How to develop "touch"

[nyiregyhazi]

Your problem is that you wish to know how to play the piano.  That can't be done, you can only play the piano but because the desire to know is so strong the mind fills that hole, as it does for our blind spot.  It fills it with useless rubbish though!  That leads you astray.

Your problem is that you neither know how to play the piano to a high level, nor have the ability to do so- as evidenced by your youtube account. Which is why you instead pollute forum with such vapid meaningless drivel and try to make it sound like the profound wisdom of an expert. Bullshit is bullshit, no matter how philosophically phrased.

[hardy_practice]

You gotta be kidding me!?  I'm no way in your bullshit league.

[dima_76557]

Your problem is that you wish to know how to play the piano.  That can't be done, you can only play the piano but because the desire to know is so strong the mind fills that hole, as it does for our blind spot.  It fills it with useless rubbish though!  That leads you astray.

Not exactly. I have no problems now. I am just not genius enough for your method. I went astray before, not now because now I have good results with very simple and clear instructions, not just metaphors, and I can truly relax because I know how to work. Only thing I want to know as student is that I am in good hands. Why change back to old ways that give problems? How is your way, for a sample, going to help me learn acrobat piece by Liszt up to level until Tuesday? Just "let it happen"? Just let the expelling from School happen if standard is not adequate?

About rubbish: I don't care if rubbish as long as it works. I am just student so I can not judge. Work results is only thing that convinces me. If best pianist on forum (Marik, who studied in Moscow) says I have to run around apartment block every day for 5 min 15 sec to be good pianist, I believe him and will do it exactly 5 min 15 sec, not shorter, not longer, because he is true master. For a sample: https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=49879.0
How about you and your students? Please show results of your "do-nothing" method.

[hardy_practice]

Obedience only results in empty copies.  

[dima_76557]

Obedience only results in empty copies.

No copying present in my training because trainer does not give interpretation to follow, only instructions like, for a sample, Marik's instructions about Glen Gould finger tapping:
https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=46180.msg503033#msg503033
which is also not Hanon muscle training, but special clever training for nerve system.

Teacher in Conservatory gives only artistic tasks, images, not to copy, just to try. But I have to be ready to react to requirements, which I could not do before I met trainer.

Short-time goal: learn ropes I should have learned long ago and graduate from Conservatory without injury. Rest of life for individuality and reaping fruit of training with experts.

[hardy_practice]

Short-time goal: learn ropes I should have learned long ago and graduate from Conservatory without injury. Rest of life for individuality and reaping fruit of training with experts.

Ahh, delayed gratification?  Never my cup of tea.  As for my students - no, I don't have any virtuosi but then it's not something either myself or their parents would recommend.   

[dima_76557]

Ahh, delayed gratification?  Never my cup of tea.

I'm afraid I gave you wrong impression from my words: many gratifications in process of learning now:
1) session with trainer - fun because trainer is funny person and can make everything look and feel easy
2) lessons with conservatory teacher no longer Judgement Day, but interesting experience to learn and grow artistically because when I go to lesson, I am ready for it
3) going from one of worst to one of better is itself gratification
etc. etc.

As for my students - no, I don't have any virtuosi but then it's not something either myself or their parents would recommend.

No offense, but I am - not surprised. You should test your system for effectiveness on people who want to go to conservatoire and who should be able to reach high level of accomplishment.

P.S.: Paul (p2u_) gave me old book as present from Luigi Bonpensiere: "New Pathways to Piano Technique". Bonpensiere first said same as you: when baby smiles, his idea tells what muscles to work. Same with piano playing. Think sound and lo!, it is done. No training needed. He calls this Ideo-Kinetics. BUT!... he was later forced to change his mind and require 3 years of movement training from student with special trainer before learning his system because piano playing is not natural programmed activity. What Bonpensiere described first was mindset for masters, not for beginners, you see?
Here is book if interested:
https://www.amazon.com/New-Pathways-Piano-Technique-Relations/dp/B0007E5432

[hardy_practice]

You should test your system for effectiveness on people who want to go to conservatoire and who should be able to reach high level of accomplishment.

My students could do that.  Getting into conservatory is not virtuoso.  None have, thank god, wanted to.

P.S.: Paul (p2u_) gave me old book as present from Luigi Bonpensiere: "New Pathways to Piano Technique". ... BUT!... he was later forced to change his mind and require 3 years of movement training from student with special trainer before learning his system because piano playing is not natural programmed activity. What Bonpensiere described first was mindset for masters, not for beginners, you see?
Here is book if interested:
https://www.amazon.com/New-Pathways-Piano-Technique-Relations/dp/B0007E5432

Interesting.  I have and know the book well.  Bonpensiere died before it as published so I'm not quite sure how 'he was later forced to change his mind'.  I would dearly love to hear more.  Can you get me some facts?

[dima_76557]

My students could do that.

In advanced and piano lion's repertoire? Why did you not record such incredible phenomenon?

Getting into conservatory is not virtuoso.

First come and visit Moscow Conservatory or Gnessin Institute and then compare. You may change mind. Virtuosos - a dime a dozen here. Most who get accepted are virtuoso pianists already, which does not mean everybody is able to cope with workload.

None have, thank god, wanted to.

Why thank God? No regrets for me.

Interesting.  I have and know the book well.  Bonpensiere died before it as published so I'm not quite sure how 'he was later forced to change his mind'.  I would dearly love to hear more.  Can you get me some facts?

I have no facts. Paul knew some followers of a follower in the Europe. They claimed L. Bonpensiere wrote not to publish book, just many separate notes and papers with absurd ideas and many misunderstandings that were later corrected after experiments but publishers published anyway because of hype for Zen buddhism at that time. They also showed workbooks with exercises for physical pre-training. But as usual with followers: can not prove legend or not. Seems very likely because for pupil who is not genius path of development goes through understanding and awareness of motor elements. This - true for all specialized physical activities.

[hardy_practice]

'My students could do that.' meaning they could get into a conservatory.  In the UK they weren't set up to produce only virtuosi but also working musicians.  But maybe with the influx of Eastern Europeans and Chinese that has changed.

I'm disappointed you have no facts.

Seems very likely because for pupil who is not genius path of development goes through understanding and awareness of motor elements. This - true for all specialized physical activities.

I hate to disappoint you but if your not a genius from the start there is no path to virtuosity.

[nyiregyhazi]

'My students could do that.' meaning they could get into a conservatory.  In the UK they weren't set up to produce only virtuosi but also working musicians.  But maybe with the influx of Eastern Europeans and Chinese that has changed.

I'm disappointed you have no facts.
I hate to disappoint you but if your not a genius from the start there is no path to virtuosity.

You've never been to music college and this is the standard you play at:

p3kmw&index=5

Please drop this embarrassing pretence at expertise. The fact you've previously claimed yourself(!!!) to be up to college standard shows how little clue you have about this.

You don't need to be any 'genius' to be a virtuoso and neither do you have to aim to get there blind. I showed no talent at all when I was young. Lately, I've been able to play such repertoire as the 6th rhapsody of Liszt, thanks to going back to the drawing board for technique. You could probably do so too - were you not suffering from quite such profound ignorance, closed-mindedness and delusions of grandeur that prevent you facing up to your low standard of accomplishment.

It's also true that anyone who aims high musically needs proper technique to execute their intentions- or they become frustrated and fail to progress further. To decide that aiming for proper technique is unnecessary is to illustrate that you are deaf to your musical failings. At any level, good technique is what leads to the control over musicality (which is so woefully absent from your abysmal playing).

I'm not going fuel this trolling with any further posts, but will simply urge anyone to watch that video before thinking of taking the empty, ill informed drivel (that you will doubtless continue to write) seriously.

[dima_76557]

I hate to disappoint you but if your not a genius from the start there is no path to virtuosity.

Religious problem. I think you may be mistaken. For craft (coordination for a sample) person may not have a genius, but you can learn that from knowledgeable person. Art is another problem but I believe that systematic work in right direction opens what all people already have even if they are 65. Only complete lack of musicality and musically oriented thinking may block virtuosity.

[hardy_practice]

Now it's my turn to ask for examples!  I can name a hundred virtuosos who were geniuses at age 5.  Geniuses post 14?  Any of you out there?

[hardy_practice]

I showed no talent at all when I was young.

And you still show none, apart from your talent for self delusion.

[nyiregyhazi]

And you still show none, apart from your talent for self delusion.

You're barking up the wrong tree, sorry. I'm not an egomaniac like yourself- and can honestly say that I don't hold my current accomplishment in high regard and hence continue to ask myself about what I need to do to improve myself. While by no means perfect, that's how I gained enough proficiency to play these difficult octaves at a reasonable speed:

If you want to criticise it, you have every right to. I have much work to do on improving various technical issues, to make it better. The fact that I realise (and tackle it head-on, rather than hide from it by lying to myself) is why I both improved enough to play that piece and why I continue to make genuine technical progress in my 30s (despite a thoroughly unremarkable start in my childhood).

If you want to talk about delusions of grandeur, then try starting with someone who refuses to admit to deficiency in extremely sloppy playing- not with someone who remains very self-critical, despite having acquired enough technique to at least be making a serious attempt at advanced repertoire.

While I have not the slightest interest in a contest of pianistic process against you or anyone, I have phenomenal interest in the issues that enable me to continue progressing and the issues that have left you stagnating at a level that no respectable music college would deem adequate for admission (whilst kidding yourself that you are technically impeccable and that you know the first thing about what creates serious progress). I'm not sure whether it's sadder that you gave up on improving yourself through stubbornness, or that you try to pass on the very limiting beliefs that you imposed on yourself to others, as if you are providing something useful.

[hardy_practice]

I'm not going fuel this trolling with any further posts,

Yet more self delusion.

[nyiregyhazi]

Yet more self delusion.

I replied to address a definably false claim about me. I'm done now. There's nothing to be gained by discussing anything with an ignorant person whose belief system is based on failure to demand improvement from himself- before deciding that his beliefs are good enough.

[dima_76557]

Now it's my turn to ask for examples!  I can name a hundred virtuosos who were geniuses at age 5.  Geniuses post 14?  Any of you out there?

Late starters with qualities of genius: Harold  Bauer at 20, Padarewsky at 22, Perahia at 15, Arcadi Volodos (initially training as a singer!) at 16-18, Wibi Soerjadi at 11 from scratch, and more (too much work to search). So many geniuses at 5 is culturally biased because of myth that you have to learn so young. It does not prove that other ages are too late.

[hardy_practice]

Late starters with qualities of genius: Harold  Bauer at 20, Padarewsky at 22, Perahia at 15,

I know about these three.  If you believe that then you'll believe anything.  I suggest you check your sources carefully. 

[dima_76557]

I know about these three.  If you believe that then you'll believe anything.  I suggest you check your sources carefully. 

One source I know very much for sure: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wibi_Soerjadi
Paul (p2u_) is personal friend of Wibi Soerjadi. He has known him from childhood and says this is true. Wibi started from scratch when 11 and when 18/19 won third prize in Liszt competition in Utrecht, Holland.
I have no reason to doubt biography of Mr. Volodos: https://www.volodos.com/biografie_e.html

[hardy_practice]

Late starters with qualities of genius: Harold  Bauer at 20, Padarewsky at 22, Perahia at 15,

Let me rephrase that: the above all started piano at about age 4.

[dima_76557]

Let me rephrase that: the above all started piano at about age 4.

No mention in biography they were geniuses in piano when so young. Bauer played violin mostly when young. Why not piano if piano genius? They became geniuses of piano later, much later.

[hardy_practice]

No mention in biography they were geniuses in piano when so young.

Oh well, you got me then!  They couldn't have been.

[dima_76557]

Oh well, you got me then!  They couldn't have been.

If Bauer, for a sample, had been piano genius at young age, then he would have concertized as pianist, not as violonist.

[hardy_practice]

And Paderewski would have been accepted into the Warsaw Conservatorium at age 8 instead of 12!

[dima_76557]

And Paderewski would have been accepted into the Warsaw Conservatorium at age 8 instead of 12!

What do you want to say? If you just want to be right, I will let you, BUT:

- You say yourself (post #57) that "going to Conservatory is not virtuosity", so we have no proof of young genius becoming virtuoso.
- You also say (post #59) that "if one is not genius from the start" (at 4/5?) "there is no path to virtuosity". No mention in biographies of special qualities at 4/5 or younger as for example Artur Rubinstein at 2.
- I have given several examples of people who were clearly not piano geniuses from the start but still became piano virtuoso later. Best example (Wibi Soerjadi) because verified info - he was 11 when he started from zero, had 2 years technical movement training with teacher Bob Brouwer and then started music playing - you did not even react to.
P.S.: Besides, if person does not start at 5 but at 20, it does not mean there is no genius present from birth. Also: if person is blocked in motorics, it does not mean that there is no genius present from birth that can come out later. It just must be unblocked with proper technical training. This basically - useless discussion.

[hardy_practice]

What do you want to say? If you just want to be right, I will let you, BUT:

That's cool.  I'll settle for being right.

[nyiregyhazi]

That's cool.  I'll settle for being right.

The only reason you want to be "right" is because it would absolve you of responsibility for your woeful standard. You are responsible for it- via your erroneous belief that you don't need to connect your hand to the key properly and that simply flopping around like an uncoordinated fish instead would do anything to improve your physical tensions. I had so little talent for music that it took me around 6 years before I even did grade 3- at age 13. While I'm not so ignorant as to declare myself any virtuoso, I've since become able to play what is regarded as "virtuoso repertoire" and it continues to get easier.

You don't need to be a genius to achieve advanced technique. You simply need an inquisitive mind, capacity for self-criticism and the right knowledge about how to progress. That said, if you're an ignorant buffoon who has no capacity to rethink that which consistently fails to achieve anything and look elsewhere, then perhaps the best route really is to claim that only geniuses excel and kid yourself that your inflexible belief system is not in any way what is responsible for your own lack of progress...

[hardy_practice]

I'm not going fuel this trolling with any further posts,

[nyiregyhazi]

Sure, change the subject. Who wants to stop and think about how to remove the real impediment to their standard of piano playing- when you can just ignore anything that refutes your ridiculous excuse about how all of the pianists who have the level of competence that you don't were just geniuses...

it's specifically because you have no capacity for internal argument that you play poorly. It's by tackling difficult and inconvenient questions head on (and changing our belief systems, if that's the only way to resolve inconvenient questions) that we progress. The most inconvenient questions are the ones we have to deal with- not run away from, in the pretence that this will make a failing belief any more correct.

[hardy_practice]

You don't feed trolls - you can't have it both ways.

[birba]

I fathom this thread being locked...

[dima_76557]

That's cool.  I'll settle for being right.

I hope you understand yourself that you - only right within framework of own unrealistic "do-nothing" method and I also hope that OP will not listen you. OP should simply find competent teacher who can free his inborn abilities. Results will be better than hoped for.

[hardy_practice]

OP should simply find competent teacher who can free his inborn abilities. Results will be better than hoped for.

But isn't that my side of the argument?  Educare [v., Latin] – "to bring out", "to lead forth"

[dima_76557]

But isn't that my side of the argument?  Educare [v., Latin] – "to bring out", "to lead forth"

Yes, but you DENY that genius can be unlocked ("educare" = "bring out") through special movement training which is very sad philosophy. In post #59 you even suggest that there is no hope for anyone to play like virtuoso who was not genius from start. Very fatalistic approach coming from teacher. It programs students for failure.

[hardy_practice]

I don't want to send this thread way OT but something happens in childhood around age 7 which precludes attaining true virtuosity if it hasn't already begun.  As the Jesuit's say "Give me a boy till the age of 7 and I'll show you the man."  In other words there's a fairly narrow window for hard-wiring a virtuoso - it closes around age 7.  Resurrect an old thread (good time of year for it) if you're wishing to dispute/discuss that - there are hundreds of them.

Why the obsession with virtuosi anyway?  You're only missing out on about .01% of the total piano literature - if that!

[nyiregyhazi]

I don't want to send this thread way OT but something happens in childhood around age 7 which precludes attaining true virtuosity if it hasn't already begun.  As the Jesuit's say "Give me a boy till the age of 7 and I'll show you the man."  In other words there's a fairly narrow window for hard-wiring a virtuoso - it closes around age 7.  Resurrect an old thread (good time of year for it) if you're wishing to dispute/discuss that - there are hundreds of them.

Why the obsession with virtuosi anyway?  You're only missing out on about .01% of the total piano literature - if that!

bullshit. At seven I was a beginner. Six years later I was only just doing grade 3. Today I can play the "virtuoso octaves" of liszt's 6 rhapsody. You can stick all of your conjecture back up your arse, where it came from. If you think you have the technique to handle 99.9% of the piano literature then you're kidding yourself. While it's easier to learn young, there's nothing magical about age 7. Even you probably retained flexibility of thought later in life. The day you thought you had it all sussed and closed your mind is when you dug your pianistic grave and killed all hope of serious progress.

[hardy_practice]

bullshit.

But your playing is quite poor as far as virtuoso standards go so doesn't have any relevance to this current discussion.  

[awesom_o]

I began developing my touch at age 16 when I switched piano teachers. Before, I was taught using the 'do-nothing' method of 'relax and listen'. I got my ARCT at age 17, and was playing very advanced repertoire. Everything I played lacked control or refinement. I played with a good sense of musicality and emotion (already having taken lessons since I was 5) but I was no virtuoso. I was out of my depth playing pieces like Chopin Ballades, Beethoven Sonatas, Bach P & F, etc.

My teacher retrained my technique from the ground up in a manner similar to what Nyir and Dima have described. Since then my playing has really developed-I got into conservatory, got a degree in piano performance, and played many recitals publicly to increasinly good reviews.

Since then I have recorded the op. 10 & 25 Etudes by Chopin.

All because I developed my touch.

[hardy_practice]

Hi awesom, we're you saying you are a virtuoso?  not? or just not commenting on this patch of thread?

[awesom_o]

I wouldn't claim to be anything other than a musician. I like to teach piano, compose, improvise, and study the works of the great masters. You can listen to my recordings and label me however you'd like.
https://soundcloud.com/carlisle-beresford

[nyiregyhazi]

But your playing is quite poor as far as virtuoso standards go so doesn't have any relevance to this current discussion.  

In what respect? Speed and accuracy? Or touch? I think you seem to have forgotten what this discussion was about. I can execute the rhapsody with 99% accuracy and fast enough to be accepted (if by no means at the speed of a cziffra). Where I still fall short is in terms of controlling it at all times.

That's why you need proper technique. It's what gives the all important control over sound- in difficult and easy music alike. My technical limits are even more of a hindrance to my control over the sound simpler lyrical pieces than in octaves. If you're spinning some line to your students about how they don't need to aim high in order to play easier repertoire truly well, you are a disgusting charlatan- who is encouraging them to aim low and portraying that as if an admirable thing,  simply to mask the fact that you cannot offer anything better.a teacher should know their limits, but they should not be spinning some nonsense that glorifies those limits (while hiding how much of a limit is imposed on musicality and control).

[awesom_o]

I really agree with Dima here-touch is the alpha and the omega of piano technique.
Control of portato is one of the main things that separate today's typical competition winner from the great masters of yesterday-Gilels, Richter, Horowitz, Gould. It's their touch. I want to say it's magic, but it actually isn't; it's just very well-controlled. Their minds are in complete control of the total sound-picture, and it is the touch of the fingertips that translates that mental control into music via the keyboard.

Think how many young players there are out there today who play the notes fast, accurate, etc. but without the colour, nuance, and full range of artistic subtleties that the real masters had.

Watch the great pianists-when they play, it's as though they hardly move at all. Think Michelangeli. You don't see him flopping his arms around the way KBK does. Same goes for Horowitz.

[awesom_o]

Your problem is that you wish to know how to play the piano.  That can't be done, you can only play the piano but because the desire to know is so strong the mind fills that hole, as it does for our blind spot.  It fills it with useless rubbish though!  That leads you astray.

I think we've found the crux of the problem here. As long as someone believes that true knowledge is beyond their grasp, that belief will be so strong as to BECOME their reality.

[nyiregyhazi]

I think we've found the crux of the problem here. As long as someone believes that true knowledge is beyond their grasp, that belief will be so strong as to BECOME their reality.

Absolutely- I think there's a grain of truth in what he says though. When you want to try to go down the route of understanding before doing but get the understanding totally wrong, it's disastrous. His concept that anything goes during key depression as long as you relax after has ruined any chance he ever had of learning functional technique - because it only helps slow playing at a low amateur level. Speed up and there's only the tensions left minus the relaxation. By sticking with a bogus concept, he had no chance of feeling his way to what works - because his ignorant premise for technique actively denies him the key missing element . Either you have to avoid having rational premises almost altogether (and hope for the 'feel' comes from good hands on teaching) or you have to get the intellectual premises spot on (or at least be flexible and willing to adapt them where useful), so they help rather than actively hinder. Although true understanding is always good, attempting to understand but getting it all wrong is probably even worse than being trained like a monkey.

[hardy_practice]

I wouldn't claim to be anything other than a musician. I like to teach piano, compose, improvise, and study the works of the great masters. You can listen to my recordings and label me however you'd like.
https://soundcloud.com/carlisle-beresfor

I'm afraid this https://soundcloud.com/carlisle-beresford/etude-no-1-in-c-major-op-10 is far too similar to this

.

[awesom_o]

well, if you are suggesting I'm a Joyce Hatto, I'll certainly take it as a compliment. I appreciate the comparison to Pollini though. I can, however, also provide links to videos of my performances.

Here's one, although I confess it's not my finest rendition and there was a bit of background noise as well.

I promise you, I am a real person. I've just been devoting my life to music for quite some time now. 

[hardy_practice]

I do apologize!  The name did ring a bell.  LOL!!!!  It's Mr_Kitty!  AKA justanotherpianist AKA god knows what else.  Could't just stick to one account?

[awesom_o]

I'm not the pianist I was 10 years ago 

[hardy_practice]

Listen, I take my hat of to you.  Those are superb performances.  Tell us more about fingertips.  It's a subject I'm 100% into.