Fundamental piano technique - curved vs. flat fingers

[marik1]

What makes you so sure?

Besides a simple visual observation, the fact he was studying with Artobolevskaja--one of the greatest teachers, whose lessons I was watching for hours. I could only imagine her face if a student would come to her and start playing with that "extension" poking the keys.

Once again, please open Lhevinne book and look at the diagram I mentioned. Rudenko's movement starts from the knuckle and the finger lightly drops into the key. Yes, from geometry point there is some kind of minimal arc, but this is not of the concern. The main thing is his wrist is absolutely loose and entire finger works as integral structure. No "extensions" of any kind--take it or leave it.

Best, M

[jesc]

With regard to the whole thread honestly TL;DR

But a question did pop in my mind. Is this obsession with explaining everything somehow connected to the notion that there is a clear path to greatness? Does explaining everything give some pianists the comfort zone that there is a tangible, concrete path to a certain level of competence? If some things are left ambiguous, unexplained, will some people feel insecure that some paths to great playing might not be easily explained at all? Does that affect some people that since it is ambiguous, they might not be able to reach it?

[marik1]

But a question did pop in my mind. Is this obsession with explaining everything somehow connected to the notion that there is a clear path to greatness?

Ironically enough, that path to greatness has very little to do with how you play piano, but mostly with what do you want to say with your playing. And this is completely different can of warms...

Best, M

[marik1]

You mention working on the Mephisto Waltz... Ok, here's an excellent example... you're of course familiar with the famous "jumps" toward the end of the piece... you know... A up to A Octave, A# up to A# Octave... playing the theme.

Many pianists play the lower notes with the thumb, jumping up to play the octave believing that this is the shortest and most efficient path.

But this is not so. If you play the lower note, A, A#, D# etc with the INDEX FINGER, this make your hand and arm move in a slightly elliptical pattern to play the upper octave and then returning completing a somewhat circular movement to play the next single melody note again with the index finger.

This way, you are making slightly rounded movements, highly flexible movements, instead of the stiffer co-contraction encountered in the stopping and starting movements you encounter when using the thumb instead.

Again, not the most direct path in physics terms, but much easier to execute in human/piano terms.

That's the fingering (i.e. with index finger) I use for that spot. Speaking of which, I believe, in fact, this is if not the most direct, IS the most economical path. The way I do it is while the index finger on A, the thumb is stretch underneath the palm somewhere on D, so the jump is not an octave, but psychologically becomes only a fifth. On the way back the thumb returns only half way, once again, saving quite a bit of distance when the index is going to the A#. So in a sense, the thumb is  working like a pivot, saving about half of the distance (both ways!!!!).

With the rest you are saying I completely agree.

Best, M  

[p2u_]

But a question did pop in my mind. Is this obsession with explaining everything somehow connected to the notion that there is a clear path to greatness? Does explaining everything give some pianists the comfort zone that there is a tangible, concrete path to a certain level of competence? If some things are left ambiguous, unexplained, will some people feel insecure that some paths to great playing might not be easily explained at all? Does that affect some people that since it is ambiguous, they might not be able to reach it?

The only path to greatness is humbleness and a sincere wish to make music at all times with the means we have. We are exclusively talking about the means here. Nothing else should be inferred.

The thing is that I think that N. and his opponents are basically talking about the same (a movement from the knuckle of the hand), but it gets too "religious" (and thus confusing) when they start talking about their own perception and awareness of ADDITIONAL stuff, which may be different in different people, although they are basically doing the same. A discussion between an "arm weight" adept and a "finger school" adept would actually be much easier to follow because they describe completely different things.

Here's the movement Lhevinne gives as correct:



Although Lhevinne indicates "no movement here" (with arrows to two joints), this does not mean that such a movement never occurs; it's just not supposed to be the focus of our attention. N. obviously noticed one of those movements (there are more) in himself and in others and is describing his explanation of the mechanical benefits of the ADDITIONAL, CORRECTIONAL movement at the "knee" joint. Actually, it is better for the health of all board users to leave these things alone. Just my opinion.

Paul

[p2u_]

Another thing I'd like to point out is the following:

Some users have a very high IQ, but have either:
1) a poor command of the language they are communicating in;
2) a low EQ; they don't ask themselves the question:
a) what am I saying exactly and
b) how is this going to be perceived in the brain of others?
c) what will the consequences of what I say be for the communication we are trying to accomplish here?
d) is it a good thing to provoke others on a personal level?
e) is it a good thing to react to provocation on a personal level, or should I just report to the moderators and keep silent?

I never have problems understanding what marik1 is saying (probably because 1) he has a very high culture in communication and 2) I know Russian and correct everything in my mind to what he really means), but some of the native speakers leave me flabbergasted sometimes. This is supposed to be a board for high-quality info, coming from professionals, but some users who should not be giving advice here because they don't belong in the group of accomplished professionals leave the impression for the outside that we are just a club of retards. If this continues, I'll be forced to take what I have to say elsewhere, because, as I said before, I'm not interested in ego-boasting and/or off-topic rants.

P.S.: Personally, I'm expecting to be corrected at all times if something is unclear in what I'm trying to say, especially since I'm not a native speaker of English.

Paul

[ajspiano]

Thankyou for posting the diagram Paul - saved me making my own near identical one..

[p2u_]

Thankyou for posting the diagram Paul - saved me making my own near identical one..

You're welcome.
Part of Lhevinne's book "Basic Principles of Pianoforte Playing" is online because it appeared in several issues of magazine "The Etude" in 1923 (I got the picture from there; it's in part 2):

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

Paul

[p2u_]

There's yet another point I'd like to make, mainly for a better understanding on the part of board readers:

In 1932, Artur Rubinstein, a "natural" pianist who had neglected his technique in his early years, was forced to think about stuff N. is now thinking about and withdrew from concert life several months for intensive study and practice. People were paying for 100% of the notes and Rubinstein gave them only 75%, part of it due to mechanical problems. The "right" movements Rubinstein found for himself cannot automatically be applied to other players, that's probably why he always stated that he "didn't know how he did it".

What I want to say is this:  As long as
1) The pianist sits well in his body, and
2) Does not get complaints from the audience (or critics) about missing notes or lack of musical expression,

the pianist should not try to drastically change his/her movements. However, technique (the art of music making) is an ongoing process that will NEVER end, and that may require modifications in types of movement, dictated by the music itself.

At the same time, a "lucky" pianist who has never experienced problems with movement has NO RIGHT to call certain movements made by others in the process of piano playing "inferior" to his/her own, unless the tone quality as a result of such movements is bad.

P.S.: I also think that one should refrain from:
1) Criticizing public figures for so-called "inferior" technique
2) Showing public figures as proof of one's own principles of movement. What is visible may not be how the pianist actually does the coordination.

Paul

[nyiregyhazi]

Besides a simple visual observation, the fact he was studying with Artobolevskaja--one of the greatest teachers, whose lessons I was watching for hours. I could only imagine her face if a student would come to her and start playing with that "extension" poking the keys.

Once again, please open Lhevinne book and look at the diagram I mentioned. Rudenko's movement starts from the knuckle and the finger lightly drops into the key. Yes, from geometry point there is some kind of minimal arc, but this is not of the concern. The main thing is his wrist is absolutely loose and entire finger works as integral structure. No "extensions" of any kind--take it or leave it.

Best, M

If the arc is minimal, it's not an arc- unless the finger is seriously flat. For a finger that starts at 45 degrees the finger can be expected to slide a greater distance horizontally than that by which the key moves down. Is that minimal? Did the teacher berate students on any occasion that their fingertips failed to slide such notable distances?

Can you clarify what you meant when you spoke of the direct path? A pure arc has only one path- which is not a direct one. Is it really necessary to rule something of piano playing altogether-merely because you do not consciously perceive it? Why is it so hard to believe that a small correction factor transfers knuckle power in a straighter line, rather than into an indirect path?

The above doesn't even go into the fact that pure knuckle pulls automatically close space between adjacent knuckles-whereas mild extension opens that space. That is a key issue for small handed pianists. Yet you want to ban the action that opens smaller hands from piano technique altogether- merely because you do not personally perceive it?

[p2u_]

Is it really necessary to rule something of piano playing altogether-merely because you do not consciously perceive it? Why is it so hard to believe that a small correction factor transfers knuckle power in a straighter line, rather than into an indirect path?

[...] Yet you want to ban the action that opens smaller hands from piano technique altogether- merely because you do not personally perceive it?

Yes, N. This is called perception and awareness. As soon as marik1 experiences problems (God forbid!), he may allow himself to think about other posibilities than the ones that work for him now. For the time being, his playing system has already formed and it functions for what he wants to achieve artistically. Why would he allow for other concepts if everything is already in place? You cannot offer help to someone who doesn't need it. And even a person who NEEDS your help at this very moment may not be ready (yet) to accept or perceive what you are saying. That's how these things work.

Paul

[nyiregyhazi]

Yes, N. This is called perception and awareness. As soon as marik1 experiences problems (God forbid!), he may allow himself to think about other posibilities than the ones that work for him now. For the time being, his playing system has already formed and it functions for what he wants to achieve artistically. Why would he allow for other concepts if everything is already in place? You cannot offer help to someone who doesn't need it. And even a person who NEEDS your help at this very moment may not be ready (yet) to accept or perceive what you are saying. That's how these things work.

I'm not trying to help him. I just think that in a forum for discussion, we should explore things objectively. I'm more concerned with those who have not been lucky enough to learn the benefits of coupling knuckle pulls with slight acts of extension (which I have no doubt Marik has, whether he places conscious focus on it or not). What would happen if everyone in the forum were to insist that their subjective experience of playing is the only possibility- and that any activities outside of what they perceive must therefore be written off? It's fine for an individual to use their subjective perspective, but the only way for understanding of piano technique at large to keep progressing is for objectivity to be involved. Otherwise, we have nothing but people saying what they did and equally accomplished pianists saying that they did something else.


Aside from the fact that few pianists consisently slip across the keys to a great enough extent for extensions actions not to be involved, the big issue for me is that about the knuckles opening/closing. Such an important point is of inestimable objective importance, when weighing up different subjective approaches. I'd far sooner that all the pianists who struggle with smaller hands knew about this issues, than that all the pianists in the world thought extension is unnecessary. The latter belief can seriously harm some- whereas the former just reveals a wider possibility in a particular option, yet excludes no alternatives. Even knowing the objective issues behind extending actions does not stop anyone from choosing to view it in their own subjective way, if that works. Objectivity does not stop people from having different mindsets. It just gives them the option of knowing things. One person's subjectivity passed off as objectivity risks great confusion.

[p2u_]

I'm not trying to help him. I just think that in a forum for discussion, we should explore things objectively.

I know, I know. That was just words I used to get an other message across. The problem is that marik1 is not the right person to discuss this with because he is a completely formed and accomplished artist, and so is pts1. The teacher forum would be a better place, because there are probably people there who don't mind experimenting, and who don't run the risk of ruining their artistic personality (that's what may happen when you think about this kind of things and experiment with them!). On the other hand: how are you going to do that without one-to-one demonstrations? Wordy descriptions are not going to help much.

The problem with accomplished artists is that they have a certain established feedback system. It's all linked to their conditioned reflexes. So, the logical result will be that the  sound expectation doesn't fit. The body will reject the movement as "bad".

Second, even in the (un)lucky event that they accept your movement as "the best", what are they going to do with it? How long will it take to implement in their repertoire? You did not discover this today or yesterday. Although you realize that it is rationally a very effective movement, you admit yourself that you tend to fall back into old habits (the feedback loop again). Are you going to compensate for their missed concerts?

Besides, you may arrive at a point when neither this nor that works anymore. That's a very dangerous moment. You may indeed lose what you had as an artistic personality. That would be very, very cruel punishment. That's why I say: this is only for people who  have no other way out, or who have nothing to fear.

I'm more concerned with those who have not been lucky enough to learn the benefits of coupling knuckle pulls with slight acts of extension.

I know, I know. I am not attacking you. On the contrary I say: I believe in what you do. Prepare yourself because your help *is* needed and you'll have to be ready when such people come along. Be ready here means: have a bag of tricks at your disposal to teach them without using words too much.

Paul

[nyiregyhazi]

The teacher forum would be a better place, because there are probably people there who don't mind experimenting, and who don't run the risk of ruining their artistic personality (that's what may happen when you think about this kind of things and experiment with them!). On the other hand: how are you going to do that without one-to-one demonstrations? Wordy descriptions are not going to help much.

Are teachers really any more open-minded than performers? :-) I'm working at ways of developing these things via a combination of description and movement exercises. I've been greatly inspired by Alan's Feldenkrais approach. Although I have no formal training of any kind myself, I've done many Feldenkrais exercises via podcast. The great thing about it is that you basically just have to be sensitive and thoughtful about what you are doing- and almost any movement can be improved upon. It's quite hard to get things "wrong" other than by actively encouraging forceful or strenuous movement. I've actually found some very useful subjective tricks for ensuring that neither will be encouraged (plus a more objective one- based on practising finger actions on top of a weighing scales, in order to check that the pressure is kept low enough). If you've read my thumb post, that's very similar to how my following blog posts will run- with the vast majority being entirely practical.

Second, even in the (un)lucky event that they accept your movement as "the best", what are they going to do with it? How long will it take to implement in their repertoire? You did not discover this today or yesterday. Although you realize that it is rationally a very effective movement, you admit yourself that you tend to fall back into old habits (the feedback loop again). Are you going to compensate for their missed concerts?

I see your point- although my problem is that my old habits are crap. A pianist with reliable technique should at least fall back on something that was competent? Are you familiar with Gekic, by the way? Apparently he started out focussed on nothing but sound, but gradually grew interested in very physical experiments. Apparently he's actually quite obsessive now about experimenting with new means to produce sounds that will enable him to fully express himself. I can't help but feel that many concert performers don't push themselves far enough with the technique of sound production. Until you can voice like Horowitz (with his range- not in emulation) surely it's never time to decide that your technique "already works" and there's nothing left to try. Personally, I believe that some very good musicians are limited more by their physical means than by their ideas about music.

I know, I know. I am not attacking you. On the contrary I say: I believe in what you do. Prepare yourself because your help *is* needed and you'll have to be ready when such people come along. Be ready here means: have a bag of tricks at your disposal to teach them without using words too much.

That's okay, it wasn't perceived that way. Your point is taken very much on board. While there are some things that I'd sooner be sure to express than leave out for the sake of simplicity, desire to get straight to the important issues in future posts is extremely high on my agenda.

[p2u_]

Are teachers really any more open-minded than performers? :-)

An absurd and seemingly unrelated example of "open-mindedness". I knew a couple in Holland. Everything was ideal. Suddenly a friend persuaded them to go deeper into the secrets of Tantra-Sex. They lost "bliss" completely and split up.
"A quest for enlightenment that ended in the bleakest doom imaginable." Copyright yours.

Paul

[nyiregyhazi]

An absurd and seemingly unrelated example of "open-mindedness". I knew a couple in Holland. Everything was ideal. Suddenly a friend persuaded them to go deeper into the secrets of Tantra-Sex. They lost "bliss" completely and split up.
"A quest for enlightenment that ended in the bleakest doom imaginable." Copyright yours.

Paul

:-) Yeah, I suppose everyone has to draw a line somewhere. I know a hippy who's into all that Tantra business. Crazy girl- although I may agree to try it out someday. My friend Wayne once reviewed a book on the subject (although I'm pretty sure he's never read it).

https://www.amazon.co.uk/review/R1LR9JQFFBLN82/ref=cm_cr_pr_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0007166060&nodeID=&tag=&linkCode=

[pts1]

They lost "bliss" completely and split up.

Yes.. I really like that! lol

Enlightenment ain't all its cracked up to be, perhaps.

Americans, it seems, are especially gullable, often falling for always trying new things, or never giving up striving to "improve". Of course, this I see as a result of our great marketing machine, with which the populace is brainwashed from day one!

Somehow, those who are content with what they have are seen as somewhat backward or living in denial. lol

Or maybe just wise.

If it ain't broke... why fix it?

[p2u_]

They lost "bliss" completely and split up.

Yes.. I really like that! lol

Hey, that's cruel; you were not supposed to laugh!

P.S.: By the way, I saw the topic starter today, but I guess he got discouraged a bit from what we are doing here with his topic. Maybe we should be talking more about cramping deep flexors and bruised extensors, huh? Whose turn is it to say something?

Paul

[ajspiano]

I think this is more of a teaching discussion too, Paul - though the teaching board never sees much action these days - it tends to be here or the students corner. That said, I know that you, myself, N. and Marik are teachers - As is chopantasy if he is infact a reincarnation of keyboardclass.

...

That aside I'm inclined to agree about unqualified people posting here, though it's not too difficult to tell who knows what they are on about. The board does say students at an advanced level though I think (where I would generally put myself comparatively to someone like yourself or Marik) but sometimes people in that category need to locate some humility.

Edit: flexors/extensors/lumbricals etc etc.

[p2u_]

it's not too difficult to tell who knows what they are on about.

For the average board reader looking for qualified info? I have my doubts.

The board does say students at an advanced level though I think (where I would generally put myself comparatively to someone like yourself or Marik) but sometimes people in that category need to locate some humility.

I probably used the wrong phrasing and I didn't want to single out certain people in particular belonging to either "the good" or "the bad". I think you are too modest about your own status. You have made very important contributions on the board in general and to this thread in particular.

P.S.: I also think it would be a good thing to try and get some great people of the past back to participating here, but that's a topic for another section of the forum.

Paul

[ajspiano]

For the average board reader looking for qualified info? I have my doubts.

I did almost decide to edit my previous post with something to effect of "but perhaps that opinion is a product of my own experience in the area"

I probably used the wrong phrasing and I didn't want to single out certain people in particular belonging to either "the good" or "the bad". I think you are too modest about your own status. You have made very important contributions on the board in general and to this thread in particular.

 I don't have the wide experience over varied repertoire that a life time provides. I'm only 24. Marik for example was a stronger pianist than I am currently when he was 24 and I believe (I may be wrong) that was atleast 25 years ago - more than my entire lifetime. I don't think I'm modest, rather honest with myself about the depth of the field and the value of good experience over a life times thoughtful study and development - both as a teacher and performer.