keeping a relaxed wrist in chords and octaves

[p2u_]

'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

As I understand it, in nyiregyhazi's case it's not any kind of forceful contraction. Merely an "allowing to unbend". Correct me if I'm wrong, N.?
There are many advantages with this coordination:
* The intrinsic muscles (interosseous and lumbricals in the hand itself) allow the fingers to work independently,
* the movement adapts directly to the movement of the key, thus avoiding friction,
* the muscles are fast and close to the fingers,
* they are extremely sensitive [through proprioceptive feedback] to the weight and movement of the key.

Paul

[keyboardclass]

As I understand it, in nyiregyhazi's case it's not any kind of forceful contraction. Merely an "allowing to unbend". Correct me if I'm wrong, N.?

In which case we're talking eccentric action from the flexors.

[nyiregyhazi]

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

So, perhaps you'd have no problem with me attaching a 10kg weight to your fingertip, via a piece of string? The tendons may be among the strongest in the body (wary as I am about taking your word for anything, given your track record), but that does not mean they are not prone to injury, when needlessly used to perform a task that stronger knuckle actions excel at. Besides, you're the one who is always harping on about having to relax your poor fingers soon as sound has been produced, lest they become overworked. Does consistency matter one jot to you?

[nyiregyhazi]

'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

A classic example of why appeal to authority is such a poor argument. Watch this video:

How do you explain the fingertip moving the key to the keybed- when neither the knuckle nor the arm is descending by equal distance? An arc would see the fingertip slipping backwards. It does not slip whatsoever. So what creates the added length between knuckle and fingertip (that is directly responsible for the key going down)- in this most basic of pianistic actions?

Sadly, Schultz evidently had not stopped to consider issues of foundation level geometry, before making such a staggeringly ignorant assertion.

EDIT- are you doing your old trick of misquoting the poor guy out of context (and hence making him to appear to be a fool)? I'm starting to guess that he was referring purely to extensors around the knuckle. It would be no surprise whatsoever if you took that quote from a completely different context without stopping to consider what he is referring to.

[nyiregyhazi]

As I understand it, in nyiregyhazi's case it's not any kind of forceful contraction. Merely an "allowing to unbend". Correct me if I'm wrong, N.?
There are many advantages with this coordination:
* The intrinsic muscles (interosseous and lumbricals in the hand itself) allow the fingers to work independently,
* the movement adapts directly to the movement of the key, thus avoiding friction,
* the muscles are fast and close to the fingers,
* they are extremely sensitive [through proprioceptive feedback] to the weight and movement of the key.

Paul

I'm not sure. You summarise the benefits very well. However, I wouldn't say extension is necessarily passive (if ever at all), except perhaps in terms of how an individual might perceive the experience (which is why I believe so few actually outline this element in their explanations). In many cases, it's definitely active- when playing from an extremely high knuckle. It's certainly slow and comfortable rather than violent, but it's very much an active movement.

[keyboardclass]

Sadly, Schultz evidently had not stopped to consider issues of foundation level geometry, before making such a staggeringly ignorant assertion.

That's an appalling thing to say about a writer and pedagogue of world renown.  Your usual totally deluded self - what a waste of space!

[nyiregyhazi]

That's an appalling thing to say about a writer and pedagogue of world renown.  Your usual totally deluded self - what a waste of space!

Sorry, I don't do hero worship. IF someone thinks that there is no value in the lone action that makes it physically possible for fingers to move keys without considerable slippage or arm descent (which ALL competent pianists do routinely), he is a complete ignoramus. Only creation of length by extension can account for key depression without a massive fingertip slide/knuckle drop. To rule out an element that the most basic geometry requires to be in place is just foolhardy.

However, I stress "IF".

You should post the full quote. I feel 90% sure that Schultz must have been speaking ONLY about the flexors/extensors of the knuckle- and that you put it into an erroneous context, falsely portraying a broader reference to extensors of two entirely different joints. Assuming the blunder is indeed yours rather than his, please have the decency to post the full quote and take responsibility for the gross error in judgement that you have successfully implied to be his.

When quoting people, you have a responsibility to the author not to portray a meaning other than that which the full context would have made clear. Time after time you selectively omit context from your quotations and give the impression of a totally different meaning to what the author was saying. Whether out of malice or naivety, you do the authors no favours by making them appear to have been guilty of short-sighted errors.

[keyboardclass]

Sorry, I don't do hero worship.

No.  We're talking peer review here - something you'd know nothing about.

[pts1]

Nyiregyhazi

You have at least three other people, all with advanced knowledge (I think) of the piano.
I have posted videos demonstrating basic finger technique (not all technique that covers everything in the piano playing universe!), with a lecture. Then there is the video of Seybok from p2u, demonstrating the student doing basically Bach-like finger pulls, then Seybok urging and demonstrating how to add hand, wrist, forearm, and upper arm movements to assist in phrasing and execution, which renders a kind of "finger pedaling" and much easier execution.

Then you go on to accuse Schultz of making "staggeringly ignorant assertions".

I would assume you'd also consider Otto Ortmann to be especially delirious, as well as Reginald Gerig. And I imagine you could take any book written by any teacher/pianist and disect it rendering it nothing more than paper and ink, as well.

I feel sorry for you in a way. Are you actually playing the piano? And if so, do you over think every
tiny detail like you do in your posts?

If you do, you'll never get any where. You think WAY too much. Its bad. You don't do it well enough to play the piano "on the fly". Nobody can.

I have no earthly idea why you'd want to "extend" your finger, instead of pull it down (NOT CURL IT!). As I explained to you earlier, there are two basic hand positions with regard to the fingers.

There's the open curved position, and closed curved position.

To get the open position, hang your arms by your side and stretch open your hand then relax.
To get the closed position, make a fist and then relax.

You end up with two different curved positions, both naturally formed in a curve since the flexors are shorter than the extensors, but both indicating the normal range of motion of the fingers.

I haven't got a clue why you'd want to attempt to play the piano with some kind of "extension" movement -- a very weak movement, BTW.

But, the bottom line looks like you're struggling with your own technique, but you're not going to "fix" it by arguing stubbornly with people who've already achieved some level of technical success by defending something you're doing that apparently does not work.

[nyiregyhazi]

No.  We're talking peer review here - something you'd know nothing about.

Line up the mathematicians who feel a stationary knuckle can create key movement without either slipping across a key in an arc, or extending the finger into a greater length. If you can find even one peer, I'll be the first to take interest.

Deep down I think you know that he was referring to the knuckle. After all, he said "extensor" not "extensors". The error is all yours, but I don't suspect for a moment that you'll have the humility or sense of responsibility to hold your hand up to an error, rather than simply pass the buck to Schultz. Words about the extensor of the knuckle do not have a bearing on the actions of the finger's other two joints- and you should take care to check what quotations are actually in reference to, before trying to foist them into a context they were never intended to be applied to.

[nyiregyhazi]

Then you go on to accuse Schultz of making "staggeringly ignorant assertions".

I retract that. I now have little doubt that his words were exclusively made in reference to the knuckle alone. He was quoted totally out of context and the ignorance was on the part of the poster who decided it would be okay to attribute them to issues regarding different joints- that the quote was never intended to refer to.

I feel sorry for you in a way. Are you actually playing the piano? And if so, do you over think every
tiny detail like you do in your posts?

If you do, you'll never get any where. You think WAY too much. Its bad. You don't do it well enough to play the piano "on the fly". Nobody can.

Cheap insults are of no interest to me. I'm no master pianist but I'm currently playing op. 110 to a far higher standard than I might had dreamed of, before my explorations of technique. Believe what you like. It does not trouble me in the least what you suspect. If you are uncomfortable with my explorations, you are welcome to ignore them- or to debunk them. But stick to the issues please. I will not respond to any further personal insinuations. Evidently you took my disagreeing with you (on objective, not personal, grounds) personally. However, I will not reciprocate anything on a personal level. It's either about the issues, or I'm not interested.

I have no earthly idea why you'd want to "extend" your finger, instead of pull it down (NOT CURL IT!). As I explained to you earlier, there are two basic hand positions with regard to the fingers.

There's the open curved position, and closed curved position.

Yes. And there are also two ways of moving./ Closing and opening. I personally use both. If you think one is enough to get by on, that's up to you. However, I am baffled by such a closed-mind to so much as the possibility of exploring both avenues.

If you think extension movements are weak, I'll upload a video to illustrate otherwise (perhaps a passage from the Liszt sonata). I cannot think of anything weaker than slipping across the surface of keys while attempting to play FFFF. Extension is both powerful and direct- IF you stop to develop it. Without it (and considering how useless slipping is for extreme power), the hand has little chance to contribute to powerful playing other than by fixating. After years of only using contraction actions (like Roy Holmes advises), I came to realise that I had been greatly missing out.

[nyiregyhazi]

Here's a clip from the Liszt sonata. Haven't practised it in months, but I can't think of a better passage to illustrate the power of extension movements (both from contact and when dropping from a height), as opposed to those that close up the finger across the surface of the key.

Although the sound completely overloads my phone's microphone, you can clearly see how the knuckle's power is being more directly channelled into the path of the key, thanks to the act of extending out. I cannot imagine how a pianist could possibly achieve serious power without such an action- whether they realise that they use it or not. The better the extension action serves to straighten the path of the fingertip, the more the pull from the knuckle goes into producing volume.

[p2u_]

Here's a clip from the Liszt sonata.
youtube.com/watch?v=VJLjKb5IZcI

Any way of watching that without having to register on Youtube?

Paul

[pts1]

,

[p2u_]

This is why, IMO, the pianist NEEDS to understand at least basic body mechanics with regard to piano playing and how the piano actually makes its sounds.

Getting past this one can then focus on the musical aspects with out taking on harmful physical habits.

I completely agree with your explanation and thank you for your views. I'd just like to add that it is close to impossible to even begin to describe all this stuff. That's probably why the really great teachers speak/spoke in metaphors. A movement may look a certain way, but we can never truly guess even the internal organization/coordination of another person. I have a feeling, for example, that Horowitz and Rubinstein also used the "extension" movement N. is talking about - as I perceive it: flexing at the MCP joint (the hand knuckle), extending at the PIP ("knee" of the finger) joint (Rubinstein more than Horowitz). But you can never know for sure, because they always pretended not to know how they did it.
P.S.: There is also a tendency among methodologists to "prove" certain points with slow-motion videos by big artists, which is also futile IMHO; the movements don't become any bigger or clearer by slowing down the tape; the end result is almost always not the movement the pianist trained while practising slowly.

Paul

[keyboardclass]

I retract that. I now have little doubt that his words were exclusively made in reference to the knuckle alone. He was quoted totally out of context and the ignorance was on the part of the poster who decided it would be okay to attribute them to issues regarding different joints- that the quote was never intended to refer to.
 

Now you've gone totally delirious!  'I now have little doubt...' - what the f... does that mean? (apart from the obvious fact you've not actually read any Schultz)

[keyboardclass]

(wary as I am about taking your word for anything, given your track record),

...and what's this load of bullshit?

[p2u_]

@ keyboardclass

Your word usage does not exactly express higher spheres of thought; could you, please, watch your language? Thank you.

Paul

[keyboardclass]

@ keyboardclass

Your word usage does not exactly express higher spheres of thought; could you, please, watch your language? Thank you.

Paul

I don't take kindly to being called a liar.

[p2u_]

I don't take kindly to being called a liar.

I understand, but couldn't you take that either to PM or to the moderators? We are trying to have a discussion here. The topic as such is already complicated, especially for someone whose native language is not English (that's me all right).

Paul

[keyboardclass]

Surely public accusations call for public admonition?

[p2u_]

Surely public accusations call for public admonition?

OK. Have it your way. I'm out of here. Never expected I'd end up in nursery school.

Paul

[marik1]

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.

Well, my guess, that one started after reading Neuhaus book, where at some point Henrich Gustavovitsh mentioned it, so some folks liked the way how those words sound (of course, taken completely out of context and without actual understanding of what it means). After that some other folks picked that up and entire thing started rolling...

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.

Ah, who cares about speed of hammer. Also, pulling, hitting, rubbing, caressing, embrasing--it's all matter of semantics depending on what is your final goal in creating of certain music image or sound in every particular situation.

After all, I completely agree, the finger work is the foundation. It is the same as in singing--my most favorite music making--everything starts from diction (analog of articulation (or finger work) in piano, or the same as in theater--if there is no diction, then there is no music, no singing, no theater), then goes the throat (equivalent of wrist) which is supported by diaphragm (i.e. arm) and then supported by entire body (i.e. spine, torso, legs).

To me the most perfect illustration of this concept is a pianism of E. Gilels--just watch his the most impeccable relaxed finger work, with his wrist "drawing" and shaping the melody and music texture, creating all those golden sonorities, which feel like an extension of monumental solidity of his body supporting entire apparatus.  

Ultimately, it is does not matter what you play--octaves, chords, single melody, staccato, legato, portamento, Bach, Chopin, Prokofiev, Ligetti, still the diction (or again, finger work) is the foundation of the piano technique. All the rest is a matter of your musical experiences, education, and ultimately, what would you like to say with your music and what is your message.

Best, M

[keyboardclass]

Well, my guess, that one started after reading Neuhaus book,

It started with Breithaupt, Deppe, Matthay and Townsend and was a reaction to the Stuttgart-type schools where injury was so common.

Ah, who cares about speed of hammer. Also, pulling, hitting, rubbing, caressing, embrasing--it's all matter of semantics depending on what is your final goal in creating of certain music image or sound in every particular situation.

There's a big difference innervating from the nail joint as opposed to the knuckle - the finger pads are rich with nerve endings.
 

Ultimately, it is does not matter what you play--... Bach, Chopin, Prokofiev, Ligetti, still the diction (or again, finger work) is the foundation of the piano technique.

Each used quite different techniques.  In my book to realize their music you need a working understanding of this.

[marik1]

It started with Breithaupt, Deppe, Matthay and Townsend and was a reaction to the Stuttgart-type schools where injury was so common.

Not sure who are those. Any famous students, who confirmed the efficiency of that technique, or at least synopsis of their approach? (not that it matters)

There's a big difference innervating from the nail joint as opposed to the knuckle - the finger pads are rich with nerve endings.

Perhaps, but still the finger movement starts from the 3rd joint, with arm and ultimately entire body working as a support, so what is your point in regards to the original message?

Each used quite different techniques.  In my book to realize their music you need a working understanding of this.

Indeed, each used different techniques, but the foundation is still the same--exactly like the foundations of the church, cathedral, regular apartment building, or condominium would be similar (and regulated rather by the city code). Indeed, one should work hard to understand that part.

Best, M

[keyboardclass]

Not sure who are those. Any famous students, who confirmed the efficiency of that technique, or at least synopsis of their approach? (not that it matters)

Matthay's most famous student was Myra Hess but he had plenty of others.

Perhaps, but still the finger movement starts from the 3rd joint,

3rd joint doesn't mean anything.  Do you mean distal (nail) or proximal (knuckle) - you can start with either.

Indeed, each used different techniques, but the foundation is still the same--exactly like the foundations of the church, cathedral, regular apartment building, or condominium would be somehow similar (and regulated rather by the city code). Indeed, one should work hard to understand that part.

Don't understand that part at all.

[marik1]

Matthay's most famous student was Myra Hess but he had plenty of others.

I am aware of that. However, the question was what is synopsis of his "weight school approach"?

3rd joint doesn't mean anything. Do you mean distal (nail) or proximal (knuckle) - you can start with either.

Start from the nail and count till 3.

Don't understand that part at all.

Sorry, can't help with that one.

Best, M

[keyboardclass]

I am aware of that. However, the question was what is synopsis of his "weight school approach"?

You'll need to do a bit of reading

Start from the nail and count till 3.

When numbers are used in anatomical circles (rare) it's the other way round https://www.fingerreplacement.com/DePuy/docs/Finger/Arthritis/Osteoarthritis/anatomy.html - best stick to nail, middle, knuckle to save confusion.The point being - I start with the distal you, like the vast majority, start with the proximal.   You have little hammers, I have caresses!

Sorry, can't help with that one.

We'll just have to let that one get away then.

[p2u_]

You have little hammers, I have caresses!

I found the courage to come back anyway. I'd like to ask kbk and N. explicitly to either burry the hatchet or lose the mutual provocations before an audience that is not interested. Thank you.

@ keyboardclass

[This is not an attempt to attack you personally! More an attempt to try and understand what your function is on this forum.]

One may read and even talk about the deeper sense of tantra sex from one's armchair and still have trouble reaching orgasm. You give the impression that you have read a lot about the subject, but when you argue with people who have been there, you talk as if you do not really know from your own experience what you are talking about; mostly misplaced quotes [or so it seems]. I'm not asking for video's, proof of anything. That would be a silly thing to do. But how can you say to your opponent (who has already proven who he is and what he can do at the instrument) "you have little hammers, I have caresses"? I just don't understand that. Actually, this implies that anybody who does not have "your caresses" is incapable of "caressing". Now, what kind of a statement is that?

Paul

[keyboardclass]

"you have little hammers, I have caresses"? I just don't understand that. Actually, this implies that anybody who does not have "your caresses" is uncapable of "caressing". Now, what kind of a statement is that?

Simply that moving from the knuckle is a 'hammer' action whilst sliding the fingertip inwards is a 'caressing' action.

Here's an interesting video.

Pure scratching/caressing - flexion against no resistance (no intrinsics):


Notice the proximal interphalangeal joint goes up (joint nearest the knuckle). This is because the extensors (finger straighteners) are contracting with the flexors (finger benders) to smooth the movement with the result that the first phalange gets straightened. It takes the intrinsic muscles (muscles in the hand) to pull the phalange down just enough so the flexors can act on it too. ( and yes, that is my armchair)

[p2u_]

Simply that moving from the knuckle is a 'hammer' action whilst sliding the fingertip inwards is a 'caressing' action.

So, you would call the following display of "intrinsic touch" (one of the many instruments available to a pianist) a hammer?
https://www.musicandhealth.co.uk/movies/IO.swf
I can explain you technically and very detailed what is happening, but the rest of the forum members may fall asleep I'm afraid. Just look at the hand knuckle and at the "knee" of the finger. Actually, N. is talking about something similar, although he starts from a more "stretched out" position.
P.S.: This is not my hand; The pianist showing this movement is Richard Beauchamp from "Music and Health".

Here's an interesting video.
[...]

Pure scratching/caressing - flexion against no resistance (no intrinsics):

No doubt this may be interesting to some individuals in the medical field, but how is that related to moving a key in a musical context?

Paul

[keyboardclass]

So, you would call the following display of "intrinsic touch" (one of the many instruments available to a pianist) a hammer?
https://www.musicandhealth.co.uk/movies/IO.swf

No, I'd call it pretty useless.  You notice how the knuckle is forced up?

[p2u_]

No, I'd call it pretty useless.  You notice how the knuckle is forced up?

That's because it's EXAGGERATED; otherwise nodoby would even see it, and how can one show the invisible? It's an attempt of a very wise guy, by the way, who knows a lot about the subject. Believe it or not, but it works for finger passages at maximum speed without loss of control...

Paul

[keyboardclass]

No.  At any speed/dynamic the knuckle will go up because there are no flexors to keep it stable.  There's no way it's useful as a piano movement - maybe for poking people?

[p2u_]

No.  At any speed/dynamic the knuckle will go up because there are no flexors to keep it stable.  There's no way it's useful as a piano movement - maybe for poking people?

There are small adjusting movements of the whole arm and hand accompanying each finger movement that cancel out the negative effects you are talking about. These are not planned, but are the result of the whole arm and hand working together as one mechanism. Some would call that "weight school" maybe? Or just "support"?

Paul

[keyboardclass]

As far as I can see it's an unnatural, awkward movement whereas grasping/caressing/scratching are natural.

[p2u_]

As far as I can see it's an unnatural, awkward movement whereas grasping/caressing/scratching are natural.

Here he does the same, but a little faster in a 5 finger exercise:
https://www.musicandhealth.co.uk/movies/finger_touch.swf
Still unnatural? Mind you, this is a concert pianist who studied with Ernest Empson, who in turn was a pupil of Godowsky. Although this particular exercise is displayed without any musical expression for practical purposes, one cannot accuse the guy of not knowing how to make music, because his concerts were always well received by both critics and the public.

Paul

[keyboardclass]

I can feel (when I try this coordination) exactly what's going on.  It's like you say - requiring arm weight (actually it's more of a pushing from the shoulder (poke) into the keys).  It works, but certainly isn't for me (and not for Chopin, Bach or Mozart either).  I only use it for chords ('up' ones).  Funny, that touch was the cardinal sin for Matthay!

[p2u_]

It works, but certainly isn't for me (and not for Chopin, Bach or Mozart either).  I only use it for chords ('up' ones).

"Play it with your nose". That's what Anton Rubinstein used to say. I guess he was right.
P.S.: I can do that, by the way; play wild accompaniment in the left and in the right hand and bring out a beautiful, expressive melody in the middle of the keyboard with my nose. I did that once for fun just to show off. I think I may just as well write a method about how to do that as soon as I run out of any other options to get attention...

Paul

[keyboardclass]

"Play it with your nose".

I do believe that was a Mozart party trick.  

[tril]

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

my teacher is always telling me that, but i don't get what she means. I just use whatever muscles nature wants me to use, as I believe that's whats more efficient (I listen to my body basically).

[pts1]

This topic, as P2u said, is almost impossible to talk about, and Marik, tired of the hammer speed thing, is not without consideration also.

The entire point of hammer speed is to note that this is all that counts from the "piano's point of view", and for the pianist, the most anatomically efficient way to do this is the best.

This knowledge as a basic "gold standard of understanding" allows the pianist or would be pianist to eliminate all the inefficient and physically harmful methods and focus on basically playing from the key, pulling the key down, and using small and helpful movements of the hand, wrist, and arm to assist in sound production.

Also, there is a tendency to talk in a rather "either/or" way about this business... either we're using the intrinsic muscles or the extrinsic.

I don't think it works this way. I think we use all of the physical mechanism, some more than others. And a good deal of it is reactive to the intentioned playing.

As a "for instance" there's this discussion about intrinsic vs extrinsic, and I always have wondered about this. Since we know -- as I recall having actually watched dissection videos and read about this -- that the lumbricals teminate at the medial phalanges, pulling the finger down at that point, this leaves the finger tip (distal phanlanges) "unpulled". However, since the lumbricals are the only muscles in the human body that originate not from bone, but from another muscle, namely the flexor digitorum profundis FDP  which ends and controls the finger tip, i.e. the distal phalanges, it would seem that using the lubricals would have a contracting effect on the FDP, thus giving some firmness to the finger tip joint, without primarily using the FDP for playing.

I don't know... just a guess on my part, and I've never read anyone discussing this.(doesn't mean someone hasn't)

And even if it doesn't, I believe we use a combination of musculature during piano playing which
cannot be accurately discerned during play.

Unless it is instructive for the pianist to know this information, again rather unknowable IMO, why do we care other than for discussion/curiosity purposes?

As I said, I think we use a very complex combination of the piano playing muscles, and electrical/contractile activity is present in varying degrees, changing from individual muscle to individual muscle, or groups, or pairs, something like a "1000 voice 3 dimensional piano playing bone/muscle/tendon/nerve fugue that Bach and Beethoven together could not have begun to understand, much less 'compose'."

Even to understand how just one cell of muscle tissue works takes pages of detailed bio chemical, electrical, nerve, mechanical, etc., etc.,  explanation. (which you can all look up if interested).

Perhaps today, a hand surgeon/pianist/scientist could "wire up" a willing competent pianist, and measure the contraction of all the different muscles involved in piano playing, and tell us how much of this or that is used when playing x, y or z.

It is no wonder that people talk about the physical aspects of playing metaphorically or by example, since other than the most basic things, it is impossible to comphrehend and explain in an understandable manner with any degree of accuracy whatsoever, IMO.

[nyiregyhazi]

Any way of watching that without having to register on Youtube?

Paul

Sorry, I made those "private" rather than "unlisted", by mistake. They should both play now, so to reiterate:

This one shows the finger acting in a direct line (with generally zero slippage and nowhere near enough for a pure arc to account for key depression, when there are traces of it).

This one shows extension actions within the hand (to generate more power than a braced and unmoving hand can transmit)

(I know the sound is awful from my phone, so please take these as being primarily for visual illustration)

[p2u_]

Unless it is instructive for the pianist to know this information, again rather unknowable IMO, why do we care other than for discussion/curiosity purposes?

Good post, pts1!

Well, I think that's what N. is basically trying to do; trying to get sensible feedback on what he discovers on his path to perfection. Unfortunately, he is meeting with a lot of misunderstanding and unbelief. I believe he is a very talented person with brilliant ideas, who will get far if he can finally let it all go and become far less movement-conscious. I don't know about you, but I can't wait to see the following two posts in this set on his blog. After all, we've just seen the "introduction"...

Paul

[nyiregyhazi]

I don't take kindly to being called a liar.

Nobody called you a liar. Now it's myself you are falsely attributing opinions to. When you quote from someone, you have a moral/intellectual duty to ensure that you do not give a false representation of them. You placed a quote from him about extensors of the KNUCKLE- and gave a false impression that it was made in reference to extension of the two completely different joints I was referring to (making him look like a short-sighted ignoramus). Whether the false impression that you gave (by omitting the context that would have clarified what his comment was specific to) was a matter of dishonesty or error, it is totally out of order to try to score argumentative points by using selective quotation that falsely attributes Schultz's opinion on one issue to being an opinion on another.

[pts1]

Thanks, Paul!

After all, we've just seen the "introduction"...

Yes, and if the size of the introduction is any indication, the exposition should be a monster!<g>

[nyiregyhazi]

Simply that moving from the knuckle is a 'hammer' action whilst sliding the fingertip inwards is a 'caressing' action.

We are dealing in nothing more than a labelling that was once applied. When you caress a woman, do you isolate your fingertips and do so by curling them up? There is nothing specific about this movement that gives it any more or less inherent sense of relating to the term "caress". Someone simply happened to apply the label once- and apparently you've lost all sight of the fact that caressing is a general quality, not a specific movement.

Seeing as Volodos does not retract his fingertips, would it make the slightest sense to say this performance is not executed with a caressing quality?

Or that Goulds most violent staccato finger flicks are "caresses"? Instead of getting caught up in the irrelevance of the fact that someone once applied a mere semantic label, why not stop to think what is implied by the concept of caressing itself? It's bad enough to think that all curling actions have the quality of a caress, but it's plain ridiculous to think that anything that involve a straighter path must be viewed as hammering and cannot have a caressing quality.

[nyiregyhazi]

No.  At any speed/dynamic the knuckle will go up because there are no flexors to keep it stable.  There's no way it's useful as a piano movement - maybe for poking people?

Not if the knuckle is already high and you play with proper legato. All that happens is the length extends between knuckle and fingertip- creating enough length to move the key. If you don't let your knuckles droop between keys, they don't get pushed up any higher. They stay up. See my short Bach extract. I think that Beauchamp film is rather exaggerated in terms of extension. I wouldn't personally want to go so far as to be sliding forwards along the key, except in rare instances. I just use it to make a direct line of movement through the key.

[nyiregyhazi]

I can feel (when I try this coordination) exactly what's going on.  It's like you say - requiring arm weight (actually it's more of a pushing from the shoulder (poke) into the keys).  It works, but certainly isn't for me (and not for Chopin, Bach or Mozart either).  I only use it for chords ('up' ones).  Funny, that touch was the cardinal sin for Matthay!

On the contrary, this is exactly where arm-weight is most counterproductive. Look at his wrist. Is it locked? Is it getting pushed forward? The movement is generated in the hand. There's not a trace of his shoulder pushing through the keys. If that is your impression of what he is doing, you simply do not understand what he is actually doing and have practised something altogether different. That's probably why we never see films of you playing anything fast. When prodding from the shoulder, it's a totally different technique to that displayed, that hits a speed wall very early on. Conversely, if you balance the arm well and generate movement from the fingers (without destabilising the arm by slipping the fingers across the surface of the keys) you can reach phenomenal speeds with little physical effort. Instead of telling us what you think he's really doing, you ought to take the time to learn what it is that enables accomplished pianists to excel- which could not be further than what you have misread as shoulder prods.

[nyiregyhazi]

my teacher is always telling me that, but i don't get what she means. I just use whatever muscles nature wants me to use, as I believe that's whats more efficient (I listen to my body basically).

Either you're very lucky, or you're potentially closing off room for further improvement. If I relied on what nature wanted me to use, I'd have never got through a Chopin Etude in my life, without my forearms locking up to the point of seizure. I think it's worth differentiating between natural tendencies for moving and the concept of what looks and functions with enough efficiency to look natural. The two are not necessarily linked in the slightest. When they are, the pianist is exceedingly lucky.