Why is virtuoso playing such a focus here?

[hardy_practice]

What ever happened to good old domestic piano playing?  I can't help thinking virtuosos are such extreme rarities that they shouldn't really figure much in discussions.  I know Chopin and Liszt were profoundly influenced by Paganini -  surely it's best kept at that level?

I for one am sick of having to accommodate to a concert touch-weight.   I've no wish to play for other than family and friends so why must I play some behemoth of a machine?  I think the instrument world has been too led by the manufacturers.  Did you see that vid of Rubinstein at the Steinway factory?  He asked for a lighter touch and they replied "No maestro, the keys would run away with you."

[dima_76557]

What ever happened to good old domestic piano playing?  I can't help thinking virtuosos are such extreme rarities that they shouldn't really figure much in discussions.  I know Chopin and Liszt were profoundly influenced by Paganini -  surely it's best kept at that level?

What do you mean with "good old domestic piano playing"?

Playing something not as well as you know you could does not give much satisfaction, even at home, especially when we see that people who can really play the instrument are becoming a dime a dozen right now, even among children. It's for everybody to see on YouTube. If people who want to strive for that level have questions, then they will get answers from people who have advanced further. Isn't that, among others, what this forum is for?

P.S.: "Virtuoso" for me personally means: being able to play very well and give the music what it deserves. It doesn't have to be loud or fast; just high-quality in every respect. There are ways to get to that level, and there are habits that keep people from ever reaching that level. I would hope that a little insight into those matters is for the benefit of all who want to read it.

[hardy_practice]

Good 'ol domestic piano playing is like you saw in Bach and Mozart's time - or even Mendelsohn.  Yes, my guess is among some groups the caliber of playing is very high - I've not heard that in the interpretation though.

[ted]

I cannot say I have noticed such a focus on this particular forum. There is a great deal of discussion on physical technique, which after all is not such a bad thing, and most of it is intelligently directed to the end of musical expression. The majority of recordings members post do not involve superhuman dexterity and display for their own sake. It depends what we mean by a "virtuoso". Rather than assign a pejorative meaning to the word, that is to say empty showmanship, I like to give it a positive connotation of an artist for whom the instrument is an extension of his mind and hands to the point where he can express his deepest psyche as easily and as naturally as most people walk and talk; a syncretic, physical and mental yoga.

[hardy_practice]

I suppose I'm talking several issues here.Look at this poor kid having to writhe away on some big concert instrument:

[/youtube]

[awesom_o]

Just sounds to me like the poor kid is far too young to be playing that Mozart.

I think it's very important to be a true virtuoso. I don't think true virtuoso playing is the focus here.

This child looks and sounds like a Suzuki student.

True virtuosity is about mastering the instrument. This means solo playing of many styles and composers, chamber music, four-hands, and two-pianos.

Also a true virtuoso must compose their own music. Being a circus monkey isn't quite the same thing.


Virtuoso playing is a noble goal. A true virtuoso can make the instrument speak in any way he or she chooses.

[gyzzzmo]

I suppose I'm talking several issues here.Look at this poor kid having to writhe away on some big concert instrument:

[/youtube]

Who says that didnt happen in Mozart and Bach's time?

[timothy42b]

I cannot say I have noticed such a focus on this particular forum. There is a great deal of discussion on physical technique, which after all is not such a bad thing, and most of it is intelligently directed to the end of musical expression.

It is a good thing, because correct physical technique for the virtuoso stuff is correct for simple music too, and we can all benefit.

Still, the OP is right, it isn't strictly necessary, and a good deal of focus here really applies to the top 1% of pianists.  I am not in that 1% and never will be.  (and do get some criticism here because of it)   

Or maybe I am - if we consider the great body of piano students who are sent by their parents as an enrichment activity and will never play in public, or ever again after high school.

We don't seem to have a middle ground.  We have the eternally struggling klutzy beginner, and we have the artists.  We don't seem to have the average craftsman in between.   

[gyzzzmo]

We don't seem to have a middle ground.  We have the eternally struggling klutzy beginner, and we have the artists.  We don't seem to have the average craftsman in between.   

The average craftsman in between, they are the ones who become teachers or have to choose another job

[awesom_o]

The average craftsman in between, they are the ones who become teachers or have to choose another job

Liszt and Chopin were teachers.

Does that mean they weren't part of that elite group of 'artists'?

Were they just the average craftsmen?

[gyzzzmo]

Liszt and Chopin were teachers.

Does that mean they weren't part of that elite group of 'artists'?

Were they just the average craftsmen?

Do you really want to compare the amount of virtuoso pianists in the time of chopin and liszt with the 21th century? And what they have/had to do to make money?  

[awesom_o]

Part of an artist's role is to practice teaching the art.

Part of a teacher's role is to be a skilled practitioner of the art which they teach.

 

[gyzzzmo]

Part of an artist's role is to practice teaching the art.

Part of a teacher's role is to be a skilled practitioner of the art which they teach.

 

My point of view:

Part of an artist's role is to know how to study the art.

The mediocre skilled artist usually has to learn how to transfer that knowledge on students to make a living.

True virtuoso artists give occasional masterclasses for some extra income. Doesnt make them real teachers though.

[awesom_o]

I believe that in order to be a true virtuoso, one must do much better than simply teach the occasional master class.

A true virtuoso must practice the art from a variety of perspectives.

The point of view you have given is the reason why there are many poor teachers in the world. A real teacher has to love teaching.
They have to understand what it is that they teach.

To fully comprehend the musical arts is to be a virtuoso. 

Liszt and Chopin were the greatest virtuoso players. They were the greatest teachers as well.

[hardy_practice]

The kid playing the Mozart - can't anyone see what a struggle he has with the instrument?

[gyzzzmo]

Liszt and Chopin were the greatest virtuoso players. They were the greatest teachers as well.

They were indeed probably the greatest virtuoso players -of that time-, greatest teachers is not really based on anything. Their teachers were most likely pretty good though 

[hardy_practice]

Or maybe I am - if we consider the great body of piano students who are sent by their parents as an enrichment activity and will never play in public, or ever again after high school.

I think that should be the primary focus - piano as an enrichment  activity.  All too often instruction is results rather than process led.

[hardy_practice]

They were indeed probably the greatest virtuoso players -of that time-, greatest teachers is not really based on anything. Their teachers were most likely pretty good though  

Not only, as usual, have we morphed into a thread about virtuosos but one on the greatest virtuosos!

[awesom_o]

To my ears, it sounds like the kid has learned to play from listening to a recording over and over again.

Although he plays very few audible wrong notes, he has a poor understanding of the rhythm.

Mozart's style receives a nasty beating from his wee fingers.

[indianajo]

With 500 channels of entertainment on the television, it is hard to get anybody to pay attention to anything one does himself these days.  They have to be bribed with alcohol or religion to perticipate in anything hand made anymore. 
The performance topic of pianostreet is more for people that get paid while playing.  This implies enough skill to be special.  You will meet more limited goal people down on the student topic, although I've only had one piano lesson in 45 years.  I play for my pleasure, not for money in a big venue.  And I don't care if the guy on the LP has better technique, my piano sounds better than any stereo or television made.
I think a lot of people on here have exagerated ideas of the market for "virtuosos" playing classical music.  I heard a very moving performance at the Louisville Symphony of Tchaikovski 1st piano Concerto by a teacher from the local college, when the famous very young contest winner pianist backed out.  Yet the symphony will probably never hire him again.  
I share your contempt for the force required to play grand pianos.  I don't have the tendons sized to play one of those things more than 10 minutes, but that is what it takes to fill a thousand seat hall without amplfication, I suppose.  At my skill level, getting more than three people to listen to me at once without paying them would be a thrill.  
While when the wife is listening, I am more likely to play a one note at a time  plus voice version of a Beatles song, or a melody plus one chord arrangement of Falling Leaves, I don't talk about these much because nobody else would be interested in that.  While my playing is probably at the one out of 50000 persons level, my singing is so soft I find it hard to be heard over a console piano.  If the wife would just sing! That is one reason I married her, her singing to the car radio when we were dating, but she gave it up right after we married.  

[gyzzzmo]

Anyway about the kid, i'd rather not judge him from a lousy recording, especially not on a Mozart piece. Plus i'm not sure if any kid of that age can really understand and feel music, or that 'feeling' music is actually based on copying and learning from other music behaviour.

[awesom_o]

"Virtuoso" for me personally means: being able to play very well and give the music what it deserves. It doesn't have to be loud or fast; just high-quality in every respect. There are ways to get to that level, and there are habits that keep people from ever reaching that level.

  This was a very good post!

[hardy_practice]

Good one jo!

So, no one sees the kid's physical struggle?  Interesting.

[awesom_o]

It was not such good playing. I doubt the child feels like he is struggling, but to me it certainly sounded like a struggle.

[hardy_practice]

It was not such good playing. I doubt the child feels like he is struggling, but to me it certainly sounded like a struggle.

I'm not so interested in how well he plays but the physical exertion it entails - try and see how  he brings his whole body in to play what should just require fingers.  Now, high caliber ninja training would have him doing this efficiently but should that really be a requirement?

[awesom_o]

This is the thing.... high caliber ninja training isn't appropriate for young children.

So imho, neither is repertoire that requires said training. Mozart is highly demanding virtuoso music.

[dima_76557]

Good 'ol domestic piano playing is like you saw in Bach and Mozart's time - or even Mendelsohn.  Yes, my guess is among some groups the caliber of playing is very high - I've not heard that in the interpretation though.

Interpretation can grow with time, especially in children. They don't have the maturity to give a musical rendition of whatever standard repertoire anyway, so it is relatively useless to work too deliberately for too long on such things with them.

More important for them, as I see it, is to learn the craft of piano playing, so that when the time of maturity comes, they'll be ready to use the skills they have acquired. When speaking about how hard it is to "motivate" students, by the way, technique/mechanics (anything that flows like oil) is very much in the field of their interest if it is taught in a competent way. Of course, one could say that there are so many "lento's" and "adagio's" in the piano literature that one doesn't have to learn an "allegro" or a "presto", but that sounds like a very sad future for piano entertainment at home.

The tragedy of the renowned Western musical institutions nowadays is that they are more and more populated solely by Asian pianists, and the "locals" are mostly rejected because they simply can't fulfil the TECHNICAL requirements for studying there. As the myth goes, "the Asians work very hard, and the locals don't work hard enough". Don't you think that's sad, especially when the latter is not necessarily true?

Raising the level at which the craft is taught is not useless. Even if all those people who learn it don't become concert pianists (how could they?), they will at least be able to pass on their high-level skills to the next generation, and hopefully, they will have the honor of getting at least one true talent in their hands. I, for myself, am grateful that I have learned how to play at a reasonably high level. This means that, even if I don't become a pro, my old days will be filled with music that can truly bring joy to myself and to others.

[hardy_practice]

Art and craft have always been companions - the latter must serve the former, but perhaps that's an old way of thinking.  It certainly appears that way today.

[dima_76557]

Art and craft have always been companions - the latter must serve the former, but perhaps that's an old way of thinking.  It certainly appears that way today.

I don't think that is really true. Neuhaus writes in his book that it is natural for young people to play very fast and very loudly; to emphasize mechanics and external show. It is a necessary stage they have to go through before they can calm down and become true musicians. How sad, however, when the ear craves for quality that the hands can't match!

[hardy_practice]

I don't think that is really true. Neuhaus writes in his book that it is natural for young people to play very fast and very loudly; to emphasize mechanics and external show. It is a necessary stage they have to go through before they can calm down and become true musicians. How sad, however, when the ear craves for quality that the hands can't match!

Do I know that phenomenon!  I disagree with your last point though - if the ear asks, the hands will deliver.

[dima_76557]

I disagree with your last point though - if the ear asks, the hands will deliver.

Then why don't the hands of the ones that come here for help magically deliver what their ears ask? Can one simply take quotes by famous instrumentalists who were already masters and apply them to (young) people that do not have the required technical foundation yet? i don't think so. The ones that have musical ears but can't do what they want on the keyboard because of mechanical problems are the ones that really suffer. No doubt in my mind about that.

[hardy_practice]

The body will always find a way to bring about the mind's conception.  Not always the best way, that's where the teacher comes in.  Most what I hear is poor conception not poor inception.

[timothy42b]

The body will always find a way to bring about the mind's conception.  Not always the best way, that's where the teacher comes in.  Most what I hear is poor conception not poor inception.

That suggests you're an intuitive, goal oriented, "inner game of tennis" type of learner.

And you think everybody else is too. 

That's natural, but wrong for many of.  For a lot of us the mind's conception does us very little good at all.  We need analytical focus on the mechanics, not on the end product, when we're learning. 

[nyiregyhazi]

Do I know that phenomenon!  I disagree with your last point though - if the ear asks, the hands will deliver.

the irony wouldn't be even half as amusing if you didn't have a youtube account. As they say "do as I do, not as I say".

In this case it doesn't need to be said. It's already a given that anyone attempting to work purely on wishful thinking will almost always do as you do, rather than achieve the idyllic results you speak of. Although you really do need to listen to the left hand more in what is supposed to be a proper duet between two voices, the listening issue is merely the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the gaping holes in the musical line. Nobody simply "hears" the odd random note as needing to be almost absent. It's chiefly a technical problem.

[nyiregyhazi]

That suggests you're an intuitive, goal oriented, "inner game of tennis" type of learner.

And you think everybody else is too.  

That's natural, but wrong for many of.  For a lot of us the mind's conception does us very little good at all.  We need analytical focus on the mechanics, not on the end product, when we're learning.  

it's just a pity that tennis isn't his game. It's easy to rely on self-delusion in pianism, in order to pretend that the results correspond closely to the intent (in spite of no such thing taking place). When you have the objective test of an opponent to square up against and a net/ground markings to nullify poorly controlled shots, self-delusions of readily transferring intent to successful results are pretty quickly shattered, if founded upon nothing of substance.

Nobody here speaks in terms of issues that relate purely to virtuoso technique. They speak in terms of mechanics that are good enough to exert the most basic control over the sound of a simple grade 3 piece and of difficult repertoire alike. That which fails at the highest level also fails at basic levels and vice versa. You don't have to ask every student to aspire to virtuosity in order to want to do everything possible to try to avoid teaching them principles that might actively trap them into nothing but amateurish results.

[hardy_practice]

Quite what your point is with this quirky personal attack is beyond me.  If you can't stay OT don't P!

Edit: you seem to be equating conception with wishful thinking?  I suppose on some level that works but you won't find it in the literature.  Does that also go for Einstein etc.?

[gyzzzmo]

Anyway, the point is that you need really good technique to be able to play a relatively simple piece musically the right way.

What is 'musically the right way' usually isnt understood until somebody compares his own play with how a 'professional' plays it, live.

And since technique is a lot easier to explain on a forum than musicality, and a requirement for musical expression, you'll find that much more on a forum.

Gyzzzmo

[dima_76557]

Anyway, the point is that you need really good technique to be able to play a relatively simple piece musically the right way.

What is 'musically the right way' usually isnt understood until somebody compares his own play with how a 'professional' plays it, live.

It is interesting to note in this context why "professionals" sound so much better than someone else playing that same music at exactly his/her level. They don't have stronger fingers, they are not much more "musical" than amateurs; they simply have LOTS of reserves in many aspects. They can do a hundred times more than what is required in any of the skills involved in playing that same piece. This gives the opportunity, the psychological and physical "space" to breathe while they perform. When you breathe well, you sing so much better. That is true virtuosity, not blinding speed and beating up the piano until it starts screaming.

[hardy_practice]

Anyway, the point is that you need really good technique to be able to play a relatively simple piece musically the right way..

And since technique is a lot easier to explain on a forum than musicality, and a requirement for musical expression, you'll find that much more on a forum.

No, I'd replace natural technique with good technique.  The old comment of Gould's that he could teach anyone to play the piano in 45 minutes is what that is about.  Your second point would he true if typing was doing.  Technique's as opaque as musicality - it's just one's of earth and one's of sky.

[hardy_practice]

This gives the opportunity, the psychological and physical "space" to breathe while they perform.

Love this!  I'd call it playing in the silence.

[gyzzzmo]

No, I'd replace natural technique with good technique.  The old comment of Gould's that he could teach anyone to play the piano in 45 minutes is what that is about.  You second point would he true if typing was doing.  Technique's as opaque as musicality - it's just one's of earth and one's of sky.

I suppose this is where i disagree with you (as far as i understand you here, it's a bit vague).
Somebody can be a quick learner, but good technique still has to be learned and practised a lot, whether you're a 'natural' or not. And you can't express musicality on the piano without good technique, you can express good technique though without musicality . That's why technique stays being the basis for good piano playing and why many people want to know about it on a forum.

Gyzzz

[hardy_practice]

The real problem is that musicality isn't there, it must be taught.  Usually when we say someone is musically talented we mean they have an easy natural technique, but technique without musicality isn't music (not as I know it any how).  There are those who catch on easily to musicality but it's still very much a learnt thing.

[nyiregyhazi]

Quite what your point is with this quirky personal attack is beyond me.  If you can't stay OT don't P!

Edit: you seem to be equating conception with wishful thinking?  I suppose on some level that works but you won't find it in the literature.  Does that also go for Einstein etc.?

no. Wishful thinking is when a person claims the hands automatically figure out what to do yet this fails to happen . The point of the "attack" is to allow anyone who should watch your video to see quite how wishful your thinking is that technique automatically follows conception. Methods are judged first and foremost on results.

[hardy_practice]

And you can tell the inner workings of a youtubers mind as easily as that?  You should have your own TV show!

[nyiregyhazi]

And you can tell the inner workings of a youtubers mind as easily as that?  You should have your own TV show!

no, I can see the lack of success. If you want to blame it all on your musical conception (ie portray yourself as a technical master with no conception of musical line) in order to try to stay consistent with the original claim then so be it.

And obviously the notes that missed altogether in your op 10 no 1 are omitted altogether from your musical conception.

[hardy_practice]

As I have to keep saying- you'd make a better point by playing the ball.

[nyiregyhazi]

As I have to keep saying- you'd make a better point by playing the ball.

The associated results that your mindset has produced are the ball. It's the exception that proves the rule (ie DISPROVES, when the phrase is correctly understood). Either your musical conception of op 10 no 1 has many notes missing from it, or your video reveals it to be a nonsense that hands automatically learn to obey intent.

[awesom_o]

Everyone's musical conception of 10/1 has many notes missing from it. That Etude is next to impossible on a modern piano!

[timothy42b]

no. Wishful thinking is when a person claims the hands automatically figure out what to do yet this fails to happen .

You're falling into the same trap hardy did, only in the opposite direction.

You are quite right that I can't get my hands to figure out what to do based on my musical goal.  And that applied to my tennis stroke and my golf stroke as well.  

But that doesn't mean everybody else's brain functions the same way mine does.  Quite a lot of people ARE able to have their body automatically figure it out.  And many of them become high level performers in golf, tennis, and yes music.  (and incidentally it's why many of those high performers can't teach at all, though they think they can;  they fail utterly with people like me who need the analysis of technique at a basic level)  

[hardy_practice]

The associated results that your mindset has produced are the ball.

No, the ball is the OT of this thread.  Twist as you might.  Try reading the title - where in the heck op 10 no 1 figures is beyond me.