are contracted agonists and antagonists
Good position is minimal contraction of agonist muscles to maintain position
Thanks

[nyiregyhazi]

As you say, the arm is composed of two sections - forearm and upper arm.  You can't proscribe for both at the same time.  The upper arm in my book has very little lateral work to do.

Perhaps that's why your arms always look so stiff on your videos? It's far easier to support the weight of the arm efficiently, when done via a slight outward activity, rather than by holding directly upwards. This is where Grindea's simplistic "piano-playing for dummies" type thinking (of insisting that piano playing features only up movements and down movements) is so limited. Efficient arm support comes from balancing the circular path in which the elbows would naturally collapse into the torso- forming an arc around the shoulder. This is a fundamental activity of piano playing. If that balance is not being found, the only alternative to stop the elbow slumping in is notable tension. Far better to focus the activity where it serves an essential purpose.

[keyboardclass]

Perhaps that's why your arms always look so stiff on your videos?

That is purely your own personal (and rather rude) observation and as always you see what you want to see.

[nyiregyhazi]

That is purely your own personal (and rather rude) observation and as always you see what you want to see.

It's an honest assessment- followed by an objective illustration of the fact that lateral activity is the only means of supporting the arm's weight efficiently. Gravity draws the elbow in towards the torso unless balanced with an outward activity. Pianists ignore this fact at their peril- especially if they want to keep the arm light. Misunderstanding the requirement and purpose of shoulder activity (rather than matching it to the specific way in which unbalanced gravity would affect the arm) can only lead to unnecessary efforts. If you do not perceive the purpose of activity or the direction in which it needs to be applied, the odds that the body will balance effectively are minimal.

There are only three realistic options- relax the shoulders enough for the elbows to remain permanently slumped against the torso, tighten them into immobility against gravity or match unwanted effects of gravity with precise and sensitive application of outward muscular activity, to balance. To pretend otherwise is just to relinquish the opportunity to choose between them.