keeping a relaxed wrist in chords and octaves

[chopantasy]

When you play "from the shoulder" but without the articulation of the fingers, you make sounds like a singer with bad diction. The vowels are there, but nobody can really make out what you are saying because the consonants are missing. And if you start pushing from higher up to compensate for lazy fingers, then you're in for trouble in the virtuoso repertoire.

Like this?

[p2u_]

Like this?

He does everything right; besides, I never said Kentner was a bad pianist. The misquote by keyboardclass of something said by Kentner in another context just has nothing to do with we are discussing here.

Paul

[chopantasy]

Sorry, my bad.  After your comments I googled Mr Kentner.  Such a surprise, I'd not heard him before.

[nyiregyhazi]

I've read the whole thread and this is by far the best advice.  Mr Kentner certainly knew his stuff.  It's so easy to lose the woods if you concentrate on the trees.

Really?

We may assume that the loosely lying hand, the elastically unimpeded arm and the naturally placed fingers will find their own best, least strenuous way of moving.

Let's "assume" that technique comes by magic if you abide by just a few highly vague sentiments? Such vague generalisations are truly worthless- other than to those who are lucky enough to be on the right track. This kind of vaguery got me nowhere whatsoever, over a period of many years. Kentner may have played well, but his assumption about fingers magically figuring out what to do is quite false.

[nyiregyhazi]

N:

I think you might want to look into the physics involved in using a whip.

As a person manipulates a whip, the easy slow movement of the whip motion beginning at the whip handle transmits via a "rolling wave" to the tip end of the whip which -- if done correctly -- "cracks", which is a miniature sonic boom.

IOW, as the energy moves from larger mass ultimately to the smallest mass, there is an abundance of powerful small energetic movement at the tip(s).

Piano playing is similar: the shoulder acts as the handle of the whip, and as the ever so slight movement originates at the shoulder down the upper arm to the forearm, wrist, hand and fingers to finger tips, the mass is finally small and the concentrated energy gives plenty of speed and power to pull down the piano key. Tiny adjusting movements by arm, wrist, hand and fingers direct the whip-like action resulting in the desired sonority.

The feeling is like the arm and hand and fingers are like one rubbery, flexible and supple unit
which can conform on the fly to any shape/speed needed for the desired result.

Continuous thinking of all the tiny separate parts is not helpful IMHO.

Before one can disect something, it must be killed.

I'm not sure if you've heard Horowitz's live 6th rhapsody, but I sure as hell cannot crack a whip at the speed he plays the last burst of repeated octaves. Can you? A one-sided shoulder-based explanation simply cannot account for such insane speeds. I'm not saying there's nothing to be explored at that end- but I think the faster you go, the less the shoulder can contribute. For an individual octave, a whole arm crack is great (although even there something has to stop the hand collapsing). For major speed, however, it's simply sluggish to view movement as starting from that end. Had I never dissected this issue and explore it from both ends, I would never have come close to being able to play the 6th rhapsody. It's not a work I've learned still, but I've finally discovered that I can play through longish sections without my whole arm locking up. The whip view never got me within a lightyear of that- until I looked at the hand end of the movements.

[pts1]

I'm not sure if you've heard Horowitz's live 6th rhapsody, but I sure as hell cannot crack a whip at the speed he plays the last burst of repeated octaves. Can you?

Have I heard it? 

When I was 14 or 15, I was obsessed with the Horowitz recording of this piece.
I practiced it relentlessly until I could match his speed (lol) even timing myself with a stop watch.
(this means I've known the piece for about 48 years!)

So, yes,  when I really practice I can play it that fast -- and that's not the hard part -- the speed --its the endurance, shifting and cycling the work load, and pacing, IMHO.

But I learned to play octaves pretty well, and the trick is that its from the shoulder, with fingers on the key and I play with all my piano playing equipment, relieving and rotating to different muscles as needed while others refresh. It is sort of a "perpetual whip-like" motion with the wrist rising at times, going lower, changing fingers from 4 to 5, and whatever you need to accomodate  the passage being played, while you cycle with rounded movements to different muscle configurations.

Actually, I think Byron Janis has faster octaves, and maybe Martha Argerich (though I don't find her playing interesting a lot of the time-- just fast.

But the fastest and most easily played octaves I ever saw were played by Rudolf Buchbinder.

I saw him do this when he was 19 -- it was a good bit faster as was the entire Beethoven Concerto #1. I found it unbelievable at the time.

Go to 9:45 and shortly after you'll see him play the C Maj scale from top to bottom with one hand in octaves.

He also, as I recall, plays (or played) the end of the Waldstein third mvmt coda octave glissando, as octaves... not a glissando... crystal clear like a two handed scale. As I recall, his wrist was low, and his hand and fingers vibrated into the keys leaving only enough to go down the scale -- or up as in the case of the left hand, all initiated by the upper arm.

He was an incredibly gifted youngster who was accepted by the Vienna Music Academy when he was only 5! Which means he had to have been playing since he was at least 4! There is simply nothing he cannot do at the piano, though he probably couldn't explain it since he learned basic technique probably before he was 7! He's quite Viennese with a kind of happy go lucky personality, an immense repetoire, huge number of recordings, and doesn't spend more than 3 hours a day at the piano and never has.

But back to the subject, I think the way to learn quick, fluent and comfortable octaves, is to play them in groups... 4 quickly in a row, then another four, finding the best fluid motion, then finding how to "cycle" between the two groups then add another group, etc.

Oh, and the hardest part of the HR6 for me is the last part when I'm tired and have to play the chromatic scale in octaves in opposite directions. I think the trick for this, is to learn the chromatic upper and lower notes using the 4th and 5th fingers, and if you can use the 3rd finger also, attempting to mimic a similar idea as in Chopin Opus 10 No 2.

[nyiregyhazi]

When I was 14 or 15, I was obsessed with the Horowitz recording of this piece.
I practiced it relentlessly until I could match his speed (lol) even timing myself with a stop watch.
(this means I've known the piece for about 48 years!)

Have you heard the live one though? It was only issued recently. The last burst is even crazier.

But I learned to play octaves pretty well, and the trick is that its from the shoulder, with fingers on the key and I play with all my piano playing equipment, relieving and rotating to different muscles as needed while others refresh. It is sort of a "perpetual whip-like" motion with the wrist rising at times, going lower, changing fingers from 4 to 5, and whatever you need to accomodate  the passage being played, while you cycle with rounded movements to different muscle configurations.

Don't get me wrong- I'm not saying you can't play good octaves or that there's nothing in the whip concept. However, if the hand were merely to "transmit", it would be slow. Even if the shoulder is involved the fingers have to move to generate any real speed. This was absent from me for years- and no amount of focus on whipping from the shoulder helped. I was just looking at the wrong end. Since developing the hand side, I'm increasingly finding that I can perceive it more at the shoulder end without having to look so much at the hand. But I'm certainly that the only reason I can do this is because the hand is finally becoming hard-wired to perform the necessary movements.

If you look at the physics of a whip, it basically channels the energy of a big movement into a smaller (but more violent) one. That's why it's so hard to do it fast in repetition- both with a whip and shoulder based octaves. You need a huge movement at one end, to produce speed at the other- and there's not enough time for that when you try to go quick. Smaller finger movements get straight into the keys- which makes for greater scope for repetition than shoulder instigation. I'm not ruling out any possibility of active shoulder involvement, but it would be nothing without considerable finger movement.

He also, as I recall, plays (or played) the end of the Waldstein third mvmt coda octave glissando, as octaves... not a glissando... crystal clear like a two handed scale. As I recall, his wrist was low, and his hand and fingers vibrated into the keys leaving only enough to go down the scale -- or up as in the case of the left hand, all initiated by the upper arm.

I'm not convinced by this. I think virtually all key movement comes from finger actions and that arm movements are almost entirely passive responses to that (except sideways movement to align the hand, of course). I cannot personally see any other explanation for extreme speeds. The upper arm requires freedom, but it would be very slow to literally channel energy through the arm.

Oh, and the hardest part of the HR6 for me is the last part when I'm tired and have to play the chromatic scale in octaves in opposite directions. I think the trick for this, is to learn the chromatic upper and lower notes using the 4th and 5th fingers, and if you can use the 3rd finger also, attempting to mimic a similar idea as in Chopin Opus 10 No 2.

Yeah, I was trying the 3s myself. This is where I'm convinced it's more about the hand. The more you strive to join physically, the less the arm digs down. I think legato fingering is one of the biggest tricks to chromatic octaves- because it basically forces you to do more with the fingers and less of the arm thrusts.

[pts1]

N:

You have a real tendency to isolate parts of posts and missing out on the intended meaning.
At first, I thought you were doing this to be "difficult", but I've changed my mind.

I do not think you can "convince" yourself intellectually about techniques you have not achieved yet -- the physical aspects of piano playing are way complex -- piano technique in general, and high level techniques -- in particular.

No one has ever been able to really explain it, nor is it necessary.

IMO, your thinking is a big problem for you -- one I sympathize with -- since I used to do a similar thing, thinking it was important I intellectually understand how piano playing is done.

But it can't be done, and in fact I think attempting to do so unnecessarily keeps you from your goal(s).

I think if you'd start experimenting with various techniques you'll eventually find ways that work for you that come from a more holistic approach.

Somehow, for instance, out of everything I said in the last post, you didn't seem to understand that I'm NOT saying you play only with the upper arm. But you seem stuck on this.

ALL parts are important in a coordinated effort.

But once you add the impetus, freedom and mass of the upper arm to the rest of the piano playing mechanism, everything is available to you to find the right way(s) for you to play. 

So I would forget trying to be convinced, and see practice as more of a process of experimentation.

IOW, the "empirical" method in learning piano is far more "advanced" than the "scientific" method.

You know all the basics, so I think what will really advance you is now experimenting and finding your way, which cannot be defined, explained or quantified.

[j_menz]

Perhaps we can prevail upon a certain lass to give us an encore:

[p2u_]

I do not think you can "convince" yourself intellectually about techniques you have not achieved yet

As a matter of fact, I remember seeing a video of N. playing the octaves arrangement by Cziffra of the Bumblebee (maybe google video, maybe myspace, I don't remember exactly). That had already quite impressive potential; not yet the beast in someone like Yuja Wang, but potential, with the impulse coming from higher up. But it was in the days when his hands and fingers were not active because he had been taught to "relax"; 2007 or so, with no arches, virtually no finger bouncing activity; nothing, just potential. I'm sure his rendering now will be much better still. But N. is also a teacher. He *has* to find ways to describe this stuff, at least for himself.

Paul

[marik1]

Go to 9:45 and shortly after you'll see him play the C Maj scale from top to bottom with one hand in octaves.

Indeed, he plays that part correctly, however, I find this performance by far more exciting:

Oh, and the hardest part of the HR6 for me is the last part when I'm tired and have to play the chromatic scale in octaves in opposite directions. I think the trick for this, is to learn the chromatic upper and lower notes using the 4th and 5th fingers, and if you can use the 3rd finger also, attempting to mimic a similar idea as in Chopin Opus 10 No 2.

Are you getting tired in HR6?

For me somehow the hardest part in that passage is the ascending part of LH coming back to Bb starting from F#. Never was able to get good control there with extreme (as fast as it is possible) tempi. Go figure...

Best, M  

[p2u_]

For me somehow the hardest part in that passage is the ascending part of LH coming back to Bb starting from F#. Never was able to get good control there with extreme (as fast as it is possible) tempi. Go figure...

Oh, yes, and you're not the only one. In 1989, the year that Wibi Soerjadi (18 years old, 8 years of piano practice!) took third prize in the Liszt competition in Utrecht - Holland, it was clear from the beginning that the Italian Enrico Pace was going to get first prize. So what do the jury members do then backstage during the breaks? Yes, they discuss all kinds of stuff, showing tricks to each other and emphasizing the mechanical benefits of this or that angle of "attack". The most popular subject for discussion and show-off was Chopin's thirds etude (jury member Daniel Wayenberg, an exponent of the Marguerite Long school with fingers like sausages won, haha), but the passage you mentioned was also under discussion. Incredible of how aware those people are of the mechanics involved.

Paul

[chopantasy]

Let's "assume" that technique comes by magic if you abide by just a few highly vague sentiments? Such vague generalisations are truly worthless- other than to those who are lucky enough to be on the right track. This kind of vaguery got me nowhere whatsoever, over a period of many years. Kentner may have played well, but his assumption about fingers magically figuring out what to do is quite false.

 I find your remarks quite offensive.  'Kentner may have played well'?  Considering you are a total nothing, that's a bit rich.

But once you add the impetus, freedom and mass of the upper arm to the rest of the piano playing mechanism, everything is available to you to find the right way(s) for you to play.  

This is more like it.

[p2u_]

@ chopantasy

Everybody understood from your very first post, who you are; your style is just too recognizable. If you continue ruining N.'s topics because of your personal vendetta against him., you will be removed from this board, even if you create a million user accounts. Now can we please continue without any further personal attacks? Thanks.

Paul

[chopantasy]

I would seem to have googled into a rather hostile environment.  Whoever you may think I am there is no excuse for rudeness.  I think it would be better to stick to the subject of the thread.

[p2u_]

there is no excuse for rudeness.

Your remark was completely out of the scope of what N. was saying; there was no rudeness intended in N.'s passage you quoted, and everybody but you understood that. You just saw what you wanted to see. Your reply, on the other hand, was really rude ("considering you are a total nothing"). In case you start editing, I've made a screenshot.

I think it would be better to stick to the subject of the thread.

Nobody will argue with that. Just show a good example, that's all I'm asking.

Paul

[chopantasy]

Perhaps once I've heard your hero's back catalogue I'll change my opinion.

[p2u_]

Perhaps once I've heard your hero's back catalogue I'll change my opinion.

My hero's back catalogue?!

This is a board for pianists discussing technique, performance, practising, memorizing etc. We have neither the time nor the energy for anything else. That was post number six that is not intended to have a serious discussion coming from someone who gives the impression of not belonging in that category. Did you read the board description? Forum rules?

Paul

[nyiregyhazi]

I do not think you can "convince" yourself intellectually about techniques you have not achieved yet -- the physical aspects of piano playing are way complex -- piano technique in general, and high level techniques -- in particular.

Well, I'd agree to a large extent. That's why I'm in a position to speak from experience about how futile the shoulder ended explanation can be, if you neglect the hand movement. Since I developed the hand side of things, I am now in a position to speak from experience on octaves. When I had only ever attempted the one sided shoulder explanation, I was not. That is why I feel it is so important to at least view it from both ends.

No one has ever been able to really explain it, nor is it necessary.

 

So I merely imagined the fact that I often used to tense up severely when trying to play octaves from the shoulder end of things alone? And that I can now play them with lightness and comfort? And it's mere coincidence that rational principles of mechanics are fully consistent with the fact that it's slower and more cumbersome to apply the energy from the shoulder end, than from the hand end?

It's all very well being skeptical, but why outright dismissive of the possibility that analysis can help? You're going so far as to advise me to return to approach that left with me with extremely poor technique? I wouldn't be citing these things if I had not recevieved HUGE benefits from them (after all, I'm not keyboardclass). The problem with analysis is when it neglects key areas within the whole and instead fixates on one aspect. When it reveals a key area that was previously overlooked, it can be extraordinarily beneficial. This is exactly what happened to me. Everyone spoke on and on about the shoulder. What I needed to improve was my hand, however.

I think if you'd start experimenting with various techniques you'll eventually find ways that work for you that come from a more holistic approach.

Been there, done it, failed. Focussed experiments however, have got me a world beyond that.

Somehow, for instance, out of everything I said in the last post, you didn't seem to understand that I'm NOT saying you play only with the upper arm. But you seem stuck on this.

You mentioned the whip. In such an analogy, everything comes from the rear. You didn't even mention the fingers directly inputting movement, in recent posts. To get anywhere, fingers had to come first- not merely being one part of a whole that is viewed mostly as a whip from the shoulder. That's exactly the view I had taken and it failed. Fingers had to start coming first.  To be clear- I'm not saying you were TOTALLY one sided when you spoke of the whip. However, anything that fails to speak directly about the fingers actively moving through the keys (rather than merely transferring energy from further back) is one sided, in my opinion. If it's sometimes viewed from shoulder to fingers, it's equally important to spend at least some of the time viewing it from finger to shoulder. Personally, I see way more problems due to neglect of the latter than the former. It's not hard to swing the whole arm, but few have the hand activation required either to transmit arm energy effectively, or to pluck octaves more lightly and without whole arm instigation.

[nyiregyhazi]

@ chopantasy

Everybody understood from your very first post, who you are; your style is just too recognizable. If you continue ruining N.'s topics because of your personal vendetta against him., you will be removed from this board, even if you create a million user accounts. Now can we please continue without any further personal attacks? Thanks.

Paul

I have to admit that I missed it at first, although it became quite clear from that post both that somebody has been banned and that they've also found themself a new account.

[nyiregyhazi]

As a matter of fact, I remember seeing a video of N. playing the octaves arrangement by Cziffra of the Bumblebee (maybe google video, maybe myspace, I don't remember exactly). That had already quite impressive potential; not yet the beast in someone like Yuja Wang, but potential, with the impulse coming from higher up. But it was in the days when his hands and fingers were not active because he had been taught to "relax"; 2007 or so, with no arches, virtually no finger bouncing activity; nothing, just potential. I'm sure his rendering now will be much better still. But N. is also a teacher. He *has* to find ways to describe this stuff, at least for himself.

Paul

Yes, here it is:

https://www.myspace.com/andrewthayer/videos

No problem moving from the shoulder (which simply isn't a very difficult thing to develop), but the intent to merely whip energy through the hand (rather than actually move the fingers) was a huge limiter. I could only play it because I was on a very springy Yamaha (although that didn't stop my forearms having to tense up aplenty). On a more inert concert Steinway action, it would have ground to a halt in no time.

[ahinton]

Many years ago when I was invited to attend piano teaching classes (which I did, albeit in my capacity as something of an outsider, as my area of interest was not so much in playing the piano but in writing effectively for it), I recall noting with a mix of perplexity, horror and amusement that the class seemed naturally to divide itself almost irreconcilably between (a) those who made much of rotary movements and other motions that seemed to me to be potentially if not actually extraneous to the best methods of sound production and (b) what I might call a "fingers forever" school whose agenda rested heavily on the utmost economy of movement with what seemed at the time to be a disproportionate emphasis on fingertips and finger muscles largely at the expense of everything else; the latter group regarded such living pianists as Maurizio Pollini, Georges Pludermacher and Misha Dichter as prime examples and Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli as almost god-like and, of the pianists of the past, Rachmaninov was always spoken of with both reverence and fervour.

It was to that latter group that I felt the greater sympathy, because what they appeared to advocate seemed to make a good deal of sense, especially in relation to the most physically demanding repertoire (Liszt, Alkan, Godowsky, etc.), although the often dogmatic attitude of some of them - which tended at times to border on what René Guénon (in a very different philosophical context) called "proselytising fury" - was nevertheless not something with which I felt especially comfortable.

I attended one recital by Michelangeli on the strength of this kind of commendation, but I was utterly shocked by it, as his economical means at the piano was instantly forgotten as I concentrated, enthralled, on the fabulous sound that he made and on his apparent creation of a sense of there being almost no one between composer and listener; I also listened for the first time to old recordings by Rachmaninov and was similarly entranced by the results that he achieved.

The pianist who took the classes (no name mentioned!) was of the "rotary-for-all" school and just watching him demonstrate different approaches to problems was sometimes rather painful; however, this sense morphed into almost ribald amusement when the other lot persuaded him to to play Schumann's Toccata, a challenge to which he rose remarkably well, actually, although the sight of his forearms, wrists and such flailing and cavorting around while the music was all so patently finger-power oriented was such as to make it rather hard to maintain a straight face, especially as he managed to bring the piece off so well! I could not help but think how much easier it would have been had he expended so much less physical energy and exercise on that performance.

It seems to me that many if not all of the more challenging of Sorabji's larege-scale piano works offer some of the most convincing illustrations of the importance of economy of movement and energy; indulging in any extraneous motions is almost guaranteed to give rise to undue exhaustion in the player while contributing nothing germane to the sound production or the listening experience. The prospect of Lang Lang playing Opus Opus Clavicembalisticum Clavicembalisticum (sorry!) would accordingly seem as dismal as it would be improbable.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

No problem moving from the shoulder (which simply isn't a very difficult thing to develop), but the intent to merely whip energy through the hand (rather than actually move the fingers) was a huge limiter. I could only play it because I was on a very springy Yamaha (although that didn't stop my forearms having to tense up aplenty). On a more inert concert Steinway action, it would have ground to a halt in no time.

Ha! - you should try it on the Mason & Hamlin that I'm currently selling; it would probably have come apart after a mere couple of measures or so!

Best,

Alistair

[pts1]

N:

I'm not saying to neglect or not use the fingers.

It seems like everytime I say "A", you think I'm invalidating "B".

The fingers, much like a dog sled, are ALWAYS the "lead dog", IMO, setting the pace, direction, etc., of the team.

The pianist's team is  shoulder, upper arm, lower arm, hand, fingers, and all their joints.

That's something like 12 or so parts along with a MULTITUDE of muscles, tendons, ligaments and so on.

The "lead dog", ie finger tip, is in charge of actually pulling down the key, all other parts having to aid by being active or inactive in the pursuit of the goal.

But having seen your seemingly very good playing of the Czifra piece -- though I accept that you say you were tight -- it is not apparent, nor are there obvious problems, nor was this an amateurish performance.

So, I'm not sure that you have a fundamentally flawed problem, but on the contrary, you seem very close to figuring out whatever it is you're trying to understand.

And no, don't completely abandon the analytical method, simply balance it with the empirical.

It takes both, IMO.

You seem frequently to get caught in "either/or" kinds of thinking, which seems a bit surprising seeing how advanced you are.

I think you're a bit too serious and hard on yourself.

[nyiregyhazi]

I'm not saying to neglect or not use the fingers.

It seems like everytime I say "A", you think I'm invalidating "B".

Not at all. I'm just pointing out that the "whip" mentality has uses but it also has a limit. There are times when thinking of energy from the shoulder is useful, but there are times when it can become a significant limiter upon the intentions.

But having seen your seemingly very good playing of the Czifra piece -- though I accept that you say you were tight -- it is not apparent, nor are there obvious problems, nor was this an amateurish performance.

having been recorded on a phone certainly helps :-) Ironically, it's not the octaves that come out badly- but rather than the finger work in between octaves (which was somewhat approximate due to accumulated tensions from the octaves).

You seem frequently to get caught in "either/or" kinds of thinking, which seems a bit surprising seeing how advanced you are.

Not at all. I believe in many different approaches. My point with octaves is that you should not ONLY view octaves as always having to involve some form of instigation at the shoulder. They should also be worked at with the most passive arm possible and no whipping action whatsoever- but merely with free response to instigation at the hand end. I don't believe in choosing a single mindset but in taking a rounded perspective. My problem with many explanations is that what might appear to be a rounded perspective can actually detract attention from the key action in the fingers. Merely by involving the whole arm whipping action, you can automatically detract attention from the hand- no matter how rounded a view you seek to take. By taking the whole arm as one, you can end up failing to send adequate attention to developing key elements. That's why I believe that at least SOME (not all) of the work should be completely without the whole arm whip- so you don't get stuck in a position of only being able to view it primarily from the shoulder end.

[ahinton]

I think that this "whip action" idea might risk falling over itself in the context of most if not all lengthy uninterrupted passages in rapid 7ths, octaves, 9ths, 10ths or chords because one can only crack a whip (or effect the equivalent movement here) so many time per second and one can only keep it up for limited amounts of time; such passages that also involve large leaps perhaps have even greater susceptibility to the shortcomings of such an approach.

Best,

Alistair

[p2u_]

OK, guys. Since we are now talking about lengthy uninterrupted passages, just listen to how Katsaris cracks his whip in Schubert-Liszt's Erlkönig. Although the original Schubert accompaniment is probably more difficult to play, I find this performance of the transcription close to supernatural actually...

Paul

[nyiregyhazi]

I think that this "whip action" idea might risk falling over itself in the context of most if not all lengthy uninterrupted passages in rapid 7ths, octaves, 9ths, 10ths or chords because one can only crack a whip (or effect the equivalent movement here) so many time per second and one can only keep it up for limited amounts of time; such passages that also involve large leaps perhaps have even greater susceptibility to the shortcomings of such an approach.

Yeah, agreed. In some ways large leaps can sometimes be more suited to the whipping approach, but the biggest jumps in the 6th rhapsody are even more dependent on the fingers. Bringing in a whole arm arc makes it very hard (even impossible) to maintain lightness and speed. When the arm drifts perfectly sideways and the fingers simply strive to flick the hand away, there's scarcely more difficulty spanning the big interval than in the adjacent octaves. I've basically had to strive to be capable of eliminating arm whipping altogether, to become capable of navigating this type of writing.

[nyiregyhazi]

OK, guys. Since we are now talking about lengthy uninterrupted passages, just listen to how Katsaris cracks his whip in Schubert-Liszt's Erlkönig. Although the original Schubert accompaniment is probably more difficult to play, I find this performance of the transcription close to supernatural actually...

Paul

Absolutely. Have you seen this one though:

For me, it's the ultimate illustration that true virtuoso octaves lie more in the hand. Of course, there is movement at the wrist and in the forearm- but that would be expected as a reaction to hand activities. I don't believe there is anywhere near enough arm movement to imply that the arms are the active source of key depression. Such tiny movements look much more like responses to hand movements, than individual whipping actions to press each octave down.

[pianoman53]

Sorry for yet another OT-post (I just came from a 'discussion' like this, and yeah... why bother with joining an other one?)

How much time do you guys spend on this site, compared to practicing?

[marik1]

OK, guys. Since we are now talking about lengthy uninterrupted passages, just listen to how Katsaris cracks his whip in Schubert-Liszt's Erlkönig.

Here is E. Schumann sleeveless, so you can see how she does it (it is live!):

[marik1]

I recall noting with a mix of perplexity, horror and amusement that the class seemed naturally to divide itself almost irreconcilably between (a) those who made much of rotary movements and other motions that seemed to me to be potentially if not actually extraneous to the best methods of sound production and (b) what I might call a "fingers forever" school whose agenda rested heavily on the utmost economy of movement with what seemed at the time to be a disproportionate emphasis on fingertips and finger muscles largely at the expense of everything else...

Somehow it reminds the war between Lilliputs and Blefuscudians over eating eggs from big and small ends...

For me the ideal pianism is that of E. Gilels, who had extremely economical, relaxed, and  just impeccable finger work. However, on top of that he had a constant wrist rotation, which worked almost like shock absorbers in the car, and also helped shaping the melody and music. It strikes me as if every single element of his pianism, as well as his entire body are inseparable from the music and music making.

Best, M

[pianowolfi]

Somehow it reminds the war between Lilliputs and Blefuscudians over eating eggs from big and small ends...

For me the ideal pianism is that of E. Gilels, who had extremely economical, relaxed, and  just impeccable finger work. However, on top of that he had a constant wrist rotation, which worked almost like shock absorbers in the car, and also helped shaping the melody and music. It strikes me as if every single element of his pianism, as well as his entire body are inseparable from the music and music making.

Best, M

I was so lucky to hear Gilels once live here in Basel, I think it was in 1983 or so, he played Schumann Symphonic Etudes, unfortunately I don't remember the rest of the program. He spoke directly to the soul. (Like Rostropowitch, whom I also heard several times). I didn't have any opportunity to watch his technique, but I am sure that he spoke intensely to the soul because I heard it, and I remember it, and it still makes me want to cry, though I don't remember all the details of the program.

[pianowolfi]

Here is E. Schumann sleeveless, so you can see how she does it (it is live!):

I love this so much, it's so, so wonderful! I mean, I don't really have anything particular against Yujia Wang, but this is so much better! Thalberg (not Thalbergmad) linked it a while ago in this forum, and I was just like wow, and also her Gretchen am Spinnrad, wow...

[pts1]

Somehow it reminds the war between Lilliputs and Blefuscudians over eating eggs from big and small ends...

Yes, and a simple and mutually beneficial solution would've been scrambled eggs.

[p2u_]

Here is E. Schumann sleeveless, so you can see how she does it (it is live!):
_youtube.com/watch?v=T5s3erfbUic

Yes, I'm very impressed, but mostly by the musical result. The fingers do look rather cramped in places. Hope she'll keep in good pianistic health.

For me the ideal pianism is that of E. Gilels, who had extremely economical, relaxed, and  just impeccable finger work. However, on top of that he had a constant wrist rotation, which worked almost like shock absorbers in the car, and also helped shaping the melody and music. It strikes me as if every single element of his pianism, as well as his entire body are inseparable from the music and music making.

Yes, words cannot even describe the power and presence of that giant. It's actually rather strange that Heinrich Gustavovich openly preferred Richter.

Paul

[thalbergmad]

Having nothing better to do (too hot to play tonight), I have read through this knowledgable thread. I cannot help but think that there is no right way and no wrong way, only the individual way. Surely the individual must figure out what works best for them, even if it does go against a scientific approach.

I was watching a video of the greatest javelin throwers in history last night. It was astounding the huge differences in technique that were used, but the end result was that they were all capable of hurling the old spear a bloody long way. Does not the same apply to octaves??

Thal

[chopantasy]

I know where I'd hurl mine.

[nyiregyhazi]

Having nothing better to do (too hot to play tonight), I have read through this knowledgable thread. I cannot help but think that there is no right way and no wrong way, only the individual way. Surely the individual must figure out what works best for them, even if it does go against a scientific approach.

I was watching a video of the greatest javelin throwers in history last night. It was astounding the huge differences in technique that were used, but the end result was that they were all capable of hurling the old spear a bloody long way. Does not the same apply to octaves??

Thal

The problem is that this argument works backwards. It starts from assumption of success and only then looks at the diversity of means. What if we include all the miserable failures? Will the difference between the successful cases seem so great any more? Compared to the abundance of ways to do poorly, they will have an enormous amount in common. There is not a lone way, but there are many more ways of failing than of succeeding. By looking at what successes have in common, you can go from one of the many ways of guaranteeing perpetual failure, towards something that actually has a chance to work.

How much diversity of let-off trajectory do you think there is among successful javelin throwers? I suspect it's miniscule. What you certainly don't get is successful javelin throwers hurling it straight up or on a perfectly flat path. This much might be obvious and most javelin throwers may find the right trajectory by experiment. However, with so many variables in pianism, there's no guarantee that a pianist will chance upon the equivalent of an effective javelin trajectory. Without certain aspects, you might as well be a javelin thrower who only practises chucking the thing straight down at the ground.

The problem with doing what a person thinks is best is that recipes for short-term success often minimise scope for longer-term sustained development. If it were as simple as doing what seems right, we'd all be virtuosi. Do people who read "the inner game" become virtuosi, without taking any lessons? No. You can't expect to reinvent the wheel. All too often, the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" attitude is applied to the most modest level of success- with the result of completing shutting off the slightest scope for ongoing development.

[j_menz]

[p2u_]

Having nothing better to do (too hot to play tonight), I have read through this knowledgable thread. I cannot help but think that there is no right way and no wrong way, only the individual way. Surely the individual must figure out what works best for them, even if it does go against a scientific approach.

I was watching a video of the greatest javelin throwers in history last night. It was astounding the huge differences in technique that were used, but the end result was that they were all capable of hurling the old spear a bloody long way. Does not the same apply to octaves??

Thal

In a way, yes, but there is one problem though: the competition. You can easily teach a student all there is to know about mechanics within 2 years. When I see the development of the Asian schools, it is clear that they have found what movements are most effective and they teach those movements. Asians are known to be very diligent, so when the movement is right and there are no mistakes in the learning process, the results come very quickly. In the West, technique (or should I say the mechanics) as such is mostly not even discussed ("Wash your dirty linen at home" (c)) and you are left on your own to reinvent the wheel. If we keep wasting our time like this, we will be forced into teaching only, the more so because the Asian schools are now also producing exponents who are capable of displaying more than mere mechanics.
P.S.: I sincerely apologize for my fatalistic views.

Paul

[thalbergmad]

What if we include all the miserable failures?

You could do, but I wonder how many would have failed because they neglected to read up on a million pages of theory or failed to adopt a certain fixed training regime.

All of these "rules" and methods of playing the piano still and probably will always bother me. Perhaps because I am firmly in the failed department.

Thal

[p2u_]

All of these "rules" and methods of playing the piano still and probably will always bother me. Perhaps because I am firmly in the failed department.

What a pity, Thal, you feel that way. What if you try not to see them as mere rules and methods? What if you see what is discussed here as stuff for people who are supposed to help others to cope? Most elements are indeed of no value for anybody who has not gone through the process.

As you've probably noticed from my posts on this board, I'm not the kind of person to give redundant info on "science", "learned mechanics" and so on. What is important to know for the average layman is the following:
1) fingers and fingertips are the soldiers
2) The natural ability of the hands, arms, etc. is the logistic support

And then there is the long-forgotten art of classical improvisation (why aren't there any good books with "licks" by the different composers, and why is theory taught as a separate subject that has nothing to do with practical implementation at the instrument?)

One makes a mistake if one thinks that the ability of the fingers is not natural, that it takes diligent training to make them fast (this idea came up in the time of the Industrial Revolution, which is no coincidence). But the truth is that speed is already there; it's inborn. Mastering a couple of movements makes you master it all and you can pay attention to music. If you skip this stage, you keep struggling, you may end up with RSI and other professional diseases, or you may have to rebuild your technique when you are 40-45 in order to be able to cope with the requirements.

Here is one of the most moving pictures of Rachmaninov I know: he's doing an exercise in the garden of his dacha (summerhouse) that says it all. It's only 12 seconds, so it's all over before you realize.
Rachmaninov exercise

Second, if you don't believe what I'm saying, just watch Wibi Soerjadi at the Liszt competition. He had a very competent teacher, Bob Brouwer, a Matthay specialist, who "made" him within just 2 years. At the age of 18, within 8 years (from scratch!), Wibi was able to participate successfully under the stress such an international competition puts on any pianist (he took 3d prize). You may argue that he is a prodigy, but my argument is that we are basically all born prodigies. Traditional teaching, unfortunately, has the tendency to kill that, which is the real point to be addressed. In the sense of "mechanics only", there are no "difficult" pieces. They are either easy or impossible.
Wibi Soerjadi: Réminiscences de Don Giovanni - 1
Wibi Soerjadi: Réminiscences de Don Giovanni - 2
 
Paul

[ahinton]

Having nothing better to do (too hot to play tonight), I have read through this knowledgable thread. I cannot help but think that there is no right way and no wrong way, only the individual way. Surely the individual must figure out what works best for them, even if it does go against a scientific approach.

I was watching a video of the greatest javelin throwers in history last night. It was astounding the huge differences in technique that were used, but the end result was that they were all capable of hurling the old spear a bloody long way. Does not the same apply to octaves??

Well, it was once said of Liszt that he hurled his lance into the future and it was also reputedly said that Liszt himself in later life once reprimanded a pupil with the presumably rhetorical question (that might have been a tacit reflection of his own past life as a touring virtuoso) "do you think that I care how fast you play octaves?".

But yes, each invididual pianist has to find the approach that best suits him/her, although excessive and unnecessary physical movements will still risk adversely affecting the performances of most if not all of them.

Best,

Alistair

[pts1]

Well, it was once said of Liszt that he hurled his lance into the future and it was also reputedly said that Liszt himself in later life once reprimanded a pupil with the presumably rhetorical question (that might have been a tacit reflection of his own past life as a touring virtuoso) "do you think that I care how fast you play octaves?".

Yes, indeed!

Why else would he have written such "octave madness" as the Erlkonig, or the Hungarian Rhapsodies and so forth.

Competitiveness is hard wired into humans, IMO, especially males.

Before there were pianos, and maybe only rocks and sticks, testosterone, speed, muscle, endurance, etc., were likely the only thing deciding whether one was the diner or the meal.

So too, the ability to best one's opponents and end up with the best cave woman for propogating the species. Old age was probably 30 years in what must have been a short, brutish life. ("Brutish" is awfully close to "British", is it not?)

Unfortunately, this take-no-prisoners competitive spirit found its way into Pianodom, and as I see it has made a good deal of teaching and performace something of a "blood sport".

By and large, this is why I prefer listening to the women pianists these days... again, who cares if they can't beat the bloody hell out of the piano like the males?

They are prettier, more pleasant to watch, and more musically pleasant to listen to.

[ahinton]

Yes, indeed!

Why else would he have written such "octave madness" as the Erlkonig, or the Hungarian Rhapsodies and so forth.

Competitiveness is hard wired into humans, IMO, especially males.

Before there were pianos, and maybe only rocks and sticks, testosterone, speed, muscle, endurance, etc., were likely the only thing deciding whether one was the diner or the meal.

So too, the ability to best one's opponents and end up with the best cave woman for propogating the species. Old age was probably 30 years in what must have been a short, brutish life. ("Brutish" is awfully close to "British", is it not?)

Unfortunately, this take-no-prisoners competitive spirit found its way into Pianodom, and as I see it has made a good deal of teaching and performace something of a "blood sport".

By and large, this is why I prefer listening to the women pianists these days... again, who cares if they can't beat the bloody hell out of the piano like the males?

They are prettier, more pleasant to watch, and more musically pleasant to listen to.

Well, good for you, but personally I don't give a monkey's what sex the pianists are; I care only about how they play.

Best,

Alistair

[lostinidlewonder]

LOL only on pianostreet can a topics go into split personality mode and tangent all over the place with randomness. Does anyone even read the pages of rambling and talking past one another? If you try you will become more stupid me thinks but it is a laugh I guess

[link0126]

I like the Roy Holmes finger motion method, but will it give you carpel tunnel? It seems like it is putting more force on my tendons, all this grasping motion...

[nyiregyhazi]

I like the Roy Holmes finger motion method, but will it give you carpel tunnel? It seems like it is putting more force on my tendons, all this grasping motion...

I'd certainly be careful. I like his idea as an exercise, but it's like going back to the dark ages if taken literally. In particular, if you're using arm pressure with that finger action without realising, it could be ruinous. I'd personally ignore the whole lot about curling the fingertip.

[link0126]

I'd certainly be careful. I like his idea as an exercise, but it's like going back to the dark ages if taken literally. In particular, if you're using arm pressure with that finger action without realising, it could be ruinous. I'd personally ignore the whole lot about curling the fingertip.

hmmm... well it's supposed to be the way Bach played. I was excited for a few days b/c I thought I was finally on to the proper technique. It felt right as soon as I tried it. But now, I'm not playing tonight b/c I'm resting my right hand. I suppose it helped me realize some benefitical movements but yeah, the curling I think is the real problem after a while. And to think I JUST ordered the book the other day...