Glenn Gould, Bach, Non-Legato, HELP???

[danielbraga]

Hello guys.
This is the first time i'm posting here, and need your help already.It's quite a peculiar situation, but there it goes:
I've heard from many people that Glenn Gould NEVER used legato in his Bach recordings, always non-legato.But, I've listened to many recordings of Gould in which he seems to be using legato sometimes, but people would always tell me "No, he never uses legato".Well, guess what , this made me confused as hell about how a legato touch and a non-legato touch should be.Take a look at his recording of invention 1 :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzU7xQmmXGE.To me , it seems he uses legato quite a bit in the sixteenth notes.

So what do you guys think?If I am really listening to it wrong, could you guys post some examples, or give me some advice in legato/non-legato playing?

Thanks a lot.

[nyiregyhazi]

They're just wrong. Why do you doubt your own judgement? One part of it is the dry acoustic that he recorded in. It stops anything sounding ultra-legato in the way pianists sound in an ambient acoustic, but he certainly didn't only play non-legato. That said, there are better examples than the invention- which is heavily detached most of the time, with just short groupings in legato. Sometimes he does relatively long lines in legato.

[iansinclair]

Glenn Gould does have a reputation for an unusually "dry" approach.  I've always felt that his objective was to ensure real clarity in his playing.  Trouble is, there is a long gradation between a slightly overlapping legato -- which I don't think he ever used, or at least rarely -- to a clear, but detached, legato, which is hard to do consistently, to detached -- a clear but very short separation between notes -- to a baroque stacatto (each note held for half its written value) and so on.  Mr. Gould, I think, tried to use the touch which he felt would best clarify the music as written.

That said... where I have a choice of listening to Gould or Landowska, I'll take Landowska every time!

[nyiregyhazi]

Glenn Gould does have a reputation for an unusually "dry" approach.  I've always felt that his objective was to ensure real clarity in his playing.  Trouble is, there is a long gradation between a slightly overlapping legato -- which I don't think he ever used, or at least rarely

I don't think that's strictly true- except as a generalisation. In the late Goldbergs he often uses some extremely melodic overlapping legato.  There are quite a few moments in the start of the clip I linked. I'm not sure if he overlaps much from the finger, but he does use a lot of short pedals that blend two notes together for an instant.

[danielbraga]

Wow thank you all guys.Really, it did not make any sense at all that he would ALWAYS use non-legato.In this Invention 1, I realise he uses a lot of non-legato, but I can really notice some legato in some parts of it.
But I have another doubt:I've always been taught that when playing legato, you play the notes so as you cannot hear "empty spaces" between the notes, that is , AS you release a key, you press the other , and always did it like this.But some folks seem to say something about an overlap, which actually goes against what I've been taught.I always imagined the notes should not overlap each other in a perfect legato, but just be played so as there is no space between then.Could you guys also clarify this up for me?

[nyiregyhazi]

Wow thank you all guys.Really, it did not make any sense at all that he would ALWAYS use non-legato.In this Invention 1, I realise he uses a lot of non-legato, but I can really notice some legato in some parts of it.
But I have another doubt:I've always been taught that when playing legato, you play the notes so as you cannot hear "empty spaces" between the notes, that is , AS you release a key, you press the other , and always did it like this.But some folks seem to say something about an overlap, which actually goes against what I've been taught.I always imagined the notes should not overlap each other in a perfect legato, but just be played so as there is no space between then.Could you guys also clarify this up for me?

Different people describe it different ways- there's no standard in the use of terminology. But by legato I'd generally expect a slight overlap. Considering the impossibility of absolute perfection of timing, there's essentially either a small gap or a small overlap every time. I'd expect there to be no gap at all (and hence some overlap) to be to be defined as legato at all. If anything I'd often associate legato to a significant overlap to smooth things together- rather than think of it as suggesting notes that are just about joined. There's no term that I'm aware of for just about connecting, at least not a standard one ("semi-legato" tends to imply slightly but almost imperceptibly detached) .

[danielbraga]

Thanks a lot.I am just going to bother you with one more question ;)Something I don't understand about non-legato touch is how are you supposed to play it fast as some pianists do sometimes?When I try it fast,either it sounds like legato, or like some kind of very fast staccato, always very different from what I hear from recordings(mostly Gould's).When playing non-legato fast, should I raise my fingers off the keys , of leave them sticked to them?And how should it played, after all?I know this questions are a bit hard to answer through internet, but it would really help me.

[nyiregyhazi]

Thanks a lot.I am just going to bother you with one more question ;)Something I don't understand about non-legato touch is how are you supposed to play it fast as some pianists do sometimes?When I try it fast,either it sounds like legato, or like some kind of very fast staccato, always very different from what I hear from recordings(mostly Gould's).When playing non-legato fast, should I raise my fingers off the keys , of leave them sticked to them?And how should it played, after all?I know this questions are a bit hard to answer through internet, but it would really help me.

It's difficult to give a meaningful answer to that- but I think avoiding arm pressure is the main thing. If you use quite a direct finger action that lengthens out to move the key, you contact the keybed quite directly. You can either do an instantaneous movement that gets bounced away in the instant you get there, or momentarily sustain the finger activity at the keybed, before releasing it altogether to let the key push you back up. Just don't press with the arm, or there's no sensitivity. The finger itself needs to judge the minute differences in whether you feel instant release or a short moment of continued contact first. I always used to get bogged down by the arm when attempting these things in the past, but it's almost impossible to judge unless you get the fingers making the differentiation. If the knuckle is falling down, it will never work.

[iansinclair]

It's difficult to give a meaningful answer to that- but I think avoiding arm pressure is the main thing. If you use quite a direct finger action that lengthens out to move the key, you contact the keybed quite directly. You can either do an instantaneous movement that gets bounced away in the instant you get there, or momentarily sustain the finger activity at the keybed, before releasing it altogether to let the key push you back up. Just don't press with the arm, or there's no sensitivity. The finger itself needs to judge the minute differences in whether you feel instant release or a short moment of continued contact first. I always used to get bogged down by the arm when attempting these things in the past, but it's almost impossible to judge unless you get the fingers making the differentiation. If the knuckle is falling down, it will never work.

Absolutely.  Not that the arm and wrist have to be rigid (they should be flexible -- certainly not tense!) but the motion is in the finger.  Consider: suppose that you have some form on non-legato on one set of notes -- say a sixteenth note figure -- against a legato quarter note figure.  That simply has to be in the fingers!

[danielbraga]

Lets see if I understood.

1.The time during I maintain each key depressed is controled by the key's natural upward motion , after depressed.
2.The move should be done entirely by the fingers, not by arm or wrists, but these should never be rigid.
3.My knuckles shouldn't go down.
4.The fingers don't come out of the keys, as in stacato.

Is that right?

[j_menz]

This is not to argue against the advice you have been given, but rather to supplement it. Don't try and perfect the motion from the descriptions of it only on its own and expect the sound you want to come out the other end; consider the sound you want and use the ideas presented above in your playing in order to produce the sound you envisage. Use that sound as your guide to finesse the movements.

[andreslr6]

This

This is not to argue against the advice you have been given, but rather to supplement it. Don't try and perfect the motion from the descriptions of it only on its own and expect the sound you want to come out the other end; consider the sound you want and use the ideas presented above in your playing in order to produce the sound you envisage. Use that sound as your guide to finesse the movements.

Your ear will be the one that will tell you if youīre doing it right or wrong, or if itīs missing something. No matter what you have to do, if it solves the music, it works; and if it doesnīt hurt you of course . Another thing Iīd like to add, my teacher always reminds me when playing non-legato to think as if Iīm pulling up my fingers, not pressing down the keys; of course, in reality you are moving downwards your fingers but the point is the sensation of pulling up quickly, almost just by keeping that in mind you automatically start getting the non-legato articulation.

And about GGīs use of legato and non-legato, or stacatto, I was taught as a point of reference, not as a rule, to use legato with short intervals, specially seconds, and as they get bigger (thirds, 4ths, 5ths, octaves) you would start changing to non-legato, etc. The thing with articulation has to do with the baroque rhetoric and symbolism, like for example, a minor second represents sadness and thatīs why you play them legato etc. (Sorry, Iīm not trying to be accurate since I really donīt have the knowledge fresh, I have to consult sources again) Thatīs the reason why Bachīs music rarely has any slurs or articulation marks, because they had like this reference or code so they automatically knew if it was needed to be played legato or non-legato, etc. making the action of writing it down a limitation. Articulation as well as ornaments could also be improvised during the performance.

Listening to Glenn Gould I also learned it serves as a contrast. In a fugue, for example, a way to differentiate each voice is by playing each of them with a different articulation, or even play the theme with a different articulation every time it appears so you donīt repeat the same thing twice, letīs say the first fugue of the first WTC, you start with the first 4 seconds legato, then on the second voice you play those 4 seconds non-legato, etc.

The point is that the possibilities are practically infinite, and if it solves the music it works, so experiment with the possibilities. Itīs not just black and white.

[danielbraga]

I understand my ear should be my first resource when judging wheter i am doing right.As an example , in Gould's Praeludium 1:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikbQ4lThJGo, he plays left hand legato, right hand non-legato, right?

Another thing:it seems, for what it has been said here, that as opposed to legato, where arms and wrists moves should be used for the playing, non legato is focused  more on fingers, right?

I think having some general concepts as these help a lot, even though those should not be taken rigourously, and that the final judgement is to be made by your ear, as you guys said.

[andreslr6]

I understand my ear should be my first resource when judging wheter i am doing right.As an example , in Gould's Praeludium 1:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikbQ4lThJGo, he plays left hand legato, right hand non-legato, right?

Not precisely, heīs playing staccato actually, which helps him bring out an implicit 4th voice, although Bach wrote down just 3 explicit voices: the bass note, the tenor (left hand) and the arpeggio on the right hand. He plays the two lower voices on the left hand legato, and what you hear on the right hand is a bass note (the one played with the thumb which would be the mezzo), and two upper notes. Iīll take the first bar as an example, what he does on the right hand is he plays the first G and C legato and the upper E staccato, then he inverts the order on the second group playing G staccato and the upper C and E legato, this brings out the fourth voice which is the G in this bar, the A in the second bar, G in the third, etc., the mezzo; in fact, you can hear he actually lengthens every first note of this group in every bar I believe, making it instead of a 16th into a dotted 8th, and the articulation helps to highlight this effect. I hope I made myself clear .

The difference between staccato and non-legato is that staccato shortens the value of a note whereas non-legato is just creating a small gap between two notes without altering the value of the note. A good example of GGīs non-legato, and one of my favorites, is the D minor prelude from the second book, hereīs the video

And yes, non-legato is focused on the fingers, but if your playing non-legato on Prokofiev and itīs marked FF then youīll need your arms and bodyweight as well , but for Bach I doubt youīll need anything more than just your fingers for a non-legato.

[danielbraga]

well that video show exacly the effect I want to archieve, but for some reason, I seem unable to do it!Well I guess it's practice now.

[j_menz]

I understand my ear should be my first resource when judging wheter i am doing right.As an example , in Gould's Praeludium 1:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikbQ4lThJGo, he plays left hand legato, right hand non-legato, right?

Firstly, use your ears to guide your own playing, not Gould's.

Secondly, your ears are not merely there to judge the final product, they are there to guide you in producing it - part of a feedback loop to guide your actions; not sitting above it judging the outcome.

[danielbraga]

Firstly, use your ears to guide your own playing, not Gould's.

Secondly, your ears are not merely there to judge the final product, they are there to guide you in producing it - part of a feedback loop to guide your actions; not sitting above it judging the outcome.

Well, I understand that, the problem is I think in my head of a non-legato touch,when playing lets say, Praeludium C minor, but that thing I thought, which is exacly Glenn Gould's non-legato, seem not to be coming out.When playing slow sequences, its comes naturally, as well as when I play fast legato or fast staccato.Each of these touches seem to bring to me an specific feeling, something that just doesn't happen with fast non-legato.It just doesn't come out as I wish.

[j_menz]

Well, I understand that, the problem is I think in my head of a non-legato touch,when playing lets say, Praeludium C minor, but that thing I thought, which is exacly Glenn Gould's non-legato, seem not to be coming out.When playing slow sequences, its comes naturally, as well as when I play fast legato or fast staccato.Each of these touches seem to bring to me an specific feeling, something that just doesn't happen with fast non-legato.It just doesn't come out as I wish.

You start off with a desired sound and a produced sound which are some way apart (what you have described). You then try and move the produced sound towards the desired sound by changing what you are doing. A little further each time. You'll probably have one step forward, one step back for a bit - but that is useful too.  Eventually, you will get them to line up - what you produce is what you want to produce. And with practice, that process becomes faster and more natural each time.

[teosoleil]

Firstly, use your ears to guide your own playing, not Gould's.

Agreed.

~

(Somewhat)-off-topic, I just can't believe people who will insist and defend their obviously wrong opinion even when faced with direct evidence otherwise. Worse is the whole "NO LEGATO!" Bach philosophy that a lot of people seem to take to heart :| It's just silly and limiting and almost like a little system of oppression enforced upon us pianists.

Though everybody has their own views on interpretation, of course.

[andreslr6]

(Somewhat)-off-topic, I just can't believe people who will insist and defend their obviously wrong opinion even when faced with direct evidence otherwise. Worse is the whole "NO LEGATO!" Bach philosophy that a lot of people seem to take to heart :| It's just silly and limiting and almost like a little system of oppression enforced upon us pianists.

Though everybody has their own views on interpretation, of course.

I havenīt encountered any kind of philosophy like that, what I do see is a lack on work on the use and contrasts between legato, non-legato, staccato, dynamics, etc. Also, playing Bach all-legato would be somewhat "wrong", just like I said earlier, not everything is black and white. I more often see pianists playing edited versions of Bach's music that even come with dynamics and pedals, when Bach didn't even wrote down Tempo indications. Although in reality it's "OK", but the job of deciding dynamics, tempo, ornaments, slurs, etc. should be the pianist's/performer's job and not the editor's, that's like cheating and just save yourself from that work by copying another person's interpretation

Of course, we first need knowledge and experience to do this on our own, a teacher is a guide that can give you those tools so you don't end up doing random stuff just because "it sounds nice and pretty".

[p2u_]

Considering the impossibility of absolute perfection of timing, there's essentially either a small gap or a small overlap every time.

Wouldn't an overlap make it "stylistically wrong" (too romantic) though? Bach's sons described the "legato cantabile" style in his playing as a "string of pearls" which suggests a MINIMUM gap between the notes, not to be confused with non-legato. You mentally strive for legato, but don't do it explicitly, physically.

Paul

[nyiregyhazi]

Wouldn't an overlap make it "stylistically wrong" (too romantic) though? Bach's sons described the "legato cantabile" style in his playing as a "string of pearls" which suggests a MINIMUM gap between the notes, not to be confused with non-legato. You mentally strive for legato, but don't do it explicitly, physically.

Paul

Is the difference necessarily audible in minute quantities? Quite honestly, I'm not sure either way. For the sake of technical reasons, I prefer to cover everything with significant literal overlap at some point (so the arm definitely stays connected to the keyboard) and then clean it up later.

At this point, I'm not honestly sure whether the clean version involves a literal overlap or not- but my point is basically that there's no such thing as a perfect version. There must either be SOME tiny overlap or SOME tiny gap. If they are small enough, it's an interesting question as to whether the ear can actually detect the difference (and how big an impact it has on physical issues) or whether it's too close to call.

[cmg]

Wouldn't an overlap make it "stylistically wrong" (too romantic) though? Bach's sons described the "legato cantabile" style in his playing as a "string of pearls" which suggests a MINIMUM gap between the notes, not to be confused with non-legato. You mentally strive for legato, but don't do it explicitly, physically.

Paul

Not sure why a "string of pearls" approach to legato suggests a "MINIMUM" gap between notes.  Have you examined a string of pearls recently?  There are NO gaps in a good string!

As to Bach being played too "romantically," well, we only know from verbal descriptions, not aural records, how the music sounded when he played.  Surely the approach is dictated by content and the context:  lyrical passages beg for a lyrical approach.

The "gold standard" for approaching music is usually based on the first and foremost human instrument -- the voice.  Bach, certainly, had the voice in mind, probably unconsciously, for most of his music.  The instrumental works with primarily "motoric" content speak for themselves and require more articulation, less or no legato.  But, aside from that, the notion of "singing" is the impulse that characterizes, overwhelmingly, most music.

I wouldn't say making Bach's lyrical passages sing through the use of a good legato, stylistically wrong, hence "romantic."  Singing is singing.     

[p2u_]

Is the difference necessarily audible in minute quantities?

I think/feel it is, but I have nothing to prove it with. Even if it is not audible, I have reason to believe it is perceivable. Case in point:

My wife, who is NOT a musician and has never had any training whatsoever in that field, listens to Bach with great intuition. She says that attempts at "romantic" legato (overlapping) in Bach kill the "spiritual power" in the music. Go figure what that means...

She also prefers much of Richter's Bach to much of Gould's, mostly because the Soviets included the acoustics of the premises in the recording. Without the acoustics, she says, Bach doesn't "work". She's also the kind who prefers old scratchy records to contemporary CD's/DVD's.

Paul

[p2u_]

Not sure why a "string of pearls" approach to legato suggests a "MINIMUM" gap between notes.  Have you examined a string of pearls recently?  There are NO gaps in a good string!

The pearls may touch each other, but they do not blend, do they? They are actually not even glued to each other.

EDIT: I'd like to add the following about legato tone ideals at that time. Reginald Gerig (Great Pianists and Their Technique) describes Forkel as saying about J.S. Bach's style of playing and about the transition from one key to another:
"so that the two tones are neither disjoined from each other nor blended together" and "Some persons play too stickily, as if they had glue between their fingers; their touch is too long, because they keep the keys down beyond the time. Others have attempted to avoid this defect and play too short, as if the keys were burning hot. This is also a fault. The middle path is the best."

I think you can very well tie notes physically together, while at the same time, it will not be perceived as legato. On the other hand, you can also play a superlight staccato (called "perle") that will be perceived as legato (Horowitz knew how to do that). Legato is NOT per se physically tying notes; it's the creation of a straight and logical tone line with no sense of jerkiness, the same ideal GOOD singers aim for.

Paul

[nyiregyhazi]

I think/feel it is, but I have nothing to prove it with. Even if it is not audible, I have reason to believe it is perceivable. Case in point:

My wife, who is NOT a musician and has never had any training whatsoever in that field, listens to Bach with great intuition. She says that attempts at "romantic" legato (overlapping) in Bach kill the "spiritual power" in the music. Go figure what that means...

She also prefers much of Richter's Bach to much of Gould's, mostly because the Soviets included the acoustics of the premises in the recording. Without the acoustics, she says, Bach doesn't "work". She's also the kind who prefers old scratchy records to contemporary CD's/DVD's.

Paul

I think it's worth distinguishing between romantic overlapping and that which exists purely to ensure there is not a gap in tone. There is necessarily either some gap or some overlap (the idea of flawless timing is purely theoretical) so it's not all about the romantic style of overlap with associated smearing rather than tight clarity. Minute overlap can still be clean, without obligation to resort to minute gaps.

Also, given how important the romantic overlap is in scarlatti, is it really off limits in Bach? It would not be my norm, but clean articulation (especially if with slight gaps) would be limiting. I thought I recalled richter using considerable legato?

[p2u_]

Also, given how important the romantic overlap is in scarlatti, is it really off limits in Bach? It would not be my norm, but clean articulation (especially if with slight gaps) would be limiting. I thought I recalled richter using considerable legato?

I'm not a specialist on Scarlatti. Few can play his music really well. Horowitz could; Richter couldn't (he admitted that himself). I do want to make a few general comments as a reply.

First of all Scarlatti and Bach are different schools. If we take singing as the norm, then you can say that the characteristic qualities of each school tend to follow tendencies found in the languages. The English school is "mouthy", the French school lightly "nasal", the German school heavier, "guttural", and the Italian school is "open-throated" with round vowels etc. One cannot sing a Bach cantata with the quality of the educated/cultivated scream the Italians use, for example. Singing is not just singing.

Second, I tried to indicate in my following post (reply to cmg's post) that Legato as such is not about physically tying notes (singers cannot even do that really). We may be talking past each other. If so, then my apologies. If I'm not mistaken, the technique of "overlapping legato" for Scarlatti was something Ralph Kirckpatrick introduced (I haven't been able to locate any earlier sources that prescribe it), who was a musicologist and harpsichordist and certainly not a contemporary of Mr. Scarlatti. There are more than enough sources that indicate what Scarlatti depicts in his music. No reason to go into it because here we are dealing with Bach. Even if overlapping legato would be acceptable in certain places in Scarlatti's music, I think we are requiring of students that they work against the very nature of the instrument and against the norms of good musical taste if we set it as the norm for what good legato is.
P.S.: Richter did not only use "considerable legato"; I think he used perfect legato in his Bach. A good example of what that is was unfortunately removed from YouTube: the unforgettable Emil Gilels playing Mozart's D minor Fantasia, virtually without pedal. I've seen quite a few masters play the lines in all kinds of music legato, without pedal, using only their pinkies. Try that. It's in the mind, not in physically tying keys with the fingers. It's just the suggestion of a straight, simple, logical, fluent tone line.

Paul

[j_menz]

A good example of what that is was unfortunately removed from YouTube: the unforgettable Emil Gilels playing Mozart's D minor Fantasia, virtually without pedal.

Nothing is gone forever:

This may neot be the exact recording you had in mind, but it well illustrates your point.

[cmg]

This is stunning playing.  And, of course, there are touches of pedal, and I suspect many subtle applications of half-pedal, quarter-pedal and hummingbird fluttering of the foot for all we know.  Plus, the acoustics of this particular venue are quite resonant and beautiful.

I suppose I'm trying to say that the greatest masters have managed to use the resource of the damper pedal to soften, "liquify," point and project tones -- WITHOUT blurring.  The pedal is not the enemy of the Baroque, unless it's used badly.  Masterful pedaling is totally unobtrusive yet ubiquitous throughout any composition.  It's how we pianists turn our instrument into an orchestra will full sonority.  I don't mean blurring.  I mean enhancing.

This is no violation of Baroque performance practice.  It's allowing the music of Bach, Scarlatti to bloom on our particular instrument.  If you listen to recordings of Landowska on her behemoth harpsichord, you hear enormous waves of sonority.  I think we are permitted to do the same.  It's all in the service of great music, after all.  Clarity, however, is the watchword.   

[danielbraga]

Could someone post some good examples of non-legato touch, so I can have some guidance in how to make it sound right?Thanks a lot.

[nyiregyhazi]

First of all Scarlatti and Bach are different schools. If we take singing as the norm, then you can say that the characteristic qualities of each school tend to follow tendencies found in the languages. The English school is "mouthy", the French school lightly "nasal", the German school heavier, "guttural", and the Italian school is "open-throated" with round vowels etc. One cannot sing a Bach cantata with the quality of the educated/cultivated scream the Italians use, for example. Singing is not just singing.

Good points- but I don't like generalisations as limiters. I agree much about the concept of "legato" without literal connection, but to my ear the C sharp minor fugue from book I simply does not work with (EDIT- I meant WITHOUT) literal connected legato as the norm. I couldn't play it any other way than with some degree of overlap in the opening subject. Gould works wonders with a little detaching, but what about Fisher and Feinberg? Are they "wrong"? It's not as simple as merely either being either romantic or more traditionally stylistic when it comes to legato. You can do smooth legato in a way that retains clarity of voices.

If so, then my apologies. If I'm not mistaken, the technique of "overlapping legato" for Scarlatti was something Ralph Kirckpatrick introduced (I haven't been able to locate any earlier sources that prescribe it), who was a musicologist and harpsichordist and certainly not a contemporary of Mr. Scarlatti.

Sure- that would be my very point. I doubt if there's any evidence that calls for it. It simply sounds poorer if you decide that it's "wrong" to do it. While I might do it less in Bach, I could not ban it based on a concept any more than I could in Scarlatti (where I sincerely doubt whether the historical argument for it as really any stronger than for Bach).

P.S.: Richter did not only use "considerable legato"; I think he used perfect legato in his Bach.

Surely it would be considered as a very mild overlap rather than a very mild separation? I agree that overlapping can be overdone, but I don't think we should simply it to overlap in general is bad and that slight gaps are always the more "correct" approach.

[nyiregyhazi]

Could someone post some good examples of non-legato touch, so I can have some guidance in how to make it sound right?Thanks a lot.

In this case, I feel it's necessary to go totally in the face of standard advice. Don't start from a sound and try to execute it- whether it's from an external party or purely from within your own head. In this case, you must learn a quality of motion first and then observe what sound results from it, via experiment. Then decide what musical uses and applications would be appropriate from the sounds you have learned to access and start putting them into practise. Once the association between movement and sound is inside you, you can start to go straight from a mental image of sound to intent to execute it. However, start that without knowing this very specific quality and you'll probably both screw up your technique and frustrate yourself.

I say that from direct experience. I was clueless for years about how to execute those tiny notated divisions in Mozart- where the phrase mark seems to suggest separating notes that have a very clear need of being musically connected. Whether I went with an inner image or tried to follow instructions, I used a bad quality of movement that caused stiffness and loss of control. The stronger my attempt to execute the phrasing, the more I ended up doing bad qualities of movement that were not versatile or predictable enough for worthy results.

In short, what you need to learn is an arm movement that is ONLY horizontal- with not a single bob in the whole thing. Practise that through simple 5 finger groups, at a slow pace- with a totally continuous arm motion, with not even the slightest stop for each finger. Every key is moved by the finger- the arm provides no downward force but simply drifts towards the next finger that is due, as if to remind it when to do something. Next up, make the exact same arm movement, to lead between the fingers, but separate them via release in the finger. That is absolutely the only difference. This applies equally to staccato or legato or mild non-legato. The quality of movement makes it possible to connect the relationship between sounds as Paul described, without literally connecting tones.

This basic and truly simple quality of motion is something that I honestly feel that I have only just begun to understand. My musical understanding has been expanded by knowing the movement- but nothing I could have known musically would have shown me the physical means that I had previously been lacking in, to make these things come out better. While practising Mozart the other day, I found that I can incorporate his phrasings exactly as marked- while still creating a sense of a long line that satisfies my musical conception of a phrase- rather than of infuriating units that stop and start and often butcher the music between the very notes that most need to be attached within a single logic. It's interesting to see the Gilels Mozart linked. I saw this a few years back but will watch again. I learned a lot today from teaching the principle described in the previous paragraph to a student in that very piece earlier today. The irony is that most people describe energy as coming from the arm in this quality- but the pure horizontal drifiting motion literally creates the very opposite. It eliminates up and down almost altogether (as the smooth drift just wont function if you bob at the same time)- so the fingers can produce the sound, in a way that is merely guided by the arm.

PS don't apply this to literally everything though- or you may withold the arm too much. Sometimes you need to rest down a bit more and make comparisons to ensure you don't get locked into a single mode. You need to keep the arm loose and free but it's the light drift that enables non-legato without bobbing. Constant bobbing is the enemy of everything in these issues.

[p2u_]

I don't think we should simply it to overlap in general is bad and that slight gaps are always the more "correct" approach.

I think we have reached the crux of it all: formalism kills.
EDIT: Also, I think Glen Gould's legacy is not meant to be listened to with headphones on; it sounds less dry when you get away from it a bit and make acoustics do its work. For example: play it in the living room and go make yourself a cup of tea. In the kitchen, you will hear something completely different. I'm sure Glen did everything exactly right and the critics who say he's "dry" should rethink their case...

Paul

[p2u_]

I think we have reached the crux of it all: formalism kills.

Since we are generally advised to listen to good singers, please allow me to give a case in point that explains how the premises can change things concerning execution to "get it right" so you just have to go against the formal rules to make it work. It's not too far away from Bach: Anu Komsi sings Villa-Lobos' Aria-Cantilena
When the vocalise returns (somewhere around 4:25), you are supposed to hum it (those are Villa-Lobos' instructions). Clearly, this didn't work in the premises, so the singer does it with her mouth slightly opened, directing the sound slightly through the nose to get the "con sordino" effect Villa-Lobos was aiming for. Her voice kind of blends with the string instruments... "Oh, my Gawd!" says your average vocal purist/methodist (they usually don't understand art and/or the listener's perception at all, and focus on the mechanics of singing only) - "She doesn't do what the composer asked her to do... Crucify!"...
P.S.: There is only one thing wrong with this performance: Had this Finnish artist consulted a native speaker of Portuguese, it would have been a near-perfect rendition.

Paul

[danielbraga]

Giving some new life to this thread, I just found this article/video about non-legato touches.The pianist explains that when playing portato, one should not deliberately aim on separating the notes, but rather strike them as a legato,but making separeted motions to hit each note, the opposite of the continuous arm movement in legato playing.May I trust this ?

https://practisingthepiano.com/?p=2073

[cmg]

May I trust this ?

https://practisingthepiano.com/?p=2073

Well, as far as trust goes, I couldn't say, but such micro-managing of gestures at the keyboard invariably results in phrasing that is lifeless.  Start with the phrase:  understand it, then shape it, as singers and string players do, giving breath to the endings-before-the-beginning, and allowing for an arch of time, almost imperceptible, between larger intervalic leaps.  Preparing, ever so subtly for the leap, the way singers and other instrumentalists do.  It makes music sound alive, flexible and not mechanical. 

THEN, take a look at the articulation.  Most of which, except in much of Bach, is marked.  How do you make choices? You use your musician's instincts.  It's really self-evident and since Bach is dead he won't call the "articulation police" on you.  Use your instincts the way Gould did.  Don't imitate him.  For godssakes, only he can play the way he plays.  He was a genius and, believe me, articulation was hardly his only concern.

If you obsess over articulation, you'll end up with nothing but finger exercises.  At least, that's the way it will sound to your audience. 

"Portato?"  Oh, please!

[danielbraga]

Well thanks Cmg.What I was actually looking for some kind of  basic non-legato move, for lets say, practice scales, arpeggios, and stuff.But as  I can see from your answers, this simply doesn't exists, and varies from piece to piece, from interpretation to interpretation.

To be honest I feel much better with this.I really don't like too rigid rules, when the matter is music.Music should above all , touch people's soul, and there are many ways to do it, but no strict recipe, as far as I can see.

[nyiregyhazi]

Well thanks Cmg.What I was actually looking for some kind of  basic non-legato move, for lets say, practice scales, arpeggios, and stuff.But as  I can see from your answers, this simply doesn't exists, and varies from piece to piece, from interpretation to interpretation.

To be honest I feel much better with this.I really don't like too rigid rules, when the matter is music.Music should above all , touch people's soul, and there are many ways to do it, but no strict recipe, as far as I can see.

There's no absolute rule- but bear in mind that there's a significant limit on what is POSSIBLE once you're at high speeds. The portato description can work well at slower tempos, but it's really important to have something that functions in high speed scales. If you get that right, you can do virtually anything you wish. If you get too caught up in arm bobbing (as I did myself for many years) there are severe limits on what you can do. If you're interested in something like what Gould does, I'd look for much smoother horizontal arm actions as your baseline. Nothing else is as versatile as that action- which also works in slower tempos too.

Also, it makes no sense to me to complain about practising articulation. What could be more useful in setting foundations? There are 1000 things that need to be learned before instincts will do them for you. You can't just neglect important things and expect to occur by magic. You might as well suggest that anyone who bothers to put in the groundwork of learning to play scales will not be able to play scales musically when they occur in music. It's all about what you do with it. Learning a musical skill is certainly not a bad thing.  If you haven't learned it you can't expect to be able to do it.

[danielbraga]

Also, it makes no sense to me to complain about practising articulation. What could be more useful in setting foundations? There are 1000 things that need to be learned before instincts will do them for you. You can't just neglect important things and expect to occur by magic. You might as well suggest that anyone who bothers to put in the groundwork of learning to play scales will not be able to play scales musically when they occur in music. It's all about what you do with it. Learning a musical skill is certainly not a bad thing.  If you haven't learned it you can't expect to be able to do it.

I'm not complaining about articulation practice, I know this is important , and it is exactly why I started this thread .I was just agreeing with cmg , when he points out very rigid rules are bad to musicality.

Anyway, it seems I still I cannot quite find this non-legato touch .So, as you pointed out, I've tried to avoid up and down arm movement, or course, without maitaining it rigid.Do you have other advices?I will keep on trying.

[nyiregyhazi]

I'm not complaining about articulation practice, I know this is important , and it is exactly why I started this thread .I was just agreeing with cmg , when he points out very rigid rules are bad to musicality.

Yes, it wasn't in reference to your points but to his. I agree that unbreakable rules are bad, but it makes no sense whatsoever to suggest that a pianist should not make the effort to learn how to do things deliberately and thoughtfully (rather than leave it to instinct) or that learning how to do things makes for staleness. If that were true we'd all do nothing but sightread all day. And if articulation were truly self-evident then everyone who doesn't do it well must be an idiot. I find such elitist arguments (always made by people who casually forget quite how much they were taught in order to make things become self-evident or instinctive) short-sighted and plain silly. If it should all be on instinct then obviously Schnabel must have been an unmusical buffoon. Or rather not...

Anyway, it seems I still I cannot quite find this non-legato touch .So, as you pointed out, I've tried to avoid up and down arm movement, or course, without maitaining it rigid.Do you have other advices?I will keep on trying.

Try the style of action described in this post.

https://pianoscience.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/fingers-core-of-piano-technique-part-i.html

I believe that the extending quality of movement is essential to speed with control in non legato touches. When you pull in an indirect line the reaction force will necessarily try to drag the wrist forward. When you aim mildly forward via the finger, it's much more direct- as the reaction simply comes straight back at you and can be absorbed by your arm. Find the path where the finger moves in the exact same path both when depressing the key and when letting the key return the finger to where it started. Otherwise you'll likely find yourself tightening up (in a bid to keep the finger at the ready and to stop the wrist getting pulled out of line) and spoiling it.

[p2u_]

such micro-managing of gestures at the keyboard invariably results in phrasing that is lifeless.

During performance, yes. Very well said. You are talking about how the process works in the mature artist.

The topic starter, though, is not there yet. He needs advice of the kind Graham Fitch gives to FEED his instincts. On his way there, during preparation, this "micro-managing of gestures" makes sense to try and find, create sound images that can later be recalled instinctively - the mere thought of this or that sound image will then create the movements.

This principle is one of the reasons the old school sounded so much better, so much more alive; they "micro-managed gestures" more at the preparation stage. Today's school teaches that it is enough to just think about it and "lo! It is done." How do you call that in English? Snake oil?

Paul

[danielbraga]

nyiregyhazi , your post seems really interesting, but wouldn't this kind of finger only action be harmful, or cause injury?At least, when playing legato , I was always told to use arm movement a lot.

[p2u_]

nyiregyhazi , your post seems really interesting, but wouldn't this kind of finger only action be harmful, or cause injury?At least, when playing legato , I was always told to use arm movement a lot.

If I may - no, it won't hurt if you can do it exactly as instructed.
P.S.: For slower movements you might just as well use your arm a bit or even your nose, your big toe if you like. The main thing is that you should MOVE WITH AN ARTISTIC PURPOSE. Just executing the "right movements" won't cut it.

Paul

[nyiregyhazi]

nyiregyhazi , your post seems really interesting, but wouldn't this kind of finger only action be harmful, or cause injury?At least, when playing legato , I was always told to use arm movement a lot.

It's a difficult thing to convey- but the key is you MUST NOT press down when doing this. Practise starting with a very low wrist and begin lifting it VERY slow indeed. Then lengthen the finger out through a key. Providing that you get the path of the finger right (so it doesn't pull back at all but rather aims minimally forwards) you literally cannot strain against the keybed. You are freeing yourself from it, not digging in.

The thing about this quality of free movement from the finger is that nothing else will produce high speed non legato. Arm bobs can be used in lower speeds, but they actuallly cause MORE strain, not less, if you attempt them while going fast. There's a certain point that cannot be passed with active arm pressure. I know people usually claim that it's arm energy that relieves the hand, but it's actually avoiding downward arm pressures that makes the fingers able to act without strain. The smooth arm drift that lightens the burden on the fingers is the only option, when you aim for the upper limits of execution. I write more about the background issues spread around my various blog posts, if you're interested- although I'm still working on the ones that will get right into these kinds of issues in a completely head-on fashion.

[danielbraga]

Found an interesting text by Forkel, about the proper touch and manner of playing Bach's works.

https://wwkbank.harpsichord.be/Griepenkerl.pdf

https://www.pianotechnique.net/reginald-gerig-on-j-s-bach-and-sons.html

[p2u_]

Found an interesting text by Forkel, about the proper touch and manner of playing Bach's works.

https://wwkbank.harpsichord.be/Griepenkerl.pdf

Yes, an interesting article, although some elements may confuse you (passages about arm weight, elbow, etc.). Roy Holmes on YouTube has some clips about this type of touch. You might actually be served better by watching those. Some swear by it; others got into trouble by doing something they thought they had understood. Be careful!
P.S.: I repeat, though, that you should not make movements for the sake of movements. Once you have found a convenient movement that gives good tone quality and is applicable at reasonable speed, you should practise it solely with the aim to 1) maintain convenience; 2) create the tone you expected.

Paul

[nyiregyhazi]

Yes, an interesting article, although some elements may confuse you (passages about arm weight, elbow, etc.). Roy Holmes on YouTube has some clips about this type of touch. You might actually be served better by watching those. Some swear by it; others got into trouble by doing something they thought they had understood. Be careful!
P.S.: I repeat, though, that you should not make movements for the sake of movements. Once you have found a convenient movement that gives good tone quality and is applicable at reasonable speed, you should practise it solely with the aim to 1) maintain convenience; 2) create the tone you expected.

Paul

I'm very skeptical personally. He does as he says for very short bursts, but when starts playing longer passage I'm not convinced he's really doing what he claims he is. If you use that touch when playing fast, the knuckles will get dragged higher and higher, making the path of action so indirect that you can barely access the keys with it. At this point, I suspect that some people actually gain an instinct for the extending action of fingers- because anything else becomes quite so unnatural. Similarly if you're playing a long note. If you scratch back first, you need to switch to a lengthening activity to find comfortable stability while keeping the key down. The problem is that if you take Holmes at face value, there's a good danger that instead of finding the instinct for something totally different to what he described, you might end up in all kinds of bother from trying to do as he says. I think this could actually cause serious tensions and possible injury. It's exactly this kind of thing that took people away from the finger schools. Finger technique is essential, but this description is from the dark ages.