Why do we splash in Op 10, no 1?

[nyiregyhazi]

First of all the etude does not take a lot of power. The fortes are accomplished with an abundance of sound not forcing "loud" sounds. So right there, is a key to the playing of it.

Forcing, straining, muscle exertion, etc., will be your downfall.

This is about keeping the hand light and supple.

While I don't exactly disagree with what you say, I think this is better taken as a description of how an accomplished pianist will perform the end product- not a means of achieving it. There's more to it than knowing the folly of forcing or straining. Obviously you shouldn't be straining, but if you don't learn the right specific quality of hand movement, aiming to be light and supple will not make it so. Ironically, aiming to be loose can actually be the cause of tensions in all too many cases- especially once you start upping the tempo. By then, if you  didn't get the quality perfect, tensions will come of their own accord whether you like it or not. In an effective product, the pianist can choose to move with ease and lightness because they know how to transfer energy efficiently- not because they wanted to move lightly. The latter only works if the feel is there, for passing on energy directly and without wastage. Otherwise it can equally create the tentative half-arsed finger movements that leave pianists incapable of loosening up the arm.

In the case of keyboardclass, his video shows woefully inadequate movement from the fingers and an extremely poor connection between the hand and arm. It's a classic case of inadequate deployment of the useful activities causing no choice but to depend on excessive tension in a wealth of other places. As I say, I don't necessarily disagree with what you say, as such, but a pianist has to understand exactly what quality of finger action is required- if they are ever to come near reliable execution in a reasonable tempo. Sometimes aiming to be supple and light is exactly what holds them back from achieving that. You have to be able to perceive a very direct finger action of the kind that does not naturally drag the wrist forwards and up. Aiming to be loose often leaves a pitifully sagging hand, that leaves the fingers having to work a lot harder while acheiving considerably less. Keyboardclass' film is a classic case. It's not about lightness as a goal in itself or strength as a goal- but about learning to perceive what manner of movement produces a full tone without the arm pressing down hard. Many pianists need to get the right muscles working a lot more to get anywhere near that, whereas others need to lighten up in order to feel the actions separately from hard arm pressures. It's neither about striving to be firmer or lighter, but putting things into the bigger picture. In my opinion, most forceful pianists fall short of adequate finger action- with the real problem being their inability to distinguish between an effective finger movement from a loose arm and an arm shove. You can strip away some unwanted efforts by trying to be lighter- but you still have to learn how to deploy the efficient finger action with real deliberation and intent (even in a pp dynamic). Do it half-heartedly due to aiming to keep it "light" and the whole thing falls apart.

The important discovery for myself recently (which has made an overwhelming change to speed, accuracy and physical ease) is the value in "resting" the finger against the key surface, while simultaneously pushing the knuckle very high away from it. This is all done BEFORE the key moves even in a mm. I find it to be the perfect way to get the finger primed in a position where it can move the key with efficiency (minimising the gap between starting the movement and sound occurring and reducing the effort to make sound). It ensures that the finger is always in a position to perform properly, rather than collapse through striking the key and also helps to judge the level of weight needed for the finger to move the key effectively. It's makes sure there's enough, while keeping it to the absolute bare minimum for the finger to perform- it's not about slumping down but priming the finger to push up. Recently, this has produced some pretty startling differences among a few of my students. Instead of forcing hard but producing little, suddenly they do a small movement that makes a big sound. However, they have to make the movement extremely deliberate to get that result. I wouldn't describe it as either aiming to be either forceful or to be light, but in totally different terms.

[hmpiano]

I will say you don't play op 10 no 1 with the fingers - that's everybody's mistake.  You play it with the arms.

[werq34ac]

I will say you don't play op 10 no 1 with the fingers - that's everybody's mistake.  You play it with the arms.

You're wrong there. While the arms do do some of the work, fingers are still important too. And no that is NOT everyone's mistake. It's pretty obvious that it's not possible to play the piece with only fingers.

[nyiregyhazi]

I will say you don't play op 10 no 1 with the fingers - that's everybody's mistake.  You play it with the arms.

An attitude that explains exactly why your attempt is so sluggish and uneven. You ALIGN with the arms, but the fingers must move the keys. If you try to do any more than that, the results are disastrous. The reason you cannot play fast is because your arms are trying to take over the hand's role. It's like using an electric toothbrush. You move align it to the teeth with the arms and let the brush do the work. If your arms are intent on doing the brushing (as if you're using a regular brush), you just wear out the toothbrush head.

[werq34ac]

As some say, the finger begins at the arm. Any movements of the hands, wrists, and arms is to aid our fingers. They are essential aids to piano playing, but piano is played with the fingers. It's not like someone without fingers can play the piano well.

[ajspiano]

I will say you don't play op 10 no 1 with the fingers - that's everybody's mistake.  You play it with the arms.

... while I agree with the responses to this, in that this is a terrible explanation that will result in horribly sluggish playing if taken literally..  I strongly doubt that hmpiano actually believes the fingers do nothing and the arm does everything.

[nyiregyhazi]

... while I agree with the responses to this, in that this is a terrible explanation that will result in horribly sluggish playing if taken literally..  I strongly doubt that hmpiano actually believes the fingers do nothing and the arm does everything.

You saw his video? Whether he believes it literally or not, his fingers are underperforming quite woefully and he is trying in vain to force the sound out by shoving down a tense arm through a stiff finger. While the same advice sometimes comes from a place of wisdom, in his case it comes from a place of total misunderstanding about advanced (and indeed the very basics of) piano technique.

[ajspiano]

You saw his video? Whether he believes it literally or not, his fingers are underperforming quite woefully and he is trying in vain to force the sound out by shoving down a tense arm through a stiff finger. While the same advice sometimes comes from a place of wisdom, in his case it comes from a place of total misunderstanding about advanced (and indeed the very basics of) piano technique.

The keyboardclass video? - don't know if i'd have described it that way..  looks like the arm is too low, and as such the fingers will be forced to over-exert themselves quite frequently to support the arm due to such poor alignment. Speed will be impossible. There are moments of severe curling under as well, scratching back across the keys toward himself - which will inturn work against adequate finger activity for the required tempo.. 

even if he is trying to consciously do everything from the arm - his arm motion is not adequate. Fixing the arm will probably fix the fingers to a degree..  likewise fixing the fingers would probably fix the arm..    both with the appropriate thought and work ofcourse, and neither of which I think I can adequately explain here, which I'm quite sure you understand.

Also..

in my experience, keyboardclass was an arrogant self absorbed pompous forum member who was not even remotely interested in advice from anyone who didn't advise exactly what he currently thought to be correct..  so I'd be wasting my breath arguing about it with hmpiano..  if he's the same person (I haven't seen the content that supposed proves beyond doubt that he is).

He was never interested in what a forum member had to offer and considering that against that members proven experience (such as my posted 10/1 performance) - rather he had his idol's for whom he had blind faith, and who he continually argued on behalf of without ever seeming to have conscious thought about the matter (or his own capabilities as a result of their application) at all.

[nyiregyhazi]

The keyboardclass video? - don't know if i'd have described it that way..  looks like the arm is too low, and as such the fingers will be forced to over-exert themselves quite frequently to support the arm due to such poor alignment. Speed will be impossible. There are moments of severe curling under as well, scratching back across the keys toward himself - which will inturn work against adequate finger activity for the required tempo..  

Yeah, he's stuck in the dichomtomy of finger activity curling his fingers up in a bad way or simply doing inadequate finger movement (and instead stiffening) to compensate. Neither works.

even if he is trying to consciously do everything from the arm - his arm motion is not adequate. Fixing the arm will probably fix the fingers to a degree..  likewise fixing the fingers would probably fix the arm..    both with the appropriate thought and work ofcourse.

True. If he moves his arm better he'll improve it. But if he doesn't start moving his fingers in a productive path, the right quality of arm movement can never be encountered. It will seem as if it just took all the sound away and be missed- unless the fingers connect to the keybeds with adequate movement. He needs to float over the surface (without downward pressures) and move the keys with his fingers as the arm drifts. The biggest surprise when someone first moves their arm well is how it actually SUBTRACTS rather than adds to the depth of tone that the fingers create. The benefit only comes when you realise that a very direct path of finger action now becomes possible with extreme intensity yet without any risk of impact. There are ways to use the arm to increase tone, but if you haven't first used it for subtraction and got good results from the fingers, this is almost always counterproductive. I think this is one of the classic mistakes of schools that say the arm supposedly produces the tone or power. You need to learn totally different things first.

He was never interested in what a forum member had to offer and considering that against that members proven experience (such as my posted 10/1 performance) - rather he had his idol's for whom he had blind faith, and who he continually argued on behalf of without ever seeming to have conscious thought about the matter at all.

just look at his responses earlier in the thread. While he's toned it down in a bid to conceal his identity, do you see the slightest interest in anything other than repeating his nonsensical theory? He's been considerably more blatant in other threads and demonstrated all the same pet favourites. There's not a shred of doubt as to his identity. Above all, who would see nothing wrong in his video, as he stated- nevermind say it's "mesmerising"...

[ajspiano]

You need to learn totally different things first.

Loosely described..

If he came to a lesson with me (not that I suspect he ever would ) the first thing I'd do is bump him up higher, then spend half an hour or so going over structural alignment with all digits, probably just on a flat surface rather than a piano.. and how to recognize when it has collapsed during transitions. Once there was an understanding of what it feels like to have finger/hand support I'd go to actual playing - probably use thumb passing situations since they would encourage the most obvious and severe structural collapses..

..such as C scale fingered 13131313.

..overholding exercises over specific hand positions in repertoire such as the easier clementi sonatinas and then moving to maintaining the learned structural integrity in the context more complex contrapuntal lines, and bringing in appropriate musicality ofcourse (and especially since the increase in stability so dramatically increases the level of control the pianist has).

10/1 (and romantic repertoire in general) would probably be off the table for a little while.. which shouldnt be a problem since we know keyboardclass was a big bach fan..


atleast until such time as I felt it was possible to manage the more broad sweeping arm motions required work such as the one in question without there being such a significant loss of balance/stability.

.....

his performance in the video doesnt look like one that I can just say "try it like this" and it will magically fall into place. Its probably heavily habitual at this late stage.

...ofcourse, in saying all this I've no doubt severely offended him.. 

[pts1]

I will say you don't play op 10 no 1 with the fingers - that's everybody's mistake.  You play it with the arms.

IMO, the essence of this quote -- you don't play piano with the fingers, but with the arms (and all the permutations capable therein) -- is the SINGLE MOST POTENT reason that separates pianists with amateur techniques from pianists with professional techniques.

There exist today whole schools of piano playing that emphasize enormous use of the arms and body to do what is the domain of the fingers alone. Largely these methods are misguided corrective efforts for injured pianists who sustained their problems through other misguided techniques e.g. arm weight/rotation, high finger, flat finger, etc., etc., etc.

To put it in simple perspective, its like someone who believes clarity of thought comes from hitting their head against a wall, but finds its painful,  goes to a doctor, and the doctor prescribes alternative ways to bang one's head against the wall in order to reduce the damage.

With the piano, players expect to be able to use their relatively delicate fingers to assault the key board in all ways imaginable, and can't understand why they incur injury, inconsistency and undesirable musical results far from their hoped for goal.

Stop and think.

It only takes 50 gram or about the weight of 5 nickels to depress the key of grand piano. That is very, very little finger effort since the weight of one's finger is probably already in excess of that 50 gram threshold. Furthermore, since the inner workings of the piano mechanism behind each key come in contact with the hammer for only a few thousandths of a second at which time the hammer is catapulted into the string to produce the sound, why in the devil would one think it takes more than this tiny fraction of time and a very quick and precise effort to play a note?

I could go on here, but there's a very good article which speaks to this as well or better than I can, so for efforts sake, I'll simply refer to it here and pull in part of the essay.

First, just one other thought: If you ever DO "get it" and discover what true economy and the minimal controlled effort it takes to REALLY play as professionals do, you will quickly realize it and never want to go back to the "arm waving schools" and beating your head against a wall will never again be an option.

https://www3.sympatico.ca/norma.barr/library/piano/technique_piano_playing.html

    Three Essays on the Fundamentals of Piano-Playing

        II. TECHNIQUE

    Control of tone and dynamics is primarily dependent on physical training; control of timing is mental. Control of dynamics is control of hammer velocity; control of tone, as we have seen, means control of hammer acceleration.

    If the movement of the fingertip begins above the key surface, it will be moving when it hits the key and will jar the hammer into vibrating. Thus, to avoid a percussive sound, it is essential that the fingertip be in contact with the key before the key is depressed. One depresses the key by pulling the fingertip down and towards oneself. A legato touch calls for a steady pressure on the key. A staccato touch calls for a sort of snap of the finger to send the hammer flying to its goal. The best way to check if one is achieving these effects is to listen to the sound produced when the pedal is down and the dampers off the keys. It is easier to distinguish the two cases by listening for the duration and strength of the after sound, rather than for the brief prompt sound. I also find it easier to hear the difference with loud notes rather than quiet ones.

    Since one must always be prepared to use any or all fingers simultaneously, they must all be at the key surface at the same time. In their normal relaxed position, the palms of the hands tend to face one another; for all fingers to be in proper position at the same time, hands must be turned inward, so that the palm and back of the hand are horizontal. This position also facilitates the crossing-under of the thumb, as it keeps the outer part of the hand up and out of the way.

    One wants to avoid depression of the keys by moving the whole hand downwards. Such a hand motion involves larger, slower-moving muscles and, hence, less sensitive control. It also compromises the independence of the fingers when balancing chords by imposing the same downward motion on all of them. The weak fingers of beginners, especially children, may not be strong enough to depress keys on their own, so that hand movement is necessary to produce an audible result. However, this should be regarded as only a temporary expedient to be abandoned as soon as fingers acquire sufficient strength.

    All hand motions, except sideways to bring the fingers into a new position, are suspect. Rotation of the hand, sometimes recommended for a tremolo or Alberti bass, must be used very discreetly, if at all. Otherwise, when the thumb goes down, the little finger tends to fly up well above the key, and conversely. There is a similar danger when bouncing the hand from the wrist, as one might do in a rapid octave passage. Perhaps the standard admonition, "Keep your fingers close to the keys," should be replaced by, "Keep your fingers on the keys." Clementi, the founder of piano technique, apparently required his students to practise with a large English penny balanced on the back of the hand. Some people find this amusing, but the trick has a valid purpose. It forces the student to keep the back of the hand perfectly still and to do all the work with his fingers. While not appropriate for passages with leaps, the practice is still to be highly recommended. It immediately exposes weaknesses in the fingers. A Canadian two-dollar coin is an excellent substitute for the old English penny.

    The requirement that the finger be in contact with the key before depressing it means that in moving the hand sideways to a new position, two distinct movements are required. First, hand and fingers are moved into position and in contact with the correct keys and only then, secondly, are the keys depressed. A student may feel that, particularly in long leaps, there is insufficient time for two distinct movements, but good pianists do it all the time. Any attempt to combine them into one will bring the whole weight of hand and arm crashing onto the keys, quite possibly the wrong ones, with a loss of control of tone and dynamics. Slow practice with the fastest possible movement to new positions has the advantage of embedding the correct movement in so-called "muscle memory" with a consequent improvement in both accuracy and memory.

    Obviously, the sideways motion must be as fast and as free as possible. If the weight of hand and arm is allowed to rest on the keys, it has to be lifted off again before one can move sideways, thereby wasting precious time and impeding freedom of movement. Thus, hand and arm must be completely supported from the shoulders. The function of wrist, arm and shoulder is to move fingers into correct position as efficiently as possible and otherwise to stay out of the way. Complete relaxation of these muscles is essential as any tension has a blocking effect. One of my great-nephews, a trained athlete and kinesiology student, tells me that it is just as necessary to train the muscles that one does not use in an activity as to train those that do. Arms must swing freely from the shoulders. Computer users are frequently advised to keep forearms parallel to the floor to reduce the risk of repetitive strain injury. The same advice applies to pianists.

    Shoulders serve as a basic reference point for the position of the hands on the keyboard. (Think of blind pianists.) It is therefore desirable that they remain in the same position whenever possible. And most of the time, except when both hands are needed at the same extreme end of the piano, it is possible. It follows then that the torso is normally still. Any unnecessary physical activity distracts both performer and listener from the music. Anyone familiar with the Alexander method knows the advantage of an upright posture with solid pelvic support. It gives observers the impression that the performer is in full control, and it has a similar psychological effect on the performer himself.

    Subtle control of dynamics is essential both for the constant shading of melodic lines and for the balancing of chords. This, too, is best achieved with the fingers alone. if the fingers are forced to work regularly, they acquire the necessary muscular strength surprisingly quickly and, contrary to intuition, fingers alone can produce a bigger sound than any amount of arm action. This is explained by our theory of tone. If the keys are hit from above from any height, most of the energy goes into vibration of the hammer and a quickly vanishing prompt sound; there is little left for after sound. But almost all the energy generated by fast-moving fingers goes into a long-lasting after sound. (The pull of the finger on the key can be supplemented by a slight backward movement of the arm without any deleterious effects.)

    It is true that the hands of many successful pianists fly up in the air, as pictures of Arthur Rubinstein frequently show. But this is just showmanship. Hands go up in the air when keys are released; they are back down on the keyboard before the next notes are played. Our claim that fingers alone produce the biggest sound is borne out by the example of Vladimir Horowitz. I quote the New York critic, Harold C. Schonberg, in his book The Great Pianists (Simon and Schuster, 1963, pp.410-11).

        "...he was one of the quietest of pianists when seated before the instrument. His movements were precise, his body almost immobile." As a technician Horowitz was one of the most honest in the history of modern pianism. He achieved his dazzling effects by fingers alone, using the pedal sparingly." (My italics.) "And above all there were his stupendous fortissimos - that orchestral body of tone that only Horowitz could produce. In such a work as the Rachmaninoff Third Concerto he swamped the orchestra ..."

    The loudness of a note is determined by the average downward velocity of the key. This must not be confused with the speed of motion of the fingertips. In normal playing with curved fingers, the finger bends as it depresses the key and the tip is pulled toward the performer. It feels as if the finger were pulling the key. The motion of the tip has both vertical and horizontal components; only the vertical component affects loudness. Thus, even if the fingertip always moves at the same speed - and it is desirable that it always move fairly quickly - loudness can be varied by changing the direction in which the fingertip moves. If the motion is almost vertical, a loud sound is produced; if almost horizontal, the vertical component is very slow and a soft sound results. Of course, there is a minimal vertical velocity below which the note fails to sound. It may be easier to control dynamics by direction of motion, particularly in pianissimo passages, than by speed of motion, but it is likely that most pianists unconsciously employ both.

    With a level wrist, the motion of the fingertip can easily be varied over the full range from vertical to near horizontal. But a high wrist does not allow for vertical motion; in order to play loudly, it is necessary to poke down with the whole hand, with a consequent loss of control. Conversely, a very low wrist does not permit near horizontal motion, and control of pianissimo is limited to fingertip speed.

    Occasionally. a teacher will recommend playing a passage with flat fingers. A flat finger must move almost vertically so that dynamic control through angle of motion is sacrificed. On the other hand, it also prevents a sharp initial impulse and enforces the uniform acceleration appropriate to warm tone and legato. Another useful device for dynamic control is to partially depress the key before playing the note. The distance travelled by key and hammer is reduced, producing a softer sound. It is most commonly used with repeated chords, or with trills, when the key is not permitted to come all the way back up when released. It also permits greater speed, since the fingers move shorter distances.

    In sum, our ideal pianist (Horowitz?) sits almost immobile at the piano with a commanding vertical posture. His forearms are parallel to the floor, his wrists flat, his fingers curved. The backs of his hands are horizontal and unmoving except when they move sideways from one position on the keyboard to another. They are moved quickly into position by relaxed, freely moving arms, which are fully supported by the shoulders. Before any note is played, the finger is in position with the tip in contact with the key surface. After the finger is in position, the key is depressed solely by the pulling motion of the finger. Dynamics are controlled primarily by the angle at which the fingertip moves. Tone quality is controlled by the way fingertip and key are accelerated. Constant or increasing acceleration produces a legato touch with lots of after sound. An initial quick acceleration produces a staccato sound.

   

[hmpiano]

My statement seems to have caused some fuss.  Surely the Taubman people wouldn't balk at it? and a few other schools of piano playing?

edit: here's someone from the Abby Whiteside school

Five Finger Pentascales
Lastly, Rosoff teaches a warm-up that involves the smallest lever--the finger. Note
that she places the work of the fingers last. The goal of playing pentascales is not to strengthen
fingers, but to play each pattern as one movement for the five sounds. The progression of this
warm-up is as follows:
1. Put down a cluster of five white keys, using a pattern such as C or G.
2. Play the cluster quickly with one motion. The fingers do not work independently.
3. Next, play the five tones ascending and slowly, so that the forearm flexes.
4. Finally, play the pattern hands together in one motion, as quickly as possible. Rip the
notes open using one gesture. Note that to play quickly, the touch must be light, close to the
keys, and without fingers pushing to the bottom of the key.

Personally, I think the arps in Chopin require the same rip.

[werq34ac]

My statement seems to have caused some fuss.  Surely the Taubman people wouldn't balk at it? and a few other schools of piano playing?

edit: here's someone from the Abby Whiteside school

Five Finger Pentascales
Lastly, Rosoff teaches a warm-up that involves the smallest lever--the finger. Note
that she places the work of the fingers last. The goal of playing pentascales is not to strengthen
fingers, but to play each pattern as one movement for the five sounds. The progression of this
warm-up is as follows:
1. Put down a cluster of five white keys, using a pattern such as C or G.
2. Play the cluster quickly with one motion. The fingers do not work independently.
3. Next, play the five tones ascending and slowly, so that the forearm flexes.
4. Finally, play the pattern hands together in one motion, as quickly as possible. Rip the
notes open using one gesture. Note that to play quickly, the touch must be light, close to the
keys, and without fingers pushing to the bottom of the key.

Personally, I think the arps in Chopin require the same rip.

Strengthening the fingers is useless, I agree. And I'm not saying the arms aren't important. But if your fingers are not working properly, no amount of good arm and wristwork will allow you to play the piano.
 Your method is somewhat interesting, but it's important to know that clarity comes from the fingers. If you rip the 5 notes with only your wrist or arm, then you will end up uneven. The difference is subtle, but present. And it does make a difference in how it sounds. Ripping 5 notes individually is more brilliant than 5 notes played within a short span of time. Just because it's one motion, doesn't mean all the notes don't have to sound.
@pts1: So you're saying the arms aren't important at all? I'm sorry, I haven't read your whole post since it's a bit long. I'm being a bit hypocritical here since my posts tend to be long, too.

[ajspiano]

I don't think any of us wish to argue that there isnt an overall arm motion pattern (or 'shape') - however large or small - within a line - and that may be variable depending on the desired sound, or that the fingers are able to produce a clean execution without this element.

In a theoretically perfect technique - If the arm is not moving as part of the transition between notes and across a phrase as a whole it is almost always going to be at least a little rigid, or forcing the the fingers to take more strain than is necessary. Baring in mind that effective arm motion pattern can be really really small, and totally subconscious in a well practiced pianist.

The point is only that the arm does not do the playing, it is a vital element that facilitates the fingers playing..

Surely the Taubman people wouldn't balk at it?

Actually, i would argue that pretty much everything in taubman exists to produce a perfectly aligned and balanced aparatus facilitating an ideal finger flexion. They do however focus heavily on the arm to achieve it - which I don't think makes them wrong at all, only a bit bias in their explanation of whats going on. There are key points in their presentation that are expressed in a matter of seconds and given no real focus because the lecture as a whole is discussing some other element of the execution in detail.

[hmpiano]

Actually, i would argue that pretty much everything in taubman exists to produce a perfectly aligned and balanced aparatus facilitating an ideal finger flexion.

That's not at all my impression.

Here's some more Abby Whiteside specifically on how to do arpeggios:

To use the fingers as a bony structure to stand under the arm power - never to produce power on their own, independently of the power of the arm.

Has anyone actually tried ripping op 10 no 1?

[nyiregyhazi]

That's not at all my impression.

Here's some more Abby Whiteside specifically on how to do arpeggios:

To use the fingers as a bony structure to stand under the arm power - never to produce power on their own, independently of the power of the arm.

Has anyone actually tried ripping op 10 no 1?

 

Such bilge my technique back for years. Your belief in such fantasy is exactly why you cannot do anything resembling a rip through the etude.

Generally I hold back from using precise measurements. However in a future post I will use literal mathematical geometry to show quite how many degrees the hand must rotate through, if the fingers neither instigate movement by curling up nor extending. If neither occurs, the movement required to depress even two fingers is huge. Nobody moves enough for it to be even possible as an explanation. Whiteside is simply full of sh*t and to portray that as literal reality is a gross disservice to the world of technique.

[hmpiano]

Whiteside is simply full of sh*t and to portray that as literal reality is a gross disservice to the world of technique.

That's just nasty, and you expect to be taken seriously?

[nyiregyhazi]

That's just nasty, and you expect to be taken seriously?

If you want whiteside's outrageous ignorance to be taken seriously, build a hand out of wood and rip five notes at speed minus finger movement. This isn't a politeness contest and I don't humour dangerously ignorant bullshit. When fantasy is dangerously portrayed as literal truth, politeness is not a major issue for concern.

[richard black]

Of course the quick answer to the OP's question is that our concentration fails. It's mostly a mental problem getting 10/1 to work. Most kids could play an isolated 4 sixteenth-notes from it after a year of lessons. The trick is getting those hundreds of groups of 4 16ths.

As for all this stuff about fingers/arms/buttocks/whatever doing all the work, I can't resist pointing out that I never yet met a professional solo pianist (and I've known very many of them over the years) who ever really thought that way or was taught that way. Rather, they will occasionally reflect that they could ease things by doing a bit more/less consciously with arms/fingers at a certain point. The key thing is to get the whole body flowing along and everyone's answer to that is different. Find your own way.

[hmpiano]

politeness is not a major issue for concern.

Yeah, since when did politeness mean anything?  flame away.

Here's the Abby Whiteside pupil:

[nyiregyhazi]

Yeah, since when did politeness mean anything?  flame away.

Here's the Abby Whiteside pupil:

What is that supposed to prove? I want to see a video of someone "ripping" five notes at speed by pressing a wooden fake hand through the keys. It would be impossible without moving fingers, to generate any real speed. For a small number of people who already have finger technique, whiteside's fantasy can produce something that works, via indirect means. For someone such as yourself who has minimal finger movement, imagining that arm pressures can compensate (or that they can possibly explain what helps does at speed) will lead nowhere.

[nyiregyhazi]

Of course the quick answer to the OP's question is that our concentration fails. It's mostly a mental problem getting 10/1 to work. Most kids could play an isolated 4 sixteenth-notes from it after a year of lessons. The trick is getting those hundreds of groups of 4 16ths.

aside from the fact that almost anything in technique can be argued as mental, unless a person suffers a disability, I don't think that this is a notably mental issue in the conventional sense. sure, the first four notes are easy enough and so are the next four- IF you don't have to connect them. But it's the fact that you do which is physically difficult. The hand has to close and reopen. When this is misjudged (typically with a collapse of the arch) the following group is no longer as easy to play.

Given that the hand is controlled by the brain, you can still say it's mental, but there are very specific physical issues that make it hard. To speak of the ease of four notes is literally to omit reference to the actual technical issue that makes it hard. the four notes are easy in any octave and the transition is difficult in any octave. But get the transition wrong and the four notes are no longer easy. It's not about what octave you.'re in but how you're poised on arriving there. The simple reason why keyboard class plays unreliably is that poor sense of poise after transitions.

[hmpiano]

What is that supposed to prove?

To you, nothing.  I have only contempt for your posts.

[nyiregyhazi]

I feel compelled to go back and point out a number of outright objective errors in the post that pts quoted. I agree with much of the spirit and there are aspects of notable wisdom. However, the oversights are pretty extreme. However, firstly I want to address this from the poster himself:

It only takes 50 gram or about the weight of 5 nickels to depress the key of grand piano. That is very, very little finger effort since the weight of one's finger is probably already in excess of that 50 gram threshold. Furthermore, since the inner workings of the piano mechanism behind each key come in contact with the hammer for only a few thousandths of a second at which time the hammer is catapulted into the string to produce the sound, why in the devil would one think it takes more than this tiny fraction of time and a very quick and precise effort to play a note?

While I appreciate the intended sentiment, this popular argument contains a notable oversight. 50g released as dead weight barely produces tone if at all. The finger may need to generate equivalent pressure to that which come from dropping 500g (or even a kg a or more) to make a loud sound. Citing 50g merely serves to create cause for significant misunderstandings. If you keep it down to the fact that what matters is the acceleration of the key (not how mass or weight is used to create it, or whether that accleration is limited to that which comes from gravity) it makes the same point without straying into anything that is either objectively dubious or potentially misleading.

 

  All hand motions, except sideways to bring the fingers into a new position, are suspect. Rotation of the hand, sometimes recommended for a tremolo or Alberti bass, must be used very discreetly, if at all. Otherwise, when the thumb goes down, the little finger tends to fly up well above the key, and conversely.

I've seen countless great pianists do such things. While there's good argument for learning to keep movements small, thinking that it's the only way to ever be playing is plain barmy. It's also very important to prepare for smaller movements with forms of exaggeration. Personally, I teach students to use only slight rotation for such passages. However, I always ensure that they have practised both with extreme use of rocking and minimal finger movements and with extreme finger movement and minimal rotation. From there, they have access to the different sensations needed to find an effective movement. Forcing these things to stay very small from the outset is as good as telling the student to be more tense. It's very short sighted indeed.


 

  The requirement that the finger be in contact with the key before depressing it means that in moving the hand sideways to a new position, two distinct movements are required. First, hand and fingers are moved into position and in contact with the correct keys and only then, secondly, are the keys depressed. A student may feel that, particularly in long leaps, there is insufficient time for two distinct movements, but good pianists do it all the time. Any attempt to combine them into one will bring the whole weight of hand and arm crashing onto the keys, quite possibly the wrong ones, with a loss of control of tone and dynamics.

I think that there's plenty of wisdom in this. However, ultimately the movements do tend to be combined into one. Stopping merely helps the students distinguish between a downward arm shove and a sense of aligning from the arm and using the finger to play- as a preliminary step. Ultimately, it should feel like one movement not two. It's just that rushing into this step tends to cause problematic arm shoves. You can't do the leaps in the Schumann Fantasy as two distinct movements. The arm aligns and the finger moves the key, but there's no stop between these stages when you go fast. It has to be integrated into a single feel.

   Obviously, the sideways motion must be as fast and as free as possible. If the weight of hand and arm is allowed to rest on the keys, it has to be lifted off again before one can move sideways, thereby wasting precious time and impeding freedom of movement. Thus, hand and arm must be completely supported from the shoulders.

While there is a hint of a good point in there, it is not improved upon by silly hyperbole. Completely supported? Literally 100% so? Absolutely not. You don't have to resort to simplistic black or white thinking to stress that the hand should not bear too much weight.

The function of wrist, arm and shoulder is to move fingers into correct position as efficiently as possible and otherwise to stay out of the way. Complete relaxation of these muscles is essential as any tension has a blocking effect.

I'm sorry? Complete relaxation? So we're not going to rest a gram of mass on the hand yet the shoulders are to be completely relaxed? Try holding your arms out a mm above the keys and see how relaxed you can be when resting literally no weight at all on the piano. You don't need to rest down hard on the hand to relieve the arm, but when you realise how little relaxation is available when you take zero support at the hand end, it becomes clear quite how important it is to view it from the hand end of things- not merely in terms of support at the shoulder end. Instead of having the confusion of some methods claiming that weight must be supported solely at the hand and others saying that it's solely at the shoulder, it's about time that people learned to use a little common sense and looked at it from both ends. Either form of extremist advice is equally naive.

       "...he was one of the quietest of pianists when seated before the instrument. His movements were precise, his body almost immobile." As a technician Horowitz was one of the most honest in the history of modern pianism. He achieved his dazzling effects by fingers alone, using the pedal sparingly." (My italics.) "And above all there were his stupendous fortissimos - that orchestral body of tone that only Horowitz could produce. In such a work as the Rachmaninoff Third Concerto he swamped the orchestra ..."

The claim that Schonberg is saying that Horowitz produced his loud playing only from the fingers is shocking. I'm 99% sure that he is merely saying that Horowitz didn't cheat by using the pedal for legato. This is also two totally separate quotations stuck alongside each other in a bid to imply topical connection that does not exist. This is an outrageous misportrayal of quotation that is on a par with those that keyboardclass comes up with.

If the motion is almost vertical, a loud sound is produced; if almost horizontal, the vertical component is very slow and a soft sound results.

This is horribly oversimplified. I generally use direct motions for my softest playing. Yes, they transfer a higher percentage of the energy that goes in, but they can also transfer it more predictably than with a sliding finger. You just need to direct less energy- by a movement of the finger through the key that is slow yet very deliberate. It's absurd to say that direct motion necessarily means a loud sound.

 

  With a level wrist, the motion of the fingertip can easily be varied over the full range from vertical to near horizontal. But a high wrist does not allow for vertical motion; in order to play loudly, it is necessary to poke down with the whole hand, with a consequent loss of control. Conversely, a very low wrist does not permit near horizontal motion, and control of pianissimo is limited to fingertip speed.

Not a single of one of those holds true as a rule. I often use high knuckles and wrist and then extend out a very slightly curved finger into the vertical. This makes for a VERY direct vertical motion of the finger through the key. To say this is impossible from such a position is plain naive. The author should also trying watching Horowitz with an extremely low wrist, curling up his fingers like crazy and at an extreme horizontal angle. (often seen in Mozart). To portray such utter nonsense as some kind of unbreakable rule is an example of the most appalling ignorance on the author's part.

Dynamics are controlled primarily by the angle at which the fingertip moves.

This assertion is so silly that it barely even needs a follow-up. It's simply staggering to me that anyone would even contemplate making such a silly claim. The author seriously thinks that an accomplished pianist plays with the same level of intensity for FF and for pp, but that the angle of attack is merely less direct for quiet playing? I'm actually pretty stunned.

[nyiregyhazi]

To you, nothing.  I have only contempt for your posts.

I'm not interested in off-topic passive aggressive posts. If no topical points come my mind by way of response to my post, there is no need to reply. This is the only off-topic post that I will be making.

[ajspiano]

That's not at all my impression.

Whether they are right or wrong - You obviously missed choice phrases that are along the lines of:

• the fingers must play down, with the flexors
• rotation is the only motion that can keep up with the motion of the fingers
• rotation is used to limit the over use of extensors (not the flexors)
• rotation when combined with the 'walking hand and arm' allow for perfect positioning and balance over the key
• avoid 'curling' so that the flex motion of the fingers is not inhibited
• avoid 'stretching' so that the flex motion of the fingers is not inhibited

In fact, Edna states that her own main technical problem was a collapsed MP. A finger issue.

The reality is that it doesnt matter how refined you're arm motions (rotation or otherwise) are the fingers MUST be doing something, or you will have no control what so ever.

The whole think from the elbow thing that they bang into you the whole way through is largely to stop you from reaching out with a finger (left, right, forward or backward), thereby inhibiting a comfortable finger strike. Thinking from the arm gets the student to move the arm to the note. Then you play it with the a finger in its natural position.

The approach (the way it is explained) has holes, not because its wrong but because it appears to be conceived with the aim to fix specific problems that were created by pedagogical catastrophes - retraining. Thinking in that way for one person creates a different result to thinking in that way for someone with a different background.

This is precisely why anyone on the taubman faculty will tell you to get lessons with an actual teacher. The videos are great but they are not there to replace a teacher. The content is too complex to take in accurately by yourself without doing your own long term experimentation. Edna plainly states that you should not alter your technique based on the lectures/vidoes without proper guidance because you will easily damage your technique not improve it due to misunderstandings or over-thinking elements that are already totally fine in your personal situation.

Has anyone actually tried ripping op 10 no 1?

I explored pretty much every humanly conceivable variation of motion between every different element of the apparatus and many different ways of thinking about motion (from the arm, from the fingers etc.) in order to find the right balanced feel for this.

The answer is balanced/supported feel, think from the sound. There isn't a concious motion pattern that fixes it. Concious motion causes problems because you over think it and end up tense. The concious thought part is only ever a means to explore a "feel" that you have not developed a sub-conscious awareness of.

And for those who don't have a balanced/supported mechanism I wouldn't recommend trying to first find it with this piece - for that would be an almighty struggle. The work is hard enough from a "developing better balance" perspective.

[hmpiano]

Here's a short example of what I mean by ripping:

https://picosong.com/wrdQ

Anybody tried it?  Maybe that gives me very different problems which would explain the OP.  (I'll take the shouts of 'bullsh*t' and 'full of sh*t' as given, so Nyer... you have no need to comment.  And it's not about my technique, it's about a technique)  

[nyiregyhazi]

Here's a short example of what I mean by ripping:

https://picosong.com/wrdQ

Anybody tried it?  Maybe that gives me very different problems which would explain the OP.  (I'll take the shouts of 'bullsh*t' and 'full of sh*t' as given, so Nyer... you have no need to comment.  And it's not about my technique, it's about a technique)  

With your track record of unprovoked rudeness to so many posters in this forum, I'm not going to hold back. I sincerely hope that's supposed to be some kind of a joke? If you think that kind of appalling uneveness and innaccuracy is supposed to be something to be proud of, you have your head in the clouds. There's a kind of "inner rhythm" (see Conrad Wolff's book on Schnabel) within the Etude that must be audible. The fourth semiquaver needs to be clearly heard, as leading to the first semiquaver of each beat. Without a sense of the transition between these notes (to meaninfully connect the end of one beat to the start of the next) there's no inner life to the music. It's just a mess of generic C major. Not only do you fail to use that note to clarify the progression to the upper note of each group, but one of the notes is literally inaudible much of the time. It sounds like a three note motif. That's to say nothing of quite how stiff you would clearly be. You can hear in the sound alone that you're as stiff as hell. The results are neither even slightly musical nor physically healthy. There is not a single positive that could possibly be found in forcing out notes like that, without a trace of control. If you want to pretend that ripping comes from the arm, first your fingers need to be capable of ripping notes out- with precision and accuracy. If you literally try to force sound out by shoving the arm down through braced fingers, you will never find anything that works.

Anyway, I won't go any further as I sincerely doubt that even you believe that kind of rubbish is something to be proud of. You're just trolling. It's sad that you spend so much time lecturing people about piano technique here, yet have more interest in dicking about with such pathetic nonsense than in acquiring a basic standard of accomplishment.

PS. Anyone still doubt that this buffoon is keyboardclass? After that mp3, I'm starting to feel that he actually deserves plaudits for having single-handedly done more to discredit Abbey Whiteside's nonsense than anyone ever before.

[werq34ac]

With your track record of unprovoked rudeness to so many posters in this forum, I'm not going to hold back. I sincerely hope that's supposed to be some kind of a joke? If you think that kind of appalling uneveness and innaccuracy is supposed to be something to be proud of, you have your head in the clouds. There's a kind of "inner rhythm" (see Conrad Wolff's book on Schnabel) within the Etude that must be audible. The fourth semiquaver needs to be clearly heard, as leading to the first semiquaver of each beat. Without a sense of the transition between these notes (to meaninfully connect the end of one beat to the start of the next) there's no inner life to the music. It's just a mess of generic C major. Not only do you fail to use that note to clarify the progression to the upper note of each group, but one of the notes is literally inaudible much of the time. It sounds like a three note motif. That's to say nothing of quite how stiff you would clearly be. You can hear in the sound alone that you're as stiff as hell. The results are neither even slightly musical nor physically healthy. There is not a single positive that could possibly be found in forcing out notes like that, without a trace of control. If you want to pretend that ripping comes from the arm, first your fingers need to be capable of ripping notes out- with precision and accuracy. If you literally try to force sound out by shoving the arm down through braced fingers, you will never find anything that works.

Anyway, I won't go any further as I sincerely doubt that even you believe that kind of rubbish is something to be proud of. You're just trolling. It's sad that you spend so much time lecturing people about piano technique here, yet have more interest in dicking about with such pathetic nonsense than in acquiring a basic standard of accomplishment.

PS. Anyone still doubt that this buffoon is keyboardclass? After that mp3, I'm starting to feel that he actually deserves plaudits for having single-handedly done more to discredit Abbey Whiteside's nonsense than anyone ever before.

Actually, I practiced the piece like that. But hmpiano or keyboard class or whatever is missing VERY CRUCIAL points to this kind of practice.

The idea of ripping it is completely wrong. It will only lead to unevenness in playing. But practicing it in segments like that is incredibly valuable in improving evenness. However, you don't leave out the important part. You have change which 4 notes consists of a segment. It's a well known practice method for difficult runs.
We pause on every 4 notes. However, you change which of the 4 notes to stop on. For instance, the first four notes are rest C G C E. the rest is 1, C is 2, G is 3, C is 4, and E is back to 1.
so you would play
1 2341 2341 2341 2341 2341 (which is what the video is doing, but the approach is completely wrong. You don't rip it at all. You are striving for evenness)
Then
12 3412 3412 3412 3412 3412
then 123 4123 4123 4123 4123
then 1234 1234 1234 1234 1234
It works wonders in improving accuracy and evenness once you play it normally.

So hmpiano was hinting at something worthwhile, but the idea of ripping it is so wrong that hmpiano has not said something worthwhile.

[nyiregyhazi]

Actually, I practiced the piece like that. But hmpiano or keyboard class or whatever is missing VERY CRUCIAL points to this kind of practice.

Exactly. I'm not criticising the idea of breaking it into pieces. I'm criticising the appallingly low quality of execution and the intent behind the whole thing (which directly contributes to that appalling quality). You cannot replace the role of the fingers. It's impossible. Whiteside's ludicrous description can only ever work for those who move their fingers well and who cannot forget how to. Those who literally try to replace the need of learning to move the fingers well with arm pressures simply cannot succeed. If you cannot produce depth of tone and stability of the arm without pressing the whole arm down, you haven't even passed the foundation stage. This the reason why "ripping" tends to be best done starting from a low wrist and drifting continuously up through the group. It ensures that the fingers are producing the sound. If the fingers don't move properly, you don't get any sound. Once this stage has been learned, active downward arm pressures can sometimes be added without compromising everything (although they can never be responsible for a succession of fast notes). But if this stage has not been learned, taking Whiteside's false premise at face value will do nothing but harm. It just takes a person further and further from the basic foundation movements that advanced piano playing cannot occur without.

By the way, not that I don't like your practise idea, but you can cover everything as long as there's an overlap. I (almost) always play a group of four plus one note- not just a group of four. I like the idea of varying the start point, but you don't actually omit anything, as long as the overlap is there.

[hmpiano]

Actually, I practiced the piece like that. But hmpiano or keyboard class or whatever is missing VERY CRUCIAL points to this kind of practice.

The idea of ripping it is completely wrong. It will only lead to unevenness in playing. But practicing it in segments like that is incredibly valuable in improving evenness. However, you don't leave out the important part. You have change which 4 notes consists of a segment. It's a well known practice method for difficult runs.
We pause on every 4 notes. However, you change which of the 4 notes to stop on. For instance, the first four notes are rest C G C E. the rest is 1, C is 2, G is 3, C is 4, and E is back to 1.
so you would play
1 2341 2341 2341 2341 2341 (which is what the video is doing, but the approach is completely wrong. You don't rip it at all. You are striving for evenness)
Then
12 3412 3412 3412 3412 3412
then 123 4123 4123 4123 4123
then 1234 1234 1234 1234 1234
It works wonders in improving accuracy and evenness once you play it normally.

So hmpiano was hinting at something worthwhile, but the idea of ripping it is so wrong that hmpiano has not said something worthwhile.

Thanks werq, something to think about.  I 'll try some of that but it'll have to be with the ripping.

[ajspiano]

Thanks werq, something to think about.  I 'll try some of that but it'll have to be with the ripping.

I don't wish to be argumentative, but if you currently have difficulty why would you remain so self assured that it would have to be "with ripping". Even if that approach is of benefit to you your experience and results would be more objective if you adjust a single variable at a time - consider what a technique does on it's own and how that impacts your body and learning before combining it with other techniques and totally clouding your understanding.

As far as what werc said, I totally agree - only I took it further. Without properly explaining I did full "repeated not group" practice on this. Progressing from 2 notes to 10 notes, on pretty much every bar by itself (rather than continuously playing the whole thing)

[hmpiano]

I don't wish to be argumentative, but if you currently have difficulty why would you remain so self assured that it would have to be "with ripping".

Because that, as I see it, is how it's played.

[ajspiano]

Because that, as I see it, is how it's played.

Obviously i dont know what your current performance is like, or what exactly you feel or do when "ripping"...

..but for anyone who can't play a work, thinking that they know how to play it is firstly daft, and secondly going to halt any developing understanding of technique and potentially result in an ultimate long term failure on occasions where you turn out to be wrong.

[hmpiano]

Obviously i dont know what your current performance is like, or what exactly you feel or do when "ripping"...

..but for anyone who can't play a work, thinking that they know how to play it is firstly daft, and secondly going to halt any developing understanding of technique and potentially result in an ultimate long term failure on occasions where you turn out to be wrong.

Exactly when can you play a work well enough to know how it's played?  I obviously think I do play this work well enough to know the 'up' arpeggios are ripped.  I won't turn out to be wrong, but it's going to be not only a very long but also the most difficult road.

[ajspiano]

Exactly when can you play a work well enough to know how it's played?

practically never. - or at least certainly not when at the relatively early stage of developing technique through studying chopin etudes. There is always room to better understand.

I obviously think I do play this work well enough to know the 'up' arpeggios are ripped.

Thats fine, I never intended to suggest otherwise - I was only questioning it because its strikes me as odd to open a thread asking why something is difficult, in regard to something you personally find challenging, only to assert that you know unequivocally how to do it. Its just not the case, if you know how to do it, you wouldn't need to ask and you'd be able to do it.

I won't turn out to be wrong

You can't possibly know that, just like I can't possibly know that you will be wrong (not that I mean to suggest you are) - its not as simple as one ideal covers the whole piece - there is far more to deal with and it relates to the entire mechanism as used to make a reality out of a sound image. You can't sit back "ripping" your arps forever. You will hit a wall because you're solving a technical (physical) issue not a musical one. That process, and as werc pointed out is valuable..  but its maybe 10% of the level of control required in the long run. Accuracy at tempo is, while admittedly a big difficult one, just a baby step.

There are numerous ways to play this accurately at tempo, few of them will also have musical control. Until you can actually play it at tempo, the whole way through, accurately and musically, your point that "ripping" is 100% correct is completely invalid. You just don't know, and you can't know. You do not have the required experience.

[j_menz]

its strikes me as odd to open a thread asking why something is difficult, in regard to something you personally find challenging, only to assert that you know unequivocally how to do it. Its just not the case, if you know how to do it, you wouldn't need to ask and you'd be able to do it.

Oh AJ, please don't discourage. I print these threads off to help me get to sleep at night.

On topic. I don't play 10/1 (though I've looked at it) so can't speak from experience of this particular piece.  But the thread has become more general in certain respects.

You know that you can play a piece when you can play it at the tempo you desire (and a standardly acceptable one if your preference is much different to that), without strain or effort, and with full control over the musical expression. Until that time, you cannot say you are platying it the "right" way, though experience may well suggest to you that you are on the right track. All options are open, though, and you should explore them.

I get heartily sick of hearing about arms or fingers or wrists as (according to the writer) being the whole be all and end all of piano technique. They all have their role to play, and what that is in any particular passage depends on what works to allow you to play it (in the sense above).

[ajspiano]

Oh AJ, please don't discourage. I print these threads off to help me get to sleep at night.

I would leave it well alone, only that I'm certain young aspiring pianists without a developed objective mind read this stuff.

You know that you can play a piece when you can play it at the tempo you desire (and a standardly acceptable one if your preference is much different to that), without strain or effort, and with full control over the musical expression. Until that time, you cannot say you are platying it the "right" way, though experience may well suggest to you that you are on the right track. All options are open, though, and you should explore them.

To be perfectly frank I might even suggest that even at that point it's a little arrogant to suggest that your way (and more specifically, the way you put it into words) is the 100% right one. The experience is too subjective. Everyone has to find their own correct feel, you can only be sent in a general direction by someones guidance.

[j_menz]

To be perfectly frank I might even suggest that even at that point it's a little arrogant to suggest that your way (and more specifically, the way you put it into words) is the 100% right one.

Indeed, I hadn't meant to suggest that. Since we all have different physiques; different leverages and different physical strengths to suggest the "right" way for me is the "right" way for everyone is just silly. I meant m,erely that one has to find one's own right way using all the tools in ones toolbox as appropriately and effectively as possible.

[ajspiano]

Indeed, I hadn't meant to suggest that.

I know you wouldn't suggest that - I was more concerned that someone else might start thinking they know everything once they can play through a piece.

[j_menz]

was more concerned that someone else might start thinking they know everything once they can play through a piece.

I'm more concerned about people who reach that conclusion even though they can't.

[ajspiano]

I'm more concerned about people who reach that conclusion even though they can't.

..and when those people start offering up their ideas as an unequivocal truth I begin to feel quite sick.

The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but the illusion of knowledge.

[hmpiano]

I would leave it well alone, only that I'm certain young aspiring pianists without a developed objective mind read this stuff.

If you're saying young aspiring pianists shouldn't attempt to 'rip' their way through op 10 no 1 then I'd have to disagree.  They (and others) should try it before dismissing it out of hand.

[ajspiano]

If you're saying young aspiring pianists shouldn't attempt to 'rip' their way through op 10 no 1 then I'd have to disagree.  They (and others) should try it before dismissing it out of hand.

I said nothing to that end, nor did I dismiss it as a potentially sound movement. My only concern is with the possibilty that a young aspiring pianist may not objectively test it because your presenting it as 100% correct. This leads to blind faith in something that may not work in the first place  - either because the experience you state you have is not sufficient for you to know, or because readers may misinterpret the idea even if it is right.

[hmpiano]

Because that, as I see it, is how it's played.

I am being quite clear here.  Yes, I am 100% certain - does that make it the truth?  To be followed blindly?  I've merely put Abby Whiteside's prescription to 'rip' arpeggios to the test.

[nyiregyhazi]

I am being quite clear here.  Yes, I am 100% certain - does that make it the truth?  To be followed blindly?  I've merely put Abby Whiteside's prescription to 'rip' arpeggios to the test.

You've also insisted that it's the right way to play, despite having posted audio evidence of yourself failing that test (even in a practise method that completely omits the big difficulty of closing then opening the hand at speed).

"try this" is not good enough, because people with poor finger technique often achieve short term improvement by pushing through a stiff hand. Then they hit a wall that they will never break through without learning to move the fingers.

Only by understanding that whiteside's idea is objectively nonsense, as a supposed reality, can we use it to help some without hindering others.

[nyiregyhazi]

Exactly when can you play a work well enough to know how it's played?  I obviously think I do play this work well enough to know the 'up' arpeggios are ripped.  I won't turn out to be wrong, but it's going to be not only a very long but also the most difficult road.

A classic psychological trick of self delusion. Kid yourself that you're on the right path, by portraying it as a slow and difficult one.then the absence of anything to show for it can be pretended not to point to failure. You get to protect your delusions of being infallible and even get to pretend that you're being noble for taking the difficult route. The only route here is a long winding road to nowhere- and you should piss off and stop using these forums to try to drag others down with you.

The only saving grace is that your ignorance is severe enough for you to post examples of the abysmal results that you achieve, without realising how comprehensively they discredit your assertions about what you think is right.

[hmpiano]

I've not read anything passed 'Abby Whiteside is full of sh*t' so you're wasting your time mate.  Who would want a discussion with someone who lacks all civility?

[p2u_]

[reading mode off]

@ hmpiano

ajspiano has given you an EXCELLENT description of what makes this etude difficult, even if you try to tackle it with your understanding of what Abby Whiteside really meant:

Breaks or weaknesses in the structure throw the mechanism off balance and it leaves the performer in a position where they must make a wide fast leap without a stable starting point. It's enormously difficult to do that accurately.

I couldn't have stated it any better.
Questions you need to ask yourself in the process are (among others):
1) Where is my thumb? Is it tense or supple? Does it gently (and quite closely) accompany each "striking" finger going up the keyboard or is it stiff, up in the air somewhere, ruining the stability of the hand?
2) Is my third finger tense because it wants to compensate for the perceived weakness of 4 and 5 (one of Chopin's obsessions)?

* * * * *

By posting that mp3-file, you show that you have completely misunderstood (and therefore gravely misrepresented!) Abby Whiteside. She never stated that a car doesn't need wheels. She was just against the fingers being the "engine".

What you need to play with her technique are still active, responsive fingertips, which are clearly and severely lacking in the mp3 recording you posted. This is also the reason for "splashing". I suggest you work really hard on that, otherwise your practice will get you nowhere.

This may sound extreme, but I suggest you play trills with all finger combinations (fingers *have to* be responsive to pull that off), especially 4-5. The tempo of your weakest trill should be the tempo you can play this etude in.

Another temporary solution would be to play all intervalls as double notes in slow to moderate tempo: fifth (1-2), fourth (2-4), third (4-5), third (1-5), fifth (1-2), fourth (2-4) and so on throughout the etude. This is good training in proprioception and no more "splasing" should occur, ever.

* * * * *

And now something unpleasant:
I was very surprised and rather disappointed that the mp3 recording you posted passed your judgement of what good 'ripping' entails. I would have expected something like the arpeggios in op. 10 no 11; that's what I call good "ripping". This suggests that you are not qualified to give any advice in this section of the forum on what is "right" in terms of piano technique and performance. Your territory is the "Student corner" where you are strongly advised to read only and modestly keep silent. You may consider this sweet revenge on behalf of a woman that has long been dead and is therefore not able to defend herself against misrepresentation of any of her (surprisingly bright) theories.
[reading mode back on]

Paul

[nyiregyhazi]

Personally, I have to say that whiteside should be held 100% responsible for such misunderstandings. She used language that implies literal reality, but which is completely impossible. Nobody need do so to make even the most subjective point. Anyone who reads her at face value is the victim of her misunderstanding- they have not misunderstood what she wrote but rather misunderstood what she wasn't able to express. although she does speak of unified whole, she says the fingers only transit an arm swing and power comes higher up. I believe she even made the fallacious claim that longer levers transit power better than short ones. Anyone who places intent to do that literally is doomed.

I made all the same misunderstandings keyboardclass did for a long time. While I blame myself for not noticing the fact that her approach hinges on an arm that bobs once per note, I took her at face value and suffered. She may have been a good teacher in person, but she was a dreadful writer who didn't know how to make her point and who used bogus facts and pseudo science as a result. In more cases than not, her advice will encourage arm shoves through a stiff hand. It may not be what she wanted, but it's exactly what much of her language carelessly asks for. Elsewhere, her idea of physical rhythm is great- but if you don't know what to ignore elsewhere, she actively hinders you from finding such a flow. What really happens in such a state is that the arm leads and the fingers do the moving. upper arm power is exactly what makes things choppy and stiff.