please read this and improves your articulation

[johnmar78]

Hi folks,

I have had read what has mentioned  by" piano power "https://www.pianoworld.com/pianopower.htm
Honestly, I have to agree with him 100%. Why? because lots of facts he mentioned does fit into our "piano street debate" in the past about the piano playing techniques. I am here not to troll anyone or stir any facts that has had mentioned in the past either right or wrong. But one thing it did proof was "finger power" overcomes other so called wrist rotations/forarm rotations when comes to articulation . To be honest, there is no set rules in piano playing, but there are set principles that CAN NOT be ignored.

Have a read see if you agree?

[pianoman53]

I didn't read the whole thing, cause everything they wrote has so many exceptions that they can't possibly be called rules. And some of the things are simply stupid. "Playing legato will improve your technique. False" Well, duh! "hmm, if I just on one leg for 55 years, I bet I will be a great sprinter later!!!"

To try to articulate with only rotation is as stupid as trying with only fingers. And still, I bet there are people able to do it, and I think it's a waste of time to try to prove anything with science. (No, I wont read the 4000 word essay that will follow)

I got a bit bored with it, so maybe I just missed some great point he had, but I really didn't get it...

[outin]

I didn't read the whole thing, cause everything they wrote has so many exceptions that they can't possibly be called rules. And some of the things are simply stupid. "Playing legato will improve your technique. False" Well, duh! "hmm, if I just on one leg for 55 years, I bet I will be a great sprinter later!!!"

To try to articulate with only rotation is as stupid as trying with only fingers. And still, I bet there are people able to do it, and I think it's a waste of time to try to prove anything with science. (No, I wont read the 4000 word essay that will follow)

I got a bit bored with it, so maybe I just missed some great point he had, but I really didn't get it...

I guess you missed the point that what he is listing are the myths that are to be contradicted

[pianoman53]

I guess you missed the point that what he is listing are the myths that are to be contradicted

Well, everything he writes he also contradicts. Even the myths contradicts each other ("you should sit low" and the next one is "you should sit high")

And the way he "Proves" the myths are rather stupid à la "It didn't work for me". And he writes about strength as a necessary force and compares with a football player who tries to throw heavier balls. Playing a scale faster or more even can't be compared with that. You can't compare body building with piano playing.

And to play in tempo and in slower tempo isn't the same thing, obviously. When you play slower, you have more time to rest between notes and then wont get tired. And just because something doesn't work the first few times doesn't mean you'll have to be Stronger to make it work, but rather to be able to relax.

It's just a stupid waste of time, and doesn't prove anything.

[dima_76557]

I have had read what has mentioned  by" piano power "https://www.pianoworld.com/pianopower.htm
Honestly, I have to agree with him 100%. [...]

Have a read see if you agree?

Actually, someone sent me a copy of his book. The essence is that he explains all piano problems as a disbalance between flexors and extensors. Extensors are generally undeveloped and he proposes a lift-the-finger-and-let-it-drop approach, which is nothing new. Yes, it is useful to some extent, but it is not a piano method. You will still have to learn to manipulate the keys ergonomically.

As a matter of fact, it is just as useful to do some of these:

and it is VERY useful to be able to fulfil the Neuhaus requirement from his book:

Gone are most of your physical endurance problems, I promise.

P.S.: That is: if you already have a good technique.

[outin]

and it is VERY useful to be able to fulfil the Neuhaus requirement from his book:

Gone are most of your physical endurance problems, I promise.

After I have broken/dislocated my fingers

[outin]

waste of time, and doesn't prove anything.

Probably, but the biggest problem is that it's not very clear what he is trying to say...

[dima_76557]

After I have broken/dislocated my fingers

Actually, it is not as difficult as it looks. Paul (p2u_) taught me this. You simply start against a wall. Then you sit on your knees and carefully load part of your upper body on your arches, then you go to a real push up and with time, you can do the handstand. The crux, of course, is to prevent collapse in the process at all times. Go gently, take your time, and be careful.
P.S.: As you can see in some of their YouTube clips, pianists like Richter and Rubinstein could do this.

[at 1:18]

[outin]

Actually, it is not as difficult as it looks. Paul (p2u_) taught me this. You simply start against a wall. Then you sit on your knees and carefully load part of your upper body on your arches, then you go to a real push up and with time, you can do the handstand. The crux, of course, is, to prevent collapse in the process. Go gently, take your time, and be careful.
P.S.: As you can see in some of the YouTube clips, pianists like Richter and Rubinstein could do this.

With my hypermobile joints and balance issues (I have skoliosis) I wouldn't even dare trying...maybe if I was half my age and half my weight 

[ajspiano]

Probably, but the biggest problem is that it's not very clear what he is trying to say...

"buy my book, please, please buy my book"

[rachmaninoff_forever]

The secret to all technique is finding out what works best for you. 

Period.

[j_menz]

please read this and improves your articulation

Is there a similar site that will improve your grammar?

[johnmar78]

Is there a similar site that will improve your grammar?

Lol, It meant to improve your blood circulation...

and in real life, I do 3 finger push ups, and the above  finger excecises you mentioned was very useful, a bit like a martial up training .

I noticed he mentioned Howiz was setting low so as Glend. Well, Glen had a back problem I dnt blame him, where as Howicz was 1.90cm plus tall guy with a long back. I would not be supprised he PREFERED a lower sittings .  I met Validmir Askenazy, he is about 170cm or less  but had a higher settings.  so here you go, we all different.

[pianoman53]

Lol, It meant to improve your blood circulation...

and in real life, I do 3 finger push ups, and the above  finger excecises you mentioned was very useful, a bit like a martial up training .

I noticed he mentioned Howiz was setting low so as Glend. Well, Glen had a back problem I dnt blame him, where as Howicz was 1.90cm plus tall guy with a long back. I would not be supprised he PREFERED a lower sittings .  I met Validmir Askenazy, he is about 170cm or less  but had a higher settings.  so here you go, we all different.

So in what way would be improve our articulation if we read that article?

[johnmar78]

So in what way would be improve our articulation if we read that article?

very good question Pianoman. After all these years playing and corrections I have encountered. I reckon, to a certain agree I have agree with him again 100%, if not 99.
A slow/fast playing using fingers with an aid of 'so called arm/wrist rotation is allowed". Also not to forget to maintain a high knuckle position that  is required to keep the hand structure supportive but not rigid. And this depends on what passage is  played. This would also eliminate whist /forearm pain in your piano playing since your main focus is on your fingers. I hope this explains.

[pianoman53]

very good question Pianoman. After all these years playing and corrections I have encountered. I reckon, to a certain agree I have agree with him again 100%, if not 99.
A slow/fast playing using fingers with an aid of 'so called arm/wrist rotation is allowed". Also not to forget to maintain a high knuckle position that  is required to keep the hand structure supportive but not rigid. And this depends on what passage is  played. This would also eliminate whist /forearm pain in your piano playing since your main focus is on your fingers. I hope this explains.

I don't understand what there is to agree with, since he doesn't say anything... The only thing he says is that everyone is different.

[nyiregyhazi]

Hi folks,

I have had read what has mentioned  by" piano power "https://www.pianoworld.com/pianopower.htm
Honestly, I have to agree with him 100%. Why? because lots of facts he mentioned does fit into our "piano street debate" in the past about the piano playing techniques. I am here not to troll anyone or stir any facts that has had mentioned in the past either right or wrong. But one thing it did proof was "finger power" overcomes other so called wrist rotations/forarm rotations when comes to articulation . To be honest, there is no set rules in piano playing, but there are set principles that CAN NOT be ignored.

Have a read see if you agree?

he raises many interesting issues, but his extensors fixation is illogical and plain wrong, in my opinion. his "proof" about finger lifting to articulate is utter nonsense. many pianists articulate well without finger lifting and there's no reason to believe that the extensors which lift fingers are involved in the action when you start from the key (considering that they act in the wrong direction) . so his logic lies on extremely dubious ground. he has a very low expectation of evidence (settling merely for his own experience without objective reference to something that many great artists clearly can do) before being willing to kid himself that something is proven by a sample of one- and that totally compromises his supposedly scientific approach. he found something that helps in practise but his theory as to why is totally off the mark and fallacious "proofs" don't help one bit.


what I believe really happens is that lifting one finger tests the balance and strength of whichever finger played last. he didn't stop to consider that the extensors are a mere trigger for actions in other fingers- which can also be executed independently of any finger lifting. it's like standing on one leg and waving the other and your arms in the air. above all, you test the quality of balance on the leg which connects to the ground. pianistically, lifting other fingers tests the poise of whichever finger played last. the poise of that finger depends on the combined grip from the knuckle plus lengthening in the two lesser joints. if you do it with all round grip you get stiff. it has nothing to do with the extensors that he says must be strong though. using these muscles merely triggers the useful ones into life. the useful and typically underused muscles are those that lengthen fingers NOT those that lift them. if you consider the analogy to waving arms and legs, this whole concept explains what makes dohnanyi and pischna over holding exercises useful. they train the fingers that keep keys depressed to find an alive quality of balance that is neither stiff nor flaccid yet secure. This quality is of balance after key depression is of paramount importance to the ability to play fast. you can't run with either stiff legs or wobbly ones and likewise with the fingers.

[dima_76557]

his extensors fixation is illogical and plain wrong, in my opinion.

There is more than one explanation of why it is useful to lift the fingers. For example, Graham Fitch says this:
https://practisingthepiano.com/?p=968
Whatever they say, it works.

From my own experience I can say that I have noticed that there is actually a ROTARY element present when you lift the fingers in a relaxed fashion. The fingers determine the amount of forearm rotation, not the other way around as in the Taubman method. I have no explanation since I know virtually nothing about either anatomy or science. Of course, when I play, I stay close to the keys, but I have a feeling my fingers "breathe" (surplus range of movement I don't actually use actively, but it feels great).

[nyiregyhazi]

There is more than one explanation of why it is useful to lift the fingers. For example, Graham Fitch says this:
https://practisingthepiano.com/?p=968
Whatever they say, it works.

From my own experience I can say that I have noticed that there is actually a ROTARY element present when you lift the fingers in a relaxed fashion. The fingers determine the amount of forearm rotation, not the other way around as in the Taubman method. I have no explanation since I know virtually nothing about either anatomy or science. Of course, when I play, I stay close to the keys, but I have a feeling my fingers "breathe" (surplus range of movement I don't actually use actively, but it feels great).

I've never been convinced by the kochevitsky thing. I'm not saying he's wrong but the whole thing so intangible that without some kind of supporting evidence from a medical or scientific professional, it's as good as gobbledygook-as there is nothing you can do to illustrate either way. instead of all this business of inhibition, you could just as well bring it down to the simpler fact that it takes longer to come back after a finger is lifted, therefore no rushing. do we really need all the neurological jargon- which merely seems to remind us that a finger that is going up is not going down? It seems more like a statement of the obvious phrased in needlessly complex language, rather than a tremendous insight. are we really needing to be " inhibiting" fingers that don't move when playing? surely we're just not sending them any signal to move- rather than sending out negative ones? However, the way my fingers are activated into better balance on depressed keys is something I perceive very clearly when I move others. In terms of practicality, being aware of it has tremendously guided the way it generates better balance and poise in general.


I don't like Fitch idea of curling up during finger drops one bit I tried it just now and already felt a slight ache in the fingertip and slight bruising under the nail, reminiscent of a severely unpleasant thing I used to get when actively curling my tips. in order to settle into low effort balance, you'd end up uncurling, curling up during landing and then having to switch to a lengthening activity for the low effort balance (following a bounce that tends to cause a brief disconnect with the key). I prefer to curl up slightly in preparation, uncurl during depression and then simply settle into a remainder of the very same activity for balance (with no bounce). It seems far lower in impact and far more practical for high speeds. I can spank the keys as hard as I like with this approach, without that same discomfort at the fingertip joint.

I agree on subtle rotations, by the way. integrating a rocking into the lifting enables the fingers to be very active without any wrist blockage.

[nyiregyhazi]

I should add, by the way, I'm totally in favour of finger lifting as a practise method. However, what I stress is that it didn't do me a jot of good when my focus was chiefly on the action of the finger that was being lifted. I often did more harm than good when that was my sole idea- which is the only thing Prokop really conveys. It takes an extremely good teacher to show a student how to turn this into something productive, based on nothing more than Prokop's coarse explanation. However, since I began to switch my focus to the balancing fingers and how well they connect the arm to the piano (without either droopiness or stiffness) finger lifting has become a totally different thing and an altogether productive one. It's all about where the focus is placed and what you are trying to observe and improve while doing it. When you put all the attention on what is merely a potential trigger, it's quite possible that you totally miss the things that it needs to be triggering and get it all wrong.

[dima_76557]

I've never been convinced by the kochevitsky thing. I'm not saying he's wrong but the whole thing so intangible that without some kind of supporting evidence from a medical or scientific professional, it's as good as gobbledygook-as there is nothing you can do to illustrate either way.

I cannot judge whether he was exactly right or wrong, but Mr. Kochevitsky knew very well what he was talking about. It is all based on real existing and rather serious research on the workings of our nervous system, conditioning of reflexes, etc., not on pure layman anatomy as is the case with Mr. Prokop. Just do a query into Google: nerve processes: excitation and inhibition.

[nyiregyhazi]

I cannot judge whether he was exactly right or wrong, but Mr. Kochevitsky knew very well what he was talking about. It is all based on real existing and rather serious research on the workings of our nervous system, conditioning of reflexes, etc., not on pure layman anatomy as is the case with Mr. Prokop. Just do a query into Google: nerve processes: exitation and inhibition.

I don't know the details, but is it really the case that muscles will move unless a signal of inhbition is sent? Surely, there's a neutral where simply nothing happens- rather than merely a positive signal to move or a signal of inhibition? Either way, it seems to me that he's simply dressing up a statement of the obvious in jargon. It goes without saying that lifting a finger is going to stop it being able to accidentally play early- and unless I'm missing something, his statement doesn't seem to add anything beyond a fancier statement of that. What I find interesting is why finger lifting provides benefits that can be carried into outrageously fast tempos once you stop lifting, rather than than the mere fact it stops you rushing in slow ones. For me, it's what it triggers in terms of the balance of the fingers and arm on whichever keys were being held depressed.

One additional practical point (which would appear to contradict his theory) is that I play best when I am ALREADY exerting a small force against a key before going on to move it. So there's absolutely no need to be inhibiting the action that plays the key until it moves. Up to that point, the same action is already present but just on a much smaller scale. Kochevitsky's words seem to imply that the finger activity is merely on or off (and that if you're not moving the key than the finger is being inhibited from all activation against it)? Perhaps there's some complexity that I'm missing the relevance of, but it doesn't seem to make any sense to me. Certainly, from a practical point of view everything is done in positives- not in terms of inhibitions. The finger doesn't accidentally move too early because the muscular activation is only very small until it's due to move the key with a larger activation- not because it is altogether inhibited until the time of sound. Surely this points to mild use of excitation- rather than inhibition of activity?

In short, I don't ever accidentally move a key because I forgot to inhibit its movement. The only way I accidentally move a key is accidentally activate the same muscles a little more intensely, rather than only enough to rest against the resistance of a key (which would be extremely rare). I'm not terribly convinced that I need inhibit any of the basic actions- and on a conscious level, the further any sense of mental inhibition is from my radar, the better. My tendency is underdo the preparatory actions of fingers, not to overdo them. The only time pianists need to hold fingers back in order not to accidentally sound them, is when they press their arms down like crazy and fail to use active finger movement through keys- which means that fingers need to be consciously retracted in order to avoid accidentally playing.
 

[dima_76557]

In short, I don't ever accidentally move a key because I forgot to inhibit its movement.

I think you should read chapter 4 of his book. It can be found in Google books online, I think. He explains how the nervous system works, not what you deliberately do with your mind, because we have no control over that. The only thing we can do as humans is practise in such a way that we obey the rules of nature. The fingers are made to act as a unit, so I find it conceivable that something contracts while we may not be aware of it in such a difficult activity as virtuoso piano passage playing. He says that not lifting the fingers while practising slowly ultimately leads to irregular playing and the tendency to rush.

[dima_76557]

@ nyiregyhazi:

I'd like to add a very interesting experience I had today to this topic. A percussionist here in Moscow let me play on his marimba. There, you need a controlled SWING with the sticks (?) to produce good sound. Pressure doesn't help on such an instrument and beating kills the sound. In sports, the swinging motion is also often essential to get good results. It seems almost counterintuitive not to use the swinging motion in piano playing since it is both a chordophone (vibrating strings with a chamber for resonance) and a percussion instrument.

Although scientists say that on the piano only a certain speed of the key/hammer produces a certain sound volume and quality and that it doesn't really matter how you move the key, this is not exactly true from what I witnessed today. If you swing the finger from the knuckle into the key (requires lifting the finger), you get another quality of sound than if you press the key gently from the surface to get the same volume. What this means is up to you. I have no answer. I only know from my limited experience that if you change the type of movement, the feel of the rhythm changes drastically. With a swinging motion, it tends to become "rounder". Since Prokop is a jazz pianist, this may have some significance for his approach. (?)

[nyiregyhazi]

I think you should read chapter 4 of his book. It can be found in Google books online, I think. He explains how the nervous system works, not what you deliberately do with your mind, because we have no control over that. The only thing we can do as humans is practise in such a way that we obey the rules of nature. The fingers are made to act as a unit, so I find it conceivable that something contracts while we may not be aware of it in such a difficult activity as virtuoso piano passage playing. He says that not lifting the fingers while practising slowly ultimately leads to irregular playing and the tendency to rush.

I appreciate that it may not be the same as conscious inhibition - but can you be both activating a muscle gently and sending signals of inhibition? if not, his explanation looks highly doubtful. I often try to engage tiny positive actions from fingers prior to moving keys (which seems to imply that inhibition is neither present nor needeed- unless slight activations can still involve signals of inhibition alongside those to activate?) but I don't find I rush as a result. The only danger is that fingers are more likely to droop after key depression, so I have to be very aware of this when I'm no longer directly involving finger lifts to inspire balancing actions. Also, finger lifting itself didn't give benefits, as I say, until I appreciated the issue of balance on preceeding fingers- so even if true I don't believe kochevitsky is talking about the really big issue behind it. This balance issue strikes me as the big factor in success or lack of. when a finger droops lazily, the following fingers start from a disadvantaged position and various efforts come in to compensate and try to recover. in my opinion, as long as you train balance properly (via finger lifting and may other approaches) it scarcely matters whether you go on to lift fingers or not. with quality of poise and balance, fingers are unlikely to accidentally move too soon whether lifted or not. I agree that there's a quality of sound that lifting can help with, although the greatest pianists seem to be able to produce it with or without a swing.

[awesom_o]

He says that not lifting the fingers while practising slowly ultimately leads to irregular playing and the tendency to rush.

In my own personal experience, I have found the opposite to be true-lifting the fingers while practicing slowly ultimately leads to irregular playing and the tendency to rush.

I believe piano playing is about developing our contact with the music. In order to do that, we must develop our contact with the keyboard.

In my opinion, lifting the fingers is detrimental to this development. As soon as a finger is lifted away from the key, that finger is no longer in contact with the keyboard.

[dima_76557]

In my own personal experience, I have found the opposite to be true-lifting the fingers while practicing slowly ultimately leads to irregular playing and the tendency to rush.

I believe piano playing is about developing our contact with the music. In order to do that, we must develop our contact with the keyboard.

In my opinion, lifting the fingers is detrimental to this development. As soon as a finger is lifted away from the key, that finger is no longer in contact with the keyboard.

While this may be true for you personally, I wouldn't say that of some of the best finger-lifters ever: Cyprien Katsaris and Grigory Sokolov.
P.S.: Lifting the fingers/hands and let them drop also has something of giving away control (taking risk), which has its own charm in virtuoso pieces.

[awesom_o]

While this may be true for you personally, I wouldn't say that of some of the best finger-lifters ever: Cyprien Katsaris and Grigory Sokolov.
P.S.: Lifting the fingers/hands and let them drop also has something of giving away control (taking risk), which has its own charm in virtuoso pieces.

I've often wondered how those two manage to play the way they do the way they do... for me I really prefer to stay in the key at all times. I feel that as soon as I strike a key from above-even from only 1mm, I relinquish control over the hammer. 

When I play only from the surface of the keys, I feel as though my hands are playing the instrument more directly-as though my fingers themselves were playing the strings inside the piano, like a stringed instrument. If I hit the keys from above with the fingers, instead of caressing the keys from below with the hands, I find the sound becomes percussive and loses its lyrical quality.

I love the piano. I never strike it. I don't strike creatures which I love. That seems wrong to me on some level.

[dima_76557]

I've often wondered how those two manage to play the way they do the way they do... for me I really prefer to stay in the key at all times. I feel that as soon as I strike a key from above-even from only 1mm, I relinquish control over the hammer. 

The beauty of it all is that those two NEVER strike/hit the keys! They let the "independent living mechanisms" (the fingers) drop. It is a very controlled swing into the key, never hitting or striking. Music is Katsaris' wife, and the piano is his mistress. The secret is in the brain, of course. The real instrument is inside you, not in the piano.

[awesom_o]

It is a very controlled swing into the key, never hitting or striking. Music is Katsaris' wife, and the piano is his mistress. The secret is in the brain, of course. The real instrument is inside you, not in the piano.

I like all of that stuff and I believe all of it can be accomplished without any lifting of the fingers.

[nyiregyhazi]

I like all of that stuff and I believe all of it can be accomplished without any lifting of the fingers.

I agree in the performance stage, but not in the practise stage. My current favourite exercise for technique is based on synthesising the two. I like to hit the surface of the keys as hard as possible WITHOUT actually moving the hammer into the strings. When you master it, you can make a hell of a lot of noise from the thump against the key surfaces. This takes away all the extraneous tensions and gets the fingers better equipped to interact and bond with a key's resistance, which prepares for when you go on to move it from direct contact. I also practise dropping fingers from a height to actually produce sound- but I think I actually find it rather less effective than the exercises where I only use lifting as a preliminary act and then move from contact. Without this preparatory exercise, trying to produce movement from the key can often be a source of tensions and imprecision. This version frees up movement, but without any need to attack the key from above.

[awesom_o]

I agree in the performance stage, but not in the practise stage. My current favourite exercise for technique is based on synthesising the two. I like to hit the surface of the keys as hard as possible WITHOUT actually moving the hammer into the strings. When you master it, you can make a hell of a lot of noise from the thump against the key surfaces. This takes away all the extraneous tensions and gets the fingers better equipped to interact and bond with a key's resistance, which prepares for when you go on to move it from direct contact. I also practise dropping fingers from a height to actually produce sound- but I think I actually find it rather less effective than the exercises where I only use lifting as a preliminary act and then move from contact. Without this preparatory exercise, trying to produce movement from the key can often be a source of tensions and imprecision. This version frees up movement, but without any need to attack the key from above.

If you feel this thumping the key surface loudly is helping your musical development then by all means, continue! In my opinion the only REAL technique is to do what REALLY works, and to do it well! Personally your method seems a bit strange to me, but then again my methods seem strange to others... I believe we should judge only by the musical results!

I would like to mention, however, that for me personally, the only difference between when I rehearse (it is always a rehearsal-never practice) and when I perform is a subtle shift-when I rehearse, I am consolidating my power. When I perform, I am displaying the power which I have consolidated.

[nyiregyhazi]

If you feel this thumping the key surface loudly is helping your musical development then by all means, continue! In my opinion the only REAL technique is to do what REALLY works, and to do it well! Personally your method seems a bit strange to me, but then again my methods seem strange to others... I believe we should judge only by the musical results!

I would like to mention, however, that for me personally, the only difference between when I rehearse (it is always a rehearsal-never practice) and when I perform is a subtle shift-when I rehearse, I am consolidating my power. When I perform, I am displaying the power which I have consolidated.

I know it sounds odd- but when you direct power against the mere key surface, you actually learn something very precise about the finger coordination. From there, I do a much more efficient and effortless energy transfer when I play the note from direct contact- where there's no sense of banging or thumping whatsoever. It's just a preliminary exercise that gets the finger better at becoming alive (rather than stiff or flaccid). At the moment, I don't reliably find the right preparation for simple direct movements, unless I run through these kinds of exercises.

The weird paradox of the exercise is that stage one gives you a clear idea of quite how much force you can apply to a key, yet have it absorbed entirely by the resistance of the key. It's surprising how much of a whack you can give, without the key actually moving. However, somehow, after that process of getting to know the key's resistance, the act of moving the key feels much less effort. I can't explain exactly why.

[awesom_o]

hmm. The reason why my rehearsal techniques are so similar to my actual performance techniques is because I learned once from a great pianist that the old saying really goes 'practice makes permanent'. It isn't 'practice makes perfect' as so many people mistakenly think....

This was my only real 'problem' with the practice technique which you described-it seemed too far removed from the real organic task of music-making.

To each his own, however.

[dima_76557]

I like all of that stuff and I believe all of it can be accomplished without any lifting of the fingers.

Yes and no.
I think it works both ways. You can have:
1) an arsenal of movements you have learned or found
2) an arsenal of sound quality images you can choose from

Different types of movement necessarily create different sound images, different overtone qualities, etc. that can not be achieved with certain other body movements, however hard you try. If you are a good pianist, you can readily choose which movement is most appropriate for which sound effect you have ever encountered. On the other hand, if your imagination and urge to create something new really guide you, then a certain sound image may give birth to another physical approach.

If your philosophy is to ALWAYS stay near the keys, you will be limited somehow in what you can do in terms of sound effects. On the other hand, if your default way of playing is swing with the fingers and lots of body weight behind it (Arrau, Rubinstein) to get a massive tone and nothing else, then you will have a hard time getting the effects a Michelangeli or a Horowitz creates, etc.

Herein lies the tragedy of all those alternative piano methods: they teach you how to move "properly", but the artistic results are often poor because other ways of moving a key are taboo.

EDIT: Here, especially for you, is Michelangeli:

Look at how he swings the fingers of his right hand into the keys and what magical effects he reaches by doing this. Try this at home and then try your default of staying close to the keys. That last approach won't cut it if you want this heartbreaking effect, really.

[awesom_o]

I don't know.... I believe magic at the keyboard is created with the mind. I do not believe the music needs 'sound effects' in order to be profound. I have never had trouble producing unlimited massive ff or delicate, sparkling leggiero. I create both of these with the same touch.

The master touch. My girlfriend has it too. We're working on Beethoven's 9th Symphony arranged for two pianos by Liszt! It's pretty epic.

[dima_76557]

I don't know.... I believe magic at the keyboard is created with the mind. I do not believe the music needs 'sound effects' in order to be profound. I have never had trouble producing unlimited massive ff or delicate, sparkling leggiero. I create both of these with the same touch.

The master touch. My girlfriend has it too. We're working on Beethoven's 9th Symphony arranged for two pianos by Liszt! It's pretty epic.

I don't want to get in a quarrel with you. The last thing I would like to add to this is: A different movement changes the feel of rhythm (also part of the tone image) necessarily for both the performer and the listener. If you play stride for example, it makes a difference to the "swing" feel whether you prepare and press or whether you describe an ellipse and make only one movement to jump. In the first case you will sound "white", in the second case you will sound "black". The second way is far more difficult, of course. It is also far more exciting to listen to. The same is true for something like flamenco guitar playing: you HAVE to use the right movement or it will not be the right thing and experts hear it without even looking at you. "Not one of us".

[ajspiano]

I don't know.... I believe magic at the keyboard is created with the mind. I do not believe the music needs 'sound effects' in order to be profound. I have never had trouble producing unlimited massive ff or delicate, sparkling leggiero. I create both of these with the same touch.

Interestingly, I perceive almost all of my dynamic and/or range of sound qualities to be produced by the same 'touch' (not that its anywhere near as good as I'd like). So I guess I agree with you. However, when I really 'let go' and get into that 'magic at the keyboard' kind of result with something - while I feel as though i'm playing with a similar movement quality in terms of how I play each key the reality is quite different. Video evidence suggests I use some strikingly different movements to produce different sounds (not that I perceive them as effects either).

Its probably hard to tell whether the touch at the key is all that different though.

I wonder where you stand on some parts of the below video..

[dima_76557]

@ ajspiano

Have you ever experimented with direct and indirect touch? One of the types of the indirect touch is the lifting and dropping/swinging Michelangeli does in the 2nd movement of the Ravel concerto I posted above. The keystroke is timed differently and we have no hand in it so to speak. It's a kind of Zen paradox. You are not allowed to hit or strike, or the effect is gone. Any attempt at interfering in the process of tone production makes the effect go away.

Compare what Michelangeli does in the Ravel to what Mlle Grimaud does in that same piece of music to hear the difference. Even if she is constantly in contact with the piano and orgasms virtually on every note, she misses the point completely, and this is not only because of "interpretation", the instrument and the recording. Something happens to the harmonics of every separate tone when you do what Michelangeli does. He also easily comes out of the orchestra. Although the tone is weaker, it is somehow more penetrating.

Also have a listen to this (first piece only) and focus on the quality of touch:

and then immediately to this and see how ugly that actually sounds in this context:

P.S.: My teacher claims that it is actually all types of indirect touch that make the wrong notes in the old school so much more interesting than the good notes in many contemporaries.

[ajspiano]

@ ajspiano

Have you ever experimented with direct and indirect touch?

Yes, infact more so just in the last few days in a direct response to some of the posts in this thread.

Consciously I have experimented perhaps with just about every conceivable variation I suspect (within my current understanding of potential movements), though some more than others - AND, some successfully built into what I can call on subconciously via sound image, others not. My technique has been rebuilt selftaught (though obviously I have spent a good amount of time reading and watching), post having had a teacher that gave me nothing in that regard. I could "get through" advanced material and pretend I could play quite well with musical sensitivity, but really there was a mountain of problems. So I've been through heaps undoing of habitual problems that limit my control.

I think what I meant before was that once they are built into subconscious they are to me perceived as all being the same touch, even though they are perhaps not in many cases depending on what it is I'm going for musically.

..

Where I am at the moment the speakers I have will in no way be sufficient for assessing fine details on sound quality (and in turn relating that to the touch). I'll take a proper look at the videos later on.

[dima_76557]

I think what I meant before was that once they are built into subconscious they are to me perceived as all being the same touch, even though they are perhaps not in many cases depending on what it is I'm going for musically.

Since you are in Jazz, you may have some friends who have a marimba or xylophone. To be "in contact" with such an instrument, you have to learn the timing of the right strokes without hitting/beating, the effect in usage of different mallets, and also where you "touch" the bars to get different kinds of tone colors. The piano can be used in very much the same way and you can get tone images that are beyond compare.

For example, hold the pedal and "strike" a low octave (e.g. D flat is comfortable) with the hand from the wrist but without the intention to create this or that tone. If you get it right, you get magnificent low church bells this way that you cannot get in any other way; comparatively loud, rich, "warm" but very transparent. If you add a little bit of arm weight, it becomes heavier, but there is a limit where you will kill the sound (a dead thud). Interfering, tension, etc. also kill it (it will be too sharp, too brilliant, "cold" if that is the right word).

P.S.: I mention the marimba because the movement is not "dropping" or "falling" like a sack of potatoes. It is a more or less controlled swing but without hitting and without direct control over the tone. After some practice, the sound image will then lead to the "right" movement. Michelangeli was a master in that kind of thing.

[nyiregyhazi]

Since you are in Jazz, you may have some friends who have a marimba or xylophone. To be "in contact" with such an instrument, you have to learn the timing of the right strokes without hitting/beating, the effect in usage of different mallets, and also where you "touch" the bars to get different kinds of tone colors. The piano can be used in very much the same way and you can get tone images that are beyond compare.

For example, hold the pedal and "strike" a low octave (e.g. D flat is comfortable) with the hand from the wrist but without the intention to create this or that tone. If you get it right, you get magnificent low church bells this way that you cannot get in any other way; comparatively loud, rich, "warm" but very transparent. If you add a little bit of arm weight, it becomes heavier, but there is a limit where you will kill the sound (a dead thud). Interfering, tension, etc. also kill it (it will be too sharp, too brilliant, "cold" if that is the right word).

P.S.: I mention the marimba because the movement is not "dropping" or "falling" like a sack of potatoes. It is a more or less controlled swing but without hitting and without direct control over the tone. After some practice, the sound image will then lead to the "right" movement. Michelangeli was a master in that kind of thing.

just one idea here about the possible objective explanation for different things here - I've defined something I call positive vs negative movement. imagine hammering a nail and trying pull your end down rather than the rolling it over the top as a the nail goes in. if your end is driven down, acceleration at the business end is pathetic. this is negative movement. a typical bad solution to that is try to lock it still, but it's actually by sending it UP that you get an actively useful result. trying to stop your end dead means impact. But even when sending your end up, do you truly roll and over the top with freedom or is it still part of pressing down? for it to be healthy you may even start the up movement yourself, a split second before the hammer hits the nail. that way, energy coasts through from hammer to nail, but your arm is free aside from the most minute grip for control. you're not forcing the hammer down but already finished accelerating it.


I believe that same is desirable with a xylophone or piano motion. You have to decouple yourself at the last split second and roll slightly over the top. if you tension to try to stay joined to a hammer mallet or finger, you will receive impact.

[pianoman53]

I find this so funny.