Is relaxation always necessary and the only acceptable technic?

[drazh]

I mean is there any pieces that should be played with tension and better sound ffect.
Eg,relaxation for fast pieces and tension for slower pieces , forte ,etc
thank you

[awesom_o]

Relaxation is not is not an acceptable technique.

Neither is tension.


In fact, both tension and relaxation themselves are just words which don't have very much to do with music at all!

[gyzzzmo]

Actually, i dont think there are (m)any pieces that DONT require a combination of tension and relaxation

[drazh]

Actually, i dont think there are (m)any pieces that DONT require a combination of tension and relaxation

are you serious?

[pianoman53]

If you're completely relaxed, you'll probably fall off your chair... If you're completely tensed, you'd probably not be able to sit on a chair.

[richard black]

Yes, quite - all human activity requires a careful blend of relaxation and tension.

[awesom_o]

The above two posts show true knowledge.

[nyiregyhazi]

The problem is that comparing tension and relaxation, in the conventional sense is at best imprecise and at worst very misleading. Tension is normally understood as bracing against unwanted movement. When this is your attitude either you stiffen to keep something immobilised and overwork, or you relax in actively and waste energy upon buckling joints. Piano playing at a high level isn't about using tension to stop unwanted collapses in the hand. It's about generating movement in the useful direction, in order to eradicate all possibility of movement in a destructive direction. It's not even about finding a halfway point between stiffness and floppiness, but about the specific timing of how you apply productive movement. Anything that is founded upon the need to immobilise things via tension is a flawed viewpoint for technique. The only way to stop an unmoving finger joint from buckling is for it to be truly rigid- with phenomenonal muscular exertion. Being somewhere in the middle be will allow it to collapse with negative consequences. That's less strenuous than locking completely but of no use in playing to a high level. The lone solution is for it to be in the act of moving in the useful direction ie it doesn't even relate meaningfully to a sliding scale between tension and relaxation but to a whole other issue altogether.

Strictly speaking all movements are a form of muscular tension, but that is a given. Nobody forgets not to lie in a heap on the floor because they are trying to avoid muscle tension. As soon as you say any type of "tension" is okay, you just introduce room for gross confusion. Rather, you need to appreciate productive actions and movements, which will never feel stiff. Anything that is perceived as a tension is going to be done wrong 99 percent of the time, even if perceived somewhere in the middle of the scale rather than as complete tension.

[drazh]

What about the other 1%?

[nyiregyhazi]

The other one percent are ultra accomplished pianists who use the word tension as an exceedingly subjective way to label something totally different to what the rest of us consider tension to be. Nobody knowingly refers to movement as a tension. only those who learned the right instincts long ago and don't even know how they do it would refer to that as a tension.for the rest of us, tension means trying to render something unmovable via general unfocussed strength of muscle contraction.That's never the answer, because its overwhelmingly more productive to add just a trace of movement in a useful direction. Not to mention less physical effort.

[awesom_o]

Hahah, if anyone could be bothered to actually READ Nyregyhazi's posts (I always do) they would learn a great deal!


Nyiregyhazi, your posts become richer and clearer as the days go by! Bloody difficult to even talk about, let alone write about this sort of stuff. I think you're doing a fantastic job!!

[theodore]

Alfred Brendel is awesome in his emotional interpretation of the Schubert Impromptu opus 90 # 3

[timothy42b]

I would suggest a more useful definition of tension.

Tension is muscular effort in excess of the minimum required to perform an action, whether that action is a movement or holding a static position. 

Frequently but not always this excess muscular effort results from using antagonist muscles improperly.  A motion may require extension or retraction; much more extension effort will be required if you are also activating the retraction muscles.  For a very simple example, think of using the triceps in a pushing movement.  If the biceps are relaxed, the triceps can perform with minimum force.  If the biceps contract, fighting the motion, the triceps must work much harder. 

It is also possible to add the muscular effort to parts of the body not directly related.  Many people tighten the neck, jaw, and forehead muscles while playing.

[hardy_practice]

Not quite so simple.  Any movement must be smoothed by the antagonist otherwise the movement is just a jerk.

[timothy42b]

Not quite so simple.  Any movement must be smoothed by the antagonist otherwise the movement is just a jerk.

Nothing is really simple, is it?

But typically a nerve signal telling a muscle to contract is also sent to the antagonist inhibiting the contraction.  It is easy to override the inhibition (which as you point out is not total) and contract the antagonist.  This contraction also causes a jerky movement.  I don't think you can override the inhibition in the wrong direction - if you can it is more recent knowledge that I haven't come across. 

[hardy_practice]

I've measured the antagonist when flexing the fingers using SEMG - there's always substantial activity.  Think about it - the more active your flexion the more active the extensors need to be to smooth the action.  All best left up to the specialists I can't help thinking.

[minona]

I think you might mean efficiency.

[nyiregyhazi]

I've measured the antagonist when flexing the fingers using SEMG - there's always substantial activity.  Think about it - the more active your flexion the more active the extensors need to be to smooth the action.  All best left up to the specialists I can't help thinking.

I don't think it's useful to describe things in terms of things that we cannot consciously perceive or differentiate. External classifications of what we cannot distinguish with our senses (no matter how well trained they are) are pointless. What we call tension probably does tend to involve severe cocontraction, but nobody improves that by understanding that mild cocontraction is okay but severe ones aren't. We do not perceive such things. Unless this accurate yet totally decontextualised truth is translated into the practical means of bringing about such differences (rather than intending to obey a concept, that the senses are not tuned to respond to) the description is nothing but an intellectual labelling of technicalities that are not under simple conscious control- not something that can serve as a prescriptive means of making improvement.

The simple yardstick is that when you are trying to render something truly immovable in reponse to any form of external force, you are tense. We shouldn't ever be trying to put things beyond all possibility of movement in any direction. When you learn how to resist external forces by suitably timed usage of movement (rather than generic fixation) you will not be tense. While such a brief summary as this will not convey the whole thing, suitable exercises make it possible to come to understand and perceive the difference very directly, in this light. Conversely, nobody can learn to achieve the functionally necessary actions to avoid fixation, simply by worrying about the externalised concept of cocontraction (taken in abstraction from the specifics of what is required to move piano keys without giving way and how the actions are actually perceived by the proprioceptive senses).

Nobody gets it wrong because they didn't know about the folly of severe cocontractions and nobody cures them by knowing that they are bad. Whether you succeed or fail, the brain is not wired that way. Totally separate processes determine whether it goes wrong this way. You don't need to know a thing about cocontractions to get it right and you equally can know everything about them yet be appallingly tense. The answers lie in what actions make them necessary/unnecessary.

[cometear]

Tension and relaxation both are sure causes of injuries. If you do them, anywhere, I can guarantee you will injure yourself.

[dima_76557]

I mean is there any pieces that should be played with tension and better sound ffect.
Eg,relaxation for fast pieces and tension for slower pieces , forte ,etc

The secret to a really good technique seems to be to:
1) activate what you need and keep it activated;
2) "relax" what you don't need and keep it "relaxed" (= not more tonus in the muscles than is absolutely required).

P.S.: Correct coordination (mostly a neurological problem) and true independence of different body parts is crucial if you want to solve this.

For example: most people are not able to lift their fingers one by one without experiencing tension in the other fingers, the hand, the wrist, and ultimately the upper side of the underarm. This is a NEUROLOGICAL problem that *can* be solved if you have enough patience, but it is not proof that lifting the fingers in itself and swinging them gently into the key is bad practice for all as some piano methodists proclaim.

Another example: when one plays a chord, one should check whether fingers that do NOT participate have freedom of movement. Can you "wiggle" or "waggle" those fingers? This is also a neurological problem. Instead of running away from the problem by inventing misguided theories about "tension-relaxation" of fingers that should stay active, one should simply solve the underlying neurological problem of true independence through smart practice, preferably under qualified guidance.

[hardy_practice]

Nobody gets it wrong because they didn't know about the folly of severe cocontractions and nobody cures them by knowing that they are bad. Whether you succeed or fail, the brain is not wired that way. Totally separate processes determine whether it goes wrong this way. You don't need to know a thing about cocontractions to get it right and you equally can know everything about them yet be appallingly tense. The answers lie in what actions make them necessary/unnecessary.

OMG!  I agree.

[timothy42b]

The secret to a really good technique seems to be to:
1) activate what you need and keep it activated;
2) "relax" what you don't need and keep it "relaxed" (= not more tonus in the muscles than is absolutely required).

I would agree.

I also notice that unnecessary tension easily creeps in unnoticed. 

It's easier to see than feel, so a mirror can be very helpful. 

[hardy_practice]

I also notice that unnecessary tension easily creeps in unnoticed. 

That's a good point - totally agree.  Constant vigilance is what it's about.

[timothy42b]

I have tried to reduce tension in my playing (whatever instrument it happens to be).

That's kind of a backwards reactive approach - do the action, recognize the tension, reduce it. 

I have heard that there are teachers who insist on the opposite.  They start with full relaxation, and slowly add motion, stopping and correcting every time tension sneaks in.  I have not had any experience with that approach, and I'm probably describing it poorly as a result. 

[hardy_practice]

I have heard that there are teachers who insist on the opposite.  They start with full relaxation, and slowly add motion, stopping and correcting every time tension sneaks in.  I have not had any experience with that approach, and I'm probably describing it poorly as a result. 

That's how I teach - start all floppy and move on from there.