Yes, as I recall in the other thread you do not believe any advice can be transferable to more than one context. So obviously you were making a rule for this passage alone and it should not be applied to a single note elsewhere? You could have made that a lot clearer, because it sure as hell looked like you were making a general rule to me...
Well it is obvious we are talking about a specific situation, does it need to be more clear? Why would I want to talk about something else?I wonder why you didn't provide a real answer instead confusing matters even further with your salad and nit-picking. I guess you think that looks clever, it doesn't you know. lol
Quite, theres one rule for a situation where it's vastly more difficult to use three twice in a row on a position change. And another for a situation in which it's really very straightforward to use three twice for a position change. Ban the easy one and keep the hard one.
Alternatively you could avoid introducing what was clearly the type of generalised concept that you argued against in the other thread (and which you clearly used as a general concept for selecting your fingering).
This is senseless to me.
That was my point, seeing as you obviously missed it.
You are applying a needless constructed rule to this passage (supposedly for the sake of avoiding difficulty). but the same rule will be dropped as soon as you have the much greater difficulty of using 3 twice in thirds.
The context of the piece does not demand avoiding any middle finger twice (unless that creates extra hand position changes). Your externally constructed concept that you tacked on does. You can argue the toss all you like, this isn't going anywhere interesting...
There was no point to miss.Absolutely irrelevant to the context we are discussing. You keep trying to draw in random examples which are out of context to the discussion of this thread. This doesn't look good for you to say the least. If you want to use repeated middle fingers for two different adjacent chords go ahead and do so but it will be less efficient.
fine, I use a fingering that is widely accepted as the norm for lightning fast adjacent thirds. Yet which is "less efficient" for the exact same notes played at a considerably more comfortable speed in this piece. We'll leave it there.
I'm sorry you did not outline your fingering for this contextual example. You merely wrote paragraphs. It only takes a few lines to write all the fingering out. Don't be scared, as soon as we see your fingering we will see how professional you are.
As I stated earlier, 13 and 35 in the middle of bar 2- as is used as the standard fingering for A major thirds.
That is not outlining it at all, write ALL the fingering out like I did. Just one little part even a beginner student could do that. I disagree with this fingering choice as after the 13 we need to go down, if we use 3 we have to move the hand more to get down the keyboard, with 14 you will not have to move as much also using the different middle fingers will promote less tension compared to overusing the 3.
For the previous two I use 13 then 14 (EDIT- sorry 23 24) , to avoid three threes in a row. However, I see not the slightest reason to avoid the same two in a row from A major thirds.
I'm not going to provide you with anything more than that, as you routinely refuse a variety of members the courtesy of replying to their questions and following up on requests for elaboration.
I don't write out anything but significant or unusual fingerings in my scores and I'm not going to write out every last detail to please a poster who shows no such courtesy to other posters. Make whatever you will of the details I already provided.
Last time I gave you an example (in response to your persistent requests), after all the hot air about wanting one you refused to either attempt it or follow up on it. I don't jump through hoops for time wasters.
Just write all your fingering out already. In the context to this piece it is not to be treated just like a A major thirds because the bounds of the notes do not move as far as performing an A major third scale. The bounds are tighter thus we can use more effective fingers, this is the context we have to deal with. It is obvious you lack the experience to apply that.
Says the poster who claims to be a concert artist yet refuses to offer any of his playing to the group and who tries to keep his identity secret at all costs.
14 works fine there. So does 13- in a context that is overwhelming easier than that where it is used by pianists as a matter of routine.
If you think the difference between 13 and 14 is actually of any tremendous significance, you're thinking too hard about this.
I'm equally at home with either.
The practical difference is basically nil.
The passage would have to be ultra fast for the cm or so difference in how far you must move to become relevant. It isn't.
The usual resort to personal attacks makes it clear that this is just yet another contest that you perceive against me as an a individual- not an honest discussion about what works or an exchange of opinion. I'll report this renewed spate of ad hominems to the moderators. Your fingering works fine for me. What I don't like is the silly rule against other fingerings that economise equally well in terms of hand positions.
Why are you lying now? Lol there are examples of my live playing uploaded to pianostreet.With 13 you will move more compared to 14.Incorrect. You obviously do not value the art of fingering.Both promote a different feeling, 13 is lesser in this contextual example.Maybe for your limited knowledge.Ultra fast? lol No the speed here is enough to promote more efficient movement such as using 14 over 13 in this instance.Personal attacks? lol. Good try. We are discussing contextual situation yet you still want to spew forth generalized responses which is evident in your first responses here. In fact you spent paragraphs trying to show how others are wrong where you should simply write the correct path. You refuse to provide the fingering solution for some unknown reason, probably because you do not want people to see what you really know.
Where is your playing uploaded?
(I'm not in the habit of "lying" about anything that would be so easily exposed)
I recall previous threads in which you refused to give your identity
In fact, you denied it when I named the chap who is an Australia pianist who has a profile elsewhere under your same username and another one under your email address. Why did you lie about that? What are you hiding?
Lelle's gave a very good fingering for the poster and I have not the the slightest interest in jumping though hoops for a poster who repeatedly demanded examples from me and then refused to follow up on it when I provided one, in a prior thread.
The poster has a fingering, your request is insincere and I have no interest in rigidly prescribing individual fingers for every note.
If you want to argue about such minute details of fingering from a narrow minded viewpoint any further, then I'll leave you to it. There's no point arguing with a person who cannot appreciate how many alternatives can work in such a passage.
PS I tried 14 and I actually prefer to move more from 13. It opens the hand more pleasantly, for my taste. I wouldn't be so ignorant as to rule out 14 but I prefer opening with a bigger movement that there is ample time for. Being smaller is not automatically better.
Fingering is an artform, it is not a mathematical manual of sameness. You need to understand the context to understand the fingering.
You also need to understand how many different possibilities can function. It's ironic that you say that, given how vigorously you are arguing for a single possibility, rather than for a broad manner of fingering in groups (which gives many possible executions).
What cracks me up is that a few bars of music can generate more words than the complete works of Shakespeare.
The context does not allow for a huge amount of difference as you are trying to say it does. If you indeed think there is multiple possibilities then please list out all the VALID different fingering opportunities that you see (although we are all still waiting to see a single example of the best fingering solution for you). If you don't want to then I really cannot take what you say here seriously at all.
Those with a broad view will see many possibilities. Look how many Cortot provided for the chopin 3rds etudes. If you think seriously think staccato double notes only have one possible fingering, there would be little point himself in even a Cortot or Horowitz himself trying to dissuade you.
Compare your fingering with lelle's and my own for bar 2. All three are fine.
Errr, we have context here already, why do you always randomly go to different sources? Funny. There are unnecessary positions used in lelle's example which I would expect from a student but not from a teacher as yourself, also your fragmented suggestions do not make sense, if you could write out your suggestion in a neater fashion so we don't have to read ten different posts to piece it together.
So a context of slow staccato double notes leaves fewer possibilities than fast legato double notes? If you think allusion to context is going to help with this, you're kidding yourself. The individual context of the two cases is exactly what makes the argument that this instance only works with a single fingering so ridiculous.
Slow Staccato? Where is that in this context? Fast Legato? Where is that in this context? We are talking about a specific situation in this thread, YOU are trying to talk about other things. Why are you doing such crazy things? Why don't you talk about this piece and the exact notes and the exact fingers like other members? The more you avoid the actual topic which has a DIRECT question the more you look like someone who doesn't actually know what they are talking about.
I'm not interested. This isn't about fingering. It's about your perceived feud with me. I'm not interested in arguing on such terms.
PS context also means putting things into a big picture alongside other specifics.
I'm not sure what makes you think referencing the word context would allow you to separate a single situation and quarantine it from bring contextualised against the rest of piano playing.
You're asking for passages to be exempted from context in a vacuum, not placed into it.
? so how do you play major scales in thirds without ever using 3 twice in a row?
Dohnanyi says (going up) 13 24 35 or 12 13 24 35 depending on where the black keys are. But I've never tried that in an actual piece.
Do you have to play it in tempo? I would probably use something like this:
Good fingering. Best book for studying double notes: Moszkowski (attachment)
Thanks for the link. That's an interesting document. Some of those fingerings are different from anything I remember from my student days. I was looking, for example, at his fingering for the ascending chromatic scale in minor thirds, where in the right hand he has 2 moving from D# to E and from Bb to B, so that he never has to use the thumb for consecutive tones. I was wondering how well that might work with some passages in Chopin's etude in thirds (Op 25/6, a piece which I have found particularly challenging, if played at tempo). I wonder: At the tempo of that etude, would the second finger slide from the black key to the white key, or would the keys be played with separate "impulses"?Of course, I'll need to try it out for myself, but it's difficult to judge what would work better in the long run when you've been doing it the old way for decades.
I would follow the fingering that Lelle gave... Where you can't play it well, you can probably skip a note or so. I doubt that the jury will mind. I think the point is to see how well you can cooperate on short notice, and not how fast you can learn to play an A-major scale in thirds... Oh, I'm sorry... To play the piece you actually posted.
As I recall, this is chopin's own fingering, isn't it? I think he prescribed it for the thirds etude? I'd definitely adopt it.
If you slide passively the knuckle falls and squashes the hand. The trick is to slide due to a genuine finger activation, so the knuckle is kept up and the space between thumb and 2 stays open.
In one way or another...
It's impossible to say no to a diva. Believe me. I know.
Dang this is gonna suck soooooooo bad.I need an excuse in case I can't live up to expectations!!!
You fell on your board and hit your head?
Of course not! . That like NEVER happens. I've haven't even seen anyone hit their head before.How about...I was skating and I hurt my hand or something.Noo... That's too convenient. I need a good one.
3. Get used to singers throwing music at you. If you play for opera auditions you are expected to handle harder stuff than this and play it in tempo (but following the singer's rubato and breathing), pretty much note-perfect.
She already gave me something harder what the heck?!
Better get hard at work then. I'm with Birba, there's no escape!Oh, and you never want to see the hissy fit if you stuff it up! Never!!!! ***shudders
"stuff it up"?
Topic: I am soo dead 