keeping a relaxed wrist in chords and octaves

[nyiregyhazi]

https://pianoscience.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/introduction-to-three-core-posts-on.html

Just written a new blog post. The first half is essentially just introducing some future posts that will be coming in the near future. However, the illustration of what goes into the possibility of a relaxed wrist (specifically during chords and octaves- although the principle is not necessarily restricted to that alone) will likely be of interest to some. Note that the concept of tension/release comes into this nowhere. It's about maintaining release throughout- not stiffening needlessly through contact and then relaxing after.

[p2u_]

Just written a new blog post. [...] not stiffening through contact and then relaxing after.

Highly appreciated. I'll read it first thing in the morning (it's midnight here in Moscow).
P.S.: Yes, indeed: in good technique (any instrument) there is really nothing to "relax" from...

Paul

[nyiregyhazi]

Highly appreciated. I'll read it first thing in the morning (it's midnight here in Moscow).
P.S.: Yes, indeed: in good technique (any instrument) there is really nothing to "relax" from...

Paul

Cheers, any thoughts (be they in agreement or disagreement) would be most welcome. Also, been busy lately, but I will reply to your email sometime 

[keyboardclass]

Note that the concept of tension/release comes into this nowhere. It's about maintaining release throughout- not stiffening needlessly through contact and then relaxing after.

'maintaining release' from what in that case?  (rhetorically speaking of course)

[pts1]

,

[nyiregyhazi]

'maintaining release' from what in that case?  (rhetorically speaking of course)

maintaining release from nothing- that's the whole point. You stay released. If you're just trying to be pedantic, the muscles have previously contracted at some point in the pianists life, yes? So, they can accurately be described as "released" from such a contraction.  

[nyiregyhazi]

I like things about his approach- but I feel it's rather dubious as an explanation for all. Consider just how far the fingers would actually have to slip- were this to be taken literally. Starting from such a highly curled position and curling further would have the fingers slipping immensely. You do see some fingers slipping at various times in his films, but look at his Chopin G major prelude. I left some comments on that one. He is not doing what he describes anywhere near all of the time- because the fingers are frequently not slipping anywhere near enough for what he describes to account for the key being depressed. From his starting position, closing the finger up further would have to slide it across the keys like crazy. He says nothing about actions of extending the finger outwards- which is a colossal omission, in my opinion. He clearly uses such an action.

Although I do like much about what he speaks of as an exercise, I actually think it could potentially be dangerous when taken too literally. Seeing as this thread is about the wrist, keeping the wrist loose is exactly what would be extremely difficult if following him at face value. That path of movement will cause very strong reactions that will want to displace the hand and arm. It would be easy to start tightening the wrist to compensate, if you're too intent on following that path of movement.

[pts1]

nyire

IMO, you're not really getting what he's doing.

First of all, there are two basic natural hand positions.
You can hang your arm loose at your side and open the hand wide, ie stretching the fingers, and then relax and you get a natural hand position with minimally curved fingers. (i.e. "flat")

Then you can hang your arm loosely at your side and make a fist and then stop this effort and the hand will open into a more closed natural hand position with a bit more curve.

So I don't see why you'd want to "talk" about extending the fingers since there is a natural range of shape and motion he uses in his playing, so I don't see any omissions as you do.

In between these two natural positions, neither of which are at extremes (where problems start), are numerous other natural positions.

Also, when he plays, he is not curling in the finger tips, but playing with the entire finger in a quick strong naturally curved movement in the direction of the palm.

And as you can hear his technique is excellent in this presentation, very clear, even and quick beautiful scales.

The proof is in the pudding, IMHO.

As for "tight wrist", I don't get this. You're not one of those "weight transfer" people are you?

I play this same way, and learned it from the same person he did,(Dieter Weber) who by the way was John O'Connor's teacher. Are you familiar with John O'Connor?

But by all means, if you don't like it or agree with it, don't do it.

Up to a certain level, one can play the piano with almost any technique.
But to achieve professional results, the options narrow considerably to a rather small array of workable body mechanics.

Nevertheless, this is your thread, and this is one of those things that could be debated forever, so I'll be happy for you to have the last word.

[nyiregyhazi]

First of all, there are two basic natural hand positions.
You can hang your arm loose at your side and open the hand wide, ie stretching the fingers, and then relax and you get a natural hand position with minimally curved fingers. (i.e. "flat")

Then you can hang your arm loosely at your side and make a fist and then stop this effort and the hand will open into a more closed natural hand position with a bit more curve.

So I don't see why you'd want to "talk" about extending the fingers since there is a natural range of shape and motion he uses in his playing, so I don't see any omissions as you do.

? You haven't either addressed or dealt with my point. What bearing is this supposed to have on it? Hold your hand in the position he describes and curl the finger inwards. Approximately speaking, you'd likely be looking at 2 cm of horizontal retraction or more, in order create enough downward movement of the tip to get a key to the bottom. Look at the movements in the G major Prelude. Do you see that on every key? If not, basic geometry dictates that he cannot be doing exactly as he describes. Something else must be accounting for how he creates enough movement to actually get the key down, without the finger retracting by adequate distance for mere curling to be responsible. I know he does it sometimes, but the idea that this pure curling action is both the beginning and end of piano technique is just ludicrously overstated. If you look closely on many of his films, you'll even see that the majority of the curling action on some of the slower motions takes place AFTER the key has landed. Sorry, but it's just not as simplistic as he makes it out to be. I see value in doing as he says as an exercise, but what he actually does cannot be fully accounted for by his overstated explanation.

edit- unless my memory is grossly in error, contrary to what you say, I am quite sure that he specifically advises a whole finger curl-up- not just action from the knuckle.

Anyway, I don't want the last word. If you have an alternative explanation of how he can regularly get the keys down purely by curling (with such minimal levels of slippage) and without any extension action, I am nothing but eager to hear it.

[lostinidlewonder]

WOW so insightful and so much context given I now know everything. We should have a fund raising project to start a school so you can share this with the world!

[p2u_]

[...] Roy Holmes [...]

After the first video, he discusses in depth technique in the following two videos.

Actually, I find his video here much better as an explanation:
Roy Holmes - thumb and finger piano technique.
It's not just a movement from the metacarpal joint (the hand knuckle) inward to the palm of the hand; even a movement from the distal joint is involved (like wiping dust off a key). That movement is, of course, in the arsenal of any good pianist, but to make it the basis for everything seems contradictory. I'm still investigating. My suspicion is fed by the fact that Holmes doesn't seem to be able himself to play more than 2-3 bars in a row correctly with that technique. The other point is that there is no real consistent control over the key. As a training in "letting go", "giving it away" it's very interesting though.

Paul

[keyboardclass]

It's not just a movement from the metacarpal joint (the hand knuckle) inward to the palm of the hand; even a movement from the distal joint is involved (like wiping dust off a key).

If he's saying innervation starts with the distal joint I'm 100% with him.

Here's my silent video (who needs words?) of the three basic touches (scratch and grip are really the same touch):

[keyboardclass]

maintaining release from nothing- that's the whole point.

I do believe that is the whole point - nothing!

[j_menz]

If he's saying innervation starts with the distal joint I'm 100% with him.

My innervation starts somewhere between my ears.

[keyboardclass]

My innervation starts somewhere between my ears.

Which is where the brain's map of the body (cortical homunculus) resides.

[j_menz]

Which is where the brain's map of the body (cortical homunculus) resides.

Actually, mine's a bit taller. And better looking. And that one seems to have been cleaned up for public viewing. 

[p2u_]

If he's saying innervation starts with the distal joint I'm 100% with him.

My innervation starts somewhere between my ears.

You speak like a true Master. Ideally, the only thing you do as a Teacher is give the student a task to solve and nature takes care of the rest. Trying to explain the material side of things, to find tricks around the problem is betraying the Master and He sends you away.

Methodologists, though, see many musicians moving like crippled ones and tend to find "solutions" to that problem in the physical appearance of everything. In that sense one may probably say that true innervation for movements with the upper extremity comes from the shoulders, even if it may not be visible and may even be perceived in the fingertips.

Paul

[p2u_]

Cheers, any thoughts (be they in agreement or disagreement) would be most welcome.

Too early yet for something definite. For now, I'd like to say: Still too wordy. Good thing you added the videos, by the way.

My style would be more like:
Please take a look at this video and try the 4 movements displayed on your piano. Which ones feels more comfortable to you? Assuming there are no other options, which one would be more effective for playing octaves at reasonable speed? etc. That would be a good start for a conversation.

Answering questions that haven't been asked, especially when people haven't gone through the same experience is always tricky - your wisdom may easily go down the drain.

When you describe the inevitable results of a certain impact of certain movements, you also assume that the tension (or absence thereof) in people's joints is the same as yours and that they will perceive everything the way you do. For example: Because of exceptional strength in my hands, I can do the handstand on curved fingers (pillars of the dome - the hand) as Neuhaus propagates without anything collapsing (I solved the proximal joint problem in my left pinky); at the same time my wrists feel as free and comfortable as can be in that particular situation, and I don't have the impression that I deliberately lock anything at certain joints. On the contrary: the more pressure upon the arches, the stronger they become without me deliberately doing anything. Not too many people can do that I assume. The result is that I can push and push, but nothing will collapse the way you describe it. This also allows for easy weight technique without the negative consequences Alan Fraser describes. The only limits are 1) what the piano can do in terms of volume and projection (my ears guide me) and 2) what an audience may still perceive as music (depends to a certain extent on the size of the hall); it's useless to try and play harder and/or faster than that anyway.

Paul

[nyiregyhazi]

Please take a look at this video and try the 4 movements displayed on your piano. Which ones feels more comfortable to you? Assuming there are no other options, which one would be more effective for playing octaves at reasonable speed? etc. That would be a good start for a conversation.

I see your point. However, just trying things out had never given me much success, personally. A lot of people would try both and find the sagging wrist a lot more comfortable. However, if they tried to play Liszt's 6th rhapsody they'd be screwed- unless they figured out how to involve both arm and hand activation to add to the relaxed wrist. In my own experience, the more I have had a conscious understanding of what I must put in place for it to be possible to improve efficiency, the more I have improved the "feel" element of things. Simply trying things out never led me to something that truly works- when I was without guiding principles founded upon objective mechanics. Although they do not replace exploration, they have given a real sense of focus and purpose to experiments- rather than a sense of flailing around in the dark.

When you describe the inevitable results of a certain impact of certain movements, you also assume that the tension (or absence thereof) in people's joints is the same as yours and that they will perceive everything the way you do.

Really, you misunderstand me here. Although taking it to mechanics might seem rather disconnected from musical piano playing, on the surface, it reveals much about what is possible under the surface- and what is quite literally impossible. I only assume that tension occurs in situations where the upper arm roll is absent, yet the wrist does not flop down during key depression. This is a matter of objective certainty- as there is no possible explanation of how the wrist could fail to collapse in such a scenario. I am keen to take particular care not to portray anything as objectively certain, unless I have solid grounding to do so. In this case, if the forearm is pressing downward, a relaxed wrist MUST collapse. Only by rolling it forward, can a relaxed wrist be in a position to maintain alignment (other than a tiny upward movement).  

On the contrary: the more pressure upon the arches, the stronger they become without me deliberately doing anything. Not too many people can do that I assume. The result is that I can push and push, but nothing will collapse the way you describe it.

Sure- but this means that you must be involving the upper arm exactly as I described it. You may or may directly notice that in your perceptions, but even a hand of steel couldn't stop the wrist collapsing- unless the upper arm element is present to eliminate that possibility. If it is not present (when the arm exerts even the smallest of pressures) only localised muscles around the wrist can stop it collapsing- regardless of how strong the hand is.

The reason I write about these underlying issues is not to say that there's a single correct way to achieve or to perceive such a product- but rather to illustrate the outright impossibility of keeping the wrist aligned without severe effort, when the two core elements listed are absent. This gives anyone who is missing either element the chance to focus their work on acquiring what is a matter of necessity. Indirect approaches might also lead to these things occurring without intent, but there's no guarantee. Equally, a person who already incorporates these elements (by instinct) may find that they can release their wrists even further, by exploring the issue with awareness. The more I explore this guiding issue, the more my wrists are relaxing. I can lift my hand above my head like Rubinstein now and actively whack the hell out of the piano (not merely drop with weight) and still land with comfort rather than impact. This is not so much a matter of hand strength, but rather timing of hand movement- rather than intent to "fix" the hand solidly. I'm not saying that I would have any cause to do so very often, but the benefits of lifting the lid on these issues have been overwhelming. By linking my experimentation to objective issues about what makes a relaxed wrist (and shock absorption) possible, I have made 1000x more progress than out of any unguided experiments of old.

[p2u_]

By linking my experimentation to objective issues about what makes a relaxed wrist (and shock absorption) possible, I have made 1000x more progress than out of any unguided experiments of old.

I believe you and I know very well what you are talking about. I was only testing if you could break the wall I put up for you. I said "feel", "don't have the impression" etc, which does not describe what the real state of my body is.

Allow me to continue playing the advocate of the devil: I have read a lot about those issues, also by Alan and I wonder why tendons and ligaments are always left out of the equation. It's all bones, muscles, bones, muscles. But what keeps the bones together must also play a role, right or wrong? For example, we are told that it only takes 50 gram or so to push a key. That's why you supposedly don't need strong hands. Now recently I read a scientific (mind you) research report in German that said they had tested 15 or so pianists, playing the Dante Sonata by Liszt and the load upon the finger joints ranged from 6 to 10 pounds (!) in most virtuoso passages. Unfortunately no sound files available. If that's true, what do you do if your finger joints tend to collapse, notwithstanding the proud metacarpal arch? Compensate with something else higher up? Sacrifice the musical sound image?

Paul

[keyboardclass]

You need to be aware Fraser has huge mitts:



Kinda shapes his personal technique.

[nyiregyhazi]

I believe you and I know very well what you are talking about. I was only testing if you could break the wall I put up for you. I said "feel", "don't have the impression" etc, which does not describe what the real state of my body is.

Allow me to continue playing the advocate of the devil: I have read a lot about those issues, also by Alan and I wonder why tendons and ligaments are always left out of the equation. It's all bones, muscles, bones, muscles. But what keeps the bones together must also play a role, right or wrong? For example, we are told that it only takes 50 gram or so to push a key. That's why you supposedly don't need strong hands. Now recently I read a scientific (mind you) research report in German that said they had tested 15 or so pianists, playing the Dante Sonata by Liszt and the load upon the finger joints ranged from 6 to 10 pounds (!) in most virtuoso passages. Unfortunately no sound files available. If that's true, what do you do if your finger joints tend to collapse, notwithstanding the proud metacarpal arch? Compensate with something else higher up? Sacrifice the musical sound image?

Paul

It's all in the hand, for me. A drop can help sometimes, but only the hand can determine whether arm energy is transferred with efficiency (or whether much of it is wasted on crashing into the keybed). There's a way of extending the finger out into a certain path, where even collapsible joints can move without giving way.

Also, yeah, the thing about keyweight is only for either no sound or a bare ppppp. The pressure to overcome the key for a true FFFFF is greatly bigger.

Regarding Alan Fraser's skeletality, personally I do like his idea as a subjective thing, but I'd sooner look at it in terms of the issues of mechanical efficiency. I think it gives more clarity to what lies under the surface, compared to the subjective concept of bones doing the work. Bones never change- only the mechanical efficiency with which they pass on energy, Regarding ligaments- I think this is intended as a part of skeletality.

[nyiregyhazi]

You need to be aware Fraser has huge mitts:



Kinda shapes his personal technique.

By all means explain precisely how and why it compromises the efficacy for small hands. If you actually read his books, you'd find a great deal of advice aimed very specifically at how to do things with smaller hands that cannot effortlessly cover big intervals. Instead of casting vague aspersions, cite precisely what you consider he overlooks due to his hand size.

(ironically the whole point of what he is showing there is that ANY hand can cover more distance when on it's side!!!! It's all the more apt for a smaller hand.)

[keyboardclass]

He can do things with his hands that most players require arms to do hence his eschewing of armweight schools.

[nyiregyhazi]

He can do things with his hands that most players require arms to do hence his eschewing of armweight schools.

Utter nonsense. Alicia de Larrocha had as a powerful a hand action as anybody. It's when small handed pianists assume that they must create all the power from their arms that they fail to cultivate a capable hand and end up crippling it.

&feature=related

If an elderly lady with small hands can develop that kind of capability, nobody's hands are too small to be developed- unless they take the wrong approach.

[keyboardclass]

Rubbish.  His hands are pianistic behemoths.  That amount of mass cannot be developed.

[nyiregyhazi]

Rubbish.  His hands are pianistic behemoths.  That amount of mass cannot be developed.

Why should that matter? Who set hand mass as the goalpost? Do you see De Larrocha thrusting forcibly through an inactive hand? Training the hand to be properly capable is all the more important for those with small hands. For anybody to use less hand mass as an excuse is simply defeatist thinking that makes for a self-fulfilling prophecy. Larrocha would never have acquired such sizeable muscles on her hands, had she taken the view that small hands are therefore weak hands, that are fit for nothing more than stiffening up to transmit arm thrusts. Any hand can be trained to do a proper job.

[keyboardclass]

It's a pretty fundamental ratio - the less hand mass the more arm weight required.

[nyiregyhazi]

It's a pretty fundamental ratio - the less hand mass the more arm weight required.

Not true. That is massively oversimplified. You can create a loud sound with a tiny bullet, if you shoot it fast enough at a piano key. You're totally missing the point, if you think it's that simple. When pianists depend on arm weight without activating adequate movement in their hand, the sagging hand compromises efficiency and gives the illusion that more mass and weight is required. When a pianist with small hands learns to utilise adequate movement in the hand, very little active application of armweight is needed at all. There are mere kids who produce loud sounds without thrusting the arms around. Look at De Larrocha once again. When the finger is accelerated effectively, mass is not an issue.

The issue with small hands lies in defeatist thinking- that leads pianists to resort to inadequate alternatives to actually developing capable hand movement.

[keyboardclass]

Not true. That is massively oversimplified. You can create a loud sound with a tiny bullet, if you shoot it fast enough at a piano key.

Yeh, better with a cannonball though!

[nick_op]

It's a pretty fundamental ratio - the less hand mass the more arm weight required.

If I may chip in with my own experience - I recently had a few lessons with Alan at one of his workshops, in which he pulled me up on the volume of some of my octaves, which I was driving using so called 'arm weight'. He got me to involve the arm much less and generate the sound entirely with my fingers and voilà - my sound got much louder and the octaves easier to play because I was putting the effort in the right place (i.e. the hand). A side effect of this is that I get a much better blood flow to my hands now - I'm no longer limiting it with undue muscular tension in my arms.

I have an octave comfortably, by the way, and a ninth between white keys at a stretch.

You might also be interested to know that there was a guy in the class who Alan described as a natural arm weight guy. Did he try to convince him to change his technique from arm weight? No, he cultivated the arm weight and tweaked it in a few places to improve upon an already magnificent sound.

[pts1]

He got me to involve the arm much less and generate the sound entirely with my fingers and voilà - my sound got much louder and the octaves easier to play because I was putting the effort in the right place (i.e. the hand).

Right!

I don't know when this crazy arm weight thing ever got started, but it has probably ruined more pianists than any other thing they do. Professional pianists use finger technique, which is based on pulling the key down -- not hitting it -- at sufficient speed to throw the hammer into the string to produce the sound they want. The role of the upper arm and forearm is to stabilize and support the hand and act as a kind of shock absorber by offering sufficient resistance to offset the reaction generated by the action of fingers pulling down the key.

All the schools and methods like Taubman (actually non-finger schools) are utiliizing the arm in various fluid and rotational movements to counter the damage and maladies of the arm weight proponents, IMHO.

As for chords and octaves, I play them with my fingers. What is a chord but several notes, i.e. several fingers pulling down several keys at the same time. I'm ON the keys when I play chords, the arms serving to "get me there" and assist the fingers if I need more speed into the keys for more volume.

If students and pianists trying to find/develop their technique would think how the piano actually works, and think in terms of the smallest, most efficient finger movement possible to perform the task at hand, this would improve them immensely, and almost overnight, since it would put them on the one and only correct path to correct technique.

[ajspiano]

 ...non-finger schools are utiliizing the arm in various fluid and rotational movements to counter the damage and maladies of the arm weight proponents, IMHO...

If students and pianists trying to find/develop their technique would think how the piano actually works, and think in terms of the smallest, most efficient finger movement possible to perform the task at hand...

I think you'll find that they are not trying to counter just the arm weight schools..

There is damaged caused by the finger schools that teach in such a way that left some students with rigid arms. Likewise there is problems cause by teachings that focused on the arm weight leaving students with inactive fingers and an arm flailing about all over the place.

for the most part (and obviously this can be argued against because its a very short explanation complicated by things like exactly how to do chords/octaves)..the "coordinate" teachings aim to use the arm for its physiological purpose or getting the fingers in place, and using the fingers for their physiological purpose of directly manipulating the object at hand, in this case a piano key.

..Which is essentially what your last paragraph is saying no?

[nyiregyhazi]

Right!

I don't know when this crazy arm weight thing ever got started, but it has probably ruined more pianists than any other thing they do. Professional pianists use finger technique, which is based on pulling the key down -- not hitting it -- at sufficient speed to throw the hammer into the string to produce the sound they want. The role of the upper arm and forearm is to stabilize and support the hand and act as a kind of shock absorber by offering sufficient resistance to offset the reaction generated by the action of fingers pulling down the key.

All the schools and methods like Taubman (actually non-finger schools) are utiliizing the arm in various fluid and rotational movements to counter the damage and maladies of the arm weight proponents, IMHO.

As for chords and octaves, I play them with my fingers. What is a chord but several notes, i.e. several fingers pulling down several keys at the same time. I'm ON the keys when I play chords, the arms serving to "get me there" and assist the fingers if I need more speed into the keys for more volume.

If students and pianists trying to find/develop their technique would think how the piano actually works, and think in terms of the smallest, most efficient finger movement possible to perform the task at hand, this would improve them immensely, and almost overnight, since it would put them on the one and only correct path to correct technique.

I agree with the majority of what you say. However, what I cannot agree with is Roy Holmes' circular path of finger movement as the norm. It creates far too much destabilisation of the arm- which will end up encouraging stiffness if taken literally at high speeds. For a rapid fire staccato scale, there's just way too much reaction to keep a healthily loose arm. There's simply no way that such extreme reactions can be casually absorbed throughout an entire Chopin Etude, or that the fingers can possibly be slipping enough on every single key for that circular path to accurately describe the product. In my next post, I'm going to illustrate a path of movement that involves pulling with the stronger muscles from the knuckle- yet EXPANDING outwards from the other two joints. This would be strenuous if the arm pushes or weighs down heavily, but it's highly comfortable when done with a lightened arm.

One aspect of this is that it opens the hand- it doesn't close it against anything. Since I adopted this style of finger action as my primary means, the difference to my hands has been pretty staggering. My hand still looks unrecognisable compared to a year or so ago. I used to have a very slight space between my r.h. 4th and 5th fingers. In a natural resting position, I now have vastly more space between the knuckles. Actions that open the hand are far more conducive to developing greater flexibility and range of motion. The action of moving the key literally serves to open the knuckles (via the interosseus muscles)- rather than close them together.

Just one further thing, I cannot agree that "small" is desirable, necessarily. What I see in students over and over is half-hearted finger movements- the bare minimum to put the key down and nothing more. I'm constantly having to remind them to keep the activity going for longer- rather than simply do a tiny prod. When they do so, their sound transforms very quickly- with greater clarity, precision and depth of tone. I think it's important to strive for efficiency in terms of directing energy directly and precisely, but I don't personally agree that students should consciously strive for small movements (except in the sense of trying to source movement in the hand, rather than with whole arm thrusts). In my experience, most students need to actually stop repressing so much and let the motions carry through without impediment- so the finger is doing everything it can to get the knuckle up in the air.

[pts1]

the "coordinate" teachings aim to use the arm for its physiological purpose or getting the fingers in place, and using the fingers for their physiological purpose of directly manipulating the object at hand, in this case a piano key.

..Which is essentially what your last paragraph is saying no?

Yes, that's essentially what I'm saying.  

[ajspiano]

Yes, that's essentially what I'm saying. 

I think this is a big reason why the Chopin etudes are so important to ones development, this is the point at which you are truly consistently challenged physically in 2 particular general ways..

Firstly, that in most cases the speed, and interval range/hand positions are such that it is not possible to play the works well if you arm does not get you into position because it will result in severely straining yourself due to the added stress on the fingers.

Secondly, that even if your arm is in place, a failure use an adequate finger action will result in an extremely sloppy and poorly articulated performance. Much more so than it would in easier works.

...and because in order to play musically these factors must become second nature, near technical perfection is simply unavoidable if you wish to play them to a high standard, or even an average standard.

[pts1]

I agree with the majority of what you say. However, what I cannot agree with is Roy Holmes' circular path of finger movement as the norm. It creates far too much destabilisation of the arm- which will end up encouraging stiffness if taken literally at high speeds. For a rapid fire staccato scale, there's just way too much reaction to keep a healthily loose arm. There's simply no way that such extreme reactions can be casually absorbed throughout an entire Chopin Etude, or that the fingers can possibly be slipping enough on every single key for that circular path to accurately describe the product.

First of all, the "circular" path is not Holmes invention, its how the finger basically works.
When your naturally curved finger is on a key -- index finger for example --  and you pull the key down and prepare to again play the same key with the same finger, and do this say at 60 bpm, for a number of seconds, say 20 or 30 repetitions, you will see a natural elipse-like circular movement.

Part of the ellipse owes to the fact that the piano key goes down at an angle causing the finger to slip toward the player. So not only is the finger naturally forming an ellipse, the keyboard action has been designed to assist it.

Its important to do this simple little exercise at a moderately quick speed, so that you can't think about it and conciously inhibit the natural movement that "wants" to occur.

Personally, I don't feel any destabilization with the arm, and my finger is back in position on the key more or less about the time the key pops up under my finger.

But one problem I have with you is you keep changing the topic in mid-stream. Rapid fire stacatto -- are these scales piano or forte? Extremes in Chopin Etudes -- are you talking about stacatto?

Purposely picking something off topic or extreme as a possible exception to a rule, does not invalidate the rule.

Another thing is that Roy's demo is a demo... he exaggerates to get his point across. In actuality, you don't need a lot of pull. The horizontal movement of the finger tip is about 1/2 an inch, and part of that is due to the angle of the finger going down as well as the key going down at an angle. If you over do it, or do it too hard all the time, sure, you'll develop tired overworked muscles.

And no technique will work without a great deal of practice. Endurance, as you know, is the primary type of "strength" pianists need to develop, i.e. the ability to perform many repetitions without fatigue, so one will need to work at this like any thing else.

And when I said the "smallest possible movement", again you're taking it out of context.
Its the smallest possible movement to accomplish the sound you want.

A forte key pull will require more speed/power/energy than a piano key pull or a mezzo piano.

You should listen to Roy's lecture about the keyboard players of old, especially Bach and how he played. Bach was a master technician, and its almost universally accepted that if one can play well the Preludes and Fugues, you'll have a fabulous technique, and anything will be within your reach.

BTW, Bach is excellent for practicing this technique, of fingers on the key, pulling down the key at the correct speed for the sound you want, while the forearm  and hand "floats" providing a stable platform and position from which the  finger can pull the key down in a natural rotary motion.

[pts1]

I think this is a big reason why the Chopin etudes are so important to ones development, this is the point at which you are truly consistently challenged physically in 2 particular general ways..

Firstly, that in most cases the speed, and interval range/hand positions are such that it is not possible to play the works well if you arm does not get you into position because it will result in severely straining yourself due to the added stress on the fingers.

Secondly, that even if your arm is in place, a failure use an adequate finger action will result in an extremely sloppy and poorly articulated performance. Much more so than it would in easier works.

...and because in order to play musically these factors must become second nature, near technical perfection is simply unavoidable if you wish to play them to a high standard, or even an average standard

Excellent observations, Aj, you're spot on with these remarks, IMHO, this is exactly how I see it.

You might check out Roy Holmes teaching video in two parts on teaching Opus 10 No 1, and he raises the exact points you're talking about.

[nyiregyhazi]

First of all, the "circular" path is not Holmes invention, its how the finger basically works.
When your naturally curved finger is on a key -- index finger for example --  and you pull the key down and prepare to again play the same key with the same finger, and do this say at 60 bpm, for a number of seconds, say 20 or 30 repetitions, you will see a natural elipse-like circular movement.

I never stated it to be his invention and that was not my basis for disputing it. The circular path is not inherently how the finger "basically works". That's what happens if you do not involve extension. If you DO involve extension, the finger works in a more direct line. It's entirely down to what you choose to do with it. Neither path is inherently more "natural" or superior for that particular reason. It's all about the results that they produce.

Part of the ellipse owes to the fact that the piano key goes down at an angle causing the finger to slip toward the player. So not only is the finger naturally forming an ellipse, the keyboard action has been designed to assist it.

? Do you have any evidence for the fact that this tiny angle was specifically intended for such a purpose as a slipping finger? Without evidence, I could just as well assert that it was designed to take the path of an extending finger. To the best of my knowledge, the angle is purely a coincidental result of the lever based construction (and it would be rather difficult to have any alternative). The finger only slips if you are retracting it. If you extend out, it need not slip one jot.

Personally, I don't feel any destabilization with the arm, and my finger is back in position on the key more or less about the time the key pops up under my finger.

Could you film a rapid staccato scale, with a visibly circular path? I am immensely skeptical that the highest speeds can be reached without a straighter line of attack.

But one problem I have with you is you keep changing the topic in mid-stream. Rapid fire stacatto -- are these scales piano or forte? Extremes in Chopin Etudes -- are you talking about stacatto?

Either is fine. Anything that involves a flurry of reaction forces.

Purposely picking something off topic or extreme as a possible exception to a rule, does not invalidate the rule.

Actually that's precisely what it does. If such things are impossible with this technique, they invalidate Holmes' assertion that the whole of piano technique is based on such an action. A counterexample disproves a rule. If a technique is not up to Chopin Etudes, it does not make for a good foundation upon which to base the whole of technique.
 

Another thing is that Roy's demo is a demo... he exaggerates to get his point across. In actuality, you don't need a lot of pull. The horizontal movement of the finger tip is about 1/2 an inch, and part of that is due to the angle of the finger going down as well as the key going down at an angle

If I hold my hand at the angle he displays, a mere 1/2 inch is not anywhere enough to get the keys to the bottom.

And when I said the "smallest possible movement", again you're taking it out of context.
Its the smallest possible movement to accomplish the sound you want.

To accomplish the sound I wish, I do not conceive any form of reduction to anything the finger does. If I feel even a trace of that, the whole thing goes out the window. That's why I am very wary of intending to make something smaller. If the concept even begins to come on the radar, the quality of movement suffers. I need to make everything about expanding out further and further- not striving to be small.

BTW, Bach is excellent for practicing this technique, of fingers on the key, pulling down the key at the correct speed for the sound you want, while the forearm  and hand "floats" providing a stable platform and position from which the  finger can pull the key down in a natural rotary motion.

But how can it "float"- when every single finger action is causing reactions that are tugging at it? You can get away with this is in many things, but once you attempt it in a Chopin Etude, there's little choice but to start clenching in order to stop the arm being thrown around everywhere. A more direct line of finger action is required, in order to avoid destabilising the hand. Where do we see films of any accomplished pianists sliding their fingers notably across the surface of every key throughout an entire Chopin Etude?

[pts1]

nyire

You seem like a disputatious and oppositional fellow.

Everything I say, you pick apart -- without trying it, it would seem -- and wish more than anything to have an ongoing and disagreeable conversation.

That, of course, could go on forever.

Your last post seems to be hung up on a "straight path" for the finger, and there is no such thing.

The finger is fixed at the knuckle, and even if it is outstretched, when you move it up or down it is in an arc. That's a physical fact, not an opinion.

If you want to see some really good examples of what I'm talking about, and what you're skeptical about in real life, then watch Glenn Gould play the Goldberg Variations on Youtube.
Arguably, he had one of the best techniques in all of pianodom.

His performance is absolutely full of the type of "scratching, circular, curved" key pull motions I've been presenting.

This approach -- Bach's approach, BTW, if you'll listen to Roy's lecture -- works very well.

But if this technique is not for you, then by all means abandon it and do what pleases you.

In the end, that's all that counts.

[p2u_]

I don't know when this crazy arm weight thing ever got started, but it has probably ruined more pianists than any other thing they do. Professional pianists use finger technique [...]

That's quite a "religious" statement if I may say so. "Weight technique" as I know it is a subjective experience; "relaxation" is another. Although I perceive my fingers to do virtually everything, there are places where the IDEA of weight and relaxation ("playing like an orange") does a great job and even creates effects that cannot be achieved with "fingers alone". Please have a look at this masterclass by Georgy Sebok: Piano Masterclass Gyorgy Sebok 1987 part 6 of 6 starting from 2:40 and you will see what I mean. Please note that Sebok does not say anything about joint fixation/stabilisation Taubman, Lister-Sink and the likes talk about to "transfer weight"...

Paul

[keyboardclass]

His performance is absolutely full of the type of "scratching, circular, curved" key pull motions I've been presenting.

It's called the carrezando touch and for my money the most fundamental of touches.

[j_menz]

That, of course, could go on forever.

And has indeed done so on many occassions.

[p2u_]

It's called the carrezando touch

For those unfamiliar with the term: here is a pdf document discussing it. Enjoy!
Protecting the pianist's hand: The carrezando touch and more.

Paul

[p2u_]

I play this same way, and learned it from the same person he did,(Dieter Weber) who by the way was John O'Connor's teacher. Are you familiar with John O'Connor?

Not an attack, just want to get a few things straight. It's always dangerous to refer to authority to prove a point. Just have a look at that same John O'Connor giving a Beethoven masterclass. Look what he is teaching there! [starting from 11:00 on it gets really, really interesting...] First he starts echoing Keyboardclass ("tension - jelly in between - tension" to prevent harm coming to the tendons). Then at 11:46: "Yes. I feel that there's not enough weight coming from the arm" + showing how she should improve the sound image. With the pianists following he becomes even more explicit about sound coming from the upper arm, the back even... What is that supposed to mean? Did Wilhelm Kempf spoil him? Or is John O'Connor deliberately eliminating the competiton?

John O Conor - Beethoven Bootcamp

Paul

[keyboardclass]

For those unfamiliar with the term: here is a pdf document discussing it. Enjoy!
Protecting the pianist's hand: The carrezando touch and more.

Paul

I delivered a paper at the same conference.  Sadly her anatomical knowledge was way off-base - the concept's broadly right though.

[nyiregyhazi]

nyire

You seem like a disputatious and oppositional fellow.

Everything I say, you pick apart -- without trying it, it would seem -- and wish more than anything to have an ongoing and disagreeable conversation.

If you care to look back, I'd actually stated agreement with the majority of your last post. However, everything *I disagreed with* I stated my disagreement with- and give my reasons for. That's how debate traditionally works. Nobody is given a protected soapbox upon which to stand. I'm not interested in taking this to a personal level, sorry. I'm here to discuss piano technique and I am arguing against arguments- not against you. Can we just stick to a discussion of the issues, please?

Your last post seems to be hung up on a "straight path" for the finger, and there is no such thing.

The finger is fixed at the knuckle, and even if it is outstretched, when you move it up or down it is in an arc. That's a physical fact, not an opinion.

I'm sorry, but that is both an opinion and an inaccurate one- as can be illustrated with an irrefutable counterexample. I'll upload a diagram later. I use an extension action that moves the fingertip in a near perfect straight line. The finger has three joints. It would only be restricted to an arc if it had but a single joint. If you open the two outer joints while closing the knuckle, the finger extends into a straight line. When done with intent, this action is really quite simple to develop. There are possibilities other than an indirect arc. I have no problem with using an arc but I have a HUGE problem with the dubious assertion that the whole of finger technique is exclusively about arc-based movements. Holmes approach has value, but he is grossly missing the bigger picture- when he tries to present this single movement style as accounting for everything. His own films reveal that he does not do exactly as he describes when performing.

If you want to see some really good examples of what I'm talking about, and what you're skeptical about in real life, then watch Glenn Gould play the Goldberg Variations on Youtube.
Arguably, he had one of the best techniques in all of pianodom.

I'm not skeptical that pianists play this way and never stated as such. I'm skeptical that extreme virtuoso passages can be executed with this style of motion. If you can find a performance of a Chopin Etude with extreme finger slips on every key (not merely on some), I'd like to see it. If no such film exists, the pure finger arc does not account for the whole of finger technique. Something else is going on.

I remind you that my argument is against Roy Holmes' short sighted assertion that this single style of action accounts for the whole of finger technique in piano playing. I made no assertion that this action is not present anywhere in piano playing, but simply that there are countless things for which it is unsuitable and which are better served by an alternative path of finger movement. His method simply does not give the whole picture.

[nyiregyhazi]

For those unfamiliar with the term: here is a pdf document discussing it. Enjoy!
Protecting the pianist's hand: The carrezando touch and more.

Paul

I have to be honest and say that I personally find this baffling, to the extreme. There is no shortage of cases of pianists who caused injury to their most sensitive tendons- by overdoing curling of the weakest joints, rather than activating well from the knuckle. I cannot even begin to get a grasp of how scraping around over the surface of the keys, via these most sensitive and injury prone tendons, is going to "protect" anything. In the past, I've occasionaly had slight aches around the fingertips from overdoing that inward grip myself. Since I switched almost entirely to the very opposite action of slightly extending these joints out (creating a much more direct path of movement through the key compared to scraping the fingertip backwards), I've never had the slightest twinge in those areas.

If anything, my sneaking suspicion is that any benefits would come through curling up the finger into a position from which the instincts are inclined to stop closing up the tip and instead start engaging extension actions in the opposite direction. All too often people forget to distinguish between curled (past tense) and curling (present tense). Pre-curled fingers are inclined to perform literally the opposite activity to curling inwards. My suspicion is that this supposedly "curling" based approach simply encourages the finger to switch direction, once it has already "curled" inward. I think it's possibly the very opposite of what is described.

[keyboardclass]

I use an extension action that moves the fingertip in a near perfect straight line. The finger has three joints. It would only be restricted to an arc if it had but a single joint. If you open the two outer joints while closing the knuckle, the finger extends into a straight line.

'Any contraction of the extensor, except as it is involved in the stiff-finger co-ordination to combine with the long flexors in locking the three phalanges into a unit, is quite useless for key-depression.' - Arnold Schultz

[keyboardclass]

I cannot even begin to get a grasp of how scraping around over the surface of the keys, via these most sensitive and injury prone tendons, is going to "protect" anything.

Talking out of your arse - the flexor tendons are some of the strongest in the body.  When climbing trees they support our entire weight!