interesting article on technique

[hardy_practice]

Here's an interesting article on technique I just came across.  Puts one of my points quite well - the difference between old and new pianos and how technique needed to change: https://archive.org/stream/jstor-738050/738050_djvu.txt

Personally my get-out is to play on an old piano!

[dima_76557]

Here's an interesting article on technique I just came across.  Puts one of my points quite well - the difference between old and new pianos and how technique needed to change: https://archive.org/stream/jstor-738050/738050_djvu.txt

Personally my get-out is to play on an old piano!

In this context I have a question: Are "heavy" pianos specific to Britain and/or other English-speaking countries? I have never heard any complaints in Russia, neither from amateurs nor from professionals, neither from children nor from the elderly. We have very "heavy" Petroff's left from the Soviet time, but with the right timing, it is a piece of cake to get even through that kind of resistance.

P.S.: I didn't like the article very much because it misrepresents what the Old School was after with its technical regimen. The value of those exercises is/was neurological, not muscle training.

[hardy_practice]

Mr Weyman is writing about pianos made before and during Chopin's life time.  The type Field would have played in Russia.

[nyiregyhazi]

Here's an interesting article on technique I just came across.  Puts one of my points quite well - the difference between old and new pianos and how technique needed to change: https://archive.org/stream/jstor-738050/738050_djvu.txt

Personally my get-out is to play on an old piano!

when young pianists are playing exceedingly fast Chopin etudes by the bucket load, to complain of action weight will never look like anything but an amateurish excuse. Heavy actions expose inefficient technique. The problem is when people try to get around them by pressing the arm down rather than learn to differentiate the fingers.

[outin]

Interesting article indeed, in a historical sense, considering it was published in 1918. Many other things have changed as well, not just pianos, so it shouldn't be judged by present standards.

[hardy_practice]

Interesting article indeed, in a historical sense, considering it was published in 1918. Many other things have changed as well, not just pianos, so it shouldn't be judged by present standards.

Well, the piano's not changed neither has the repertoire so not sure what you mean.  Turns out Mr Weyman was a New York pianist - described as 'one of the best in New York'.  He got excellent reviews.

[hardy_practice]

Heavy actions expose inefficient technique.

Yes, but better designated inappropriate technique.

[awesom_o]

Yes, but better designated inappropriate technique.

I don't tend to think of technique as being either 'appropriate' or 'inappropriate'.

Musical results can either be good or bad.

I enjoyed the article! Pianos have changed very little over the last 95 years.

For my taste, many people play Chopin Etudes exceedingly fast....  trying to press everything down with the arms results in poor tonal quality.

[hardy_practice]

I don't tend to think of technique as being either 'appropriate' or 'inappropriate'.

Point being, as the author says, there's one technique (mostly finger) for the early piano and another (arm technique) for the later more powerful instrument.

[nyiregyhazi]

Yes, but better designated inappropriate technique.

Perhaps you might have the courtesy to offer an explanation as to why the difference between the two particular terms might be in any way significant (rather than write as if you've made an objective and irrefutable factual correction)?

Personally, I favour inefficient, because those who don't channel energy efficiently won't actually do a whole lot better when playing light actions- certainly not in the most difficult etudes. If you waste energy, then light actions can be extremely problematic when you need to play loud. It's still hard to avoid jamming the arm down, but in a different kind of way. A pianist who prefers light actions should still start by exposing and correcting his faults on a heavy action. At the moment, I'm doing a lot of practise based on playing every note twice. It's the ultimate test of whether the finger is differentiating out from a free arm, or whether the arm is burdening the finger by piling unnecessary force on top of it. It's a make or break exercise, as you have to know what to look for. However, it drastically improves the ease at a heavy action, if you get the fingers engaging correctly without downward arm force.

[awesom_o]

Point being, as the author says, there's one technique (mostly finger) for the early piano and another (arm technique) for the later more powerful instrument.

To play any of my music, an artist must have highly developed classical technique.

I do not like to  categorize anything so simply as 'finger technique' or 'arm technique'.

The fingers cannot be separated from the arm, and the arm cannot be separated from the fingers.

To play the works I have written, the entire mechanism must operate in harmony!

[hardy_practice]

Here he is on the genesis of the quiet hand:
 
'The characteristics of the early piano were very light action,
small dip of key, slight singing quality, little contrast, and limited
power. For these conditions, actual muscular energy of the finger
would be generally sufficient. Indeed, the "quiet hand," of which
we hear so much in the development of technique, was a logical
and necessary condition; for unless the hand were held gently
in a quiet position, it was extremely difficult accurately to gauge
the light force to fit the needs of the very delicate action.'

Totally appropriate for Mozart's instrument and remember, Mozart laughed at anything but the quiet hand.  Try that on today's piano and you have Mr N's inefficiency.  But it's not inefficient per se, just inappropriate for our modern instrument.  We're talking chalk and cheese here gentleman.

[awesom_o]

I play with a quiet hand every single day!

If you are a skilled chef you can do some incredible things with chalk and cheese. The drier texture of the chalk compliments the moist, exciting flavour of the cheese.

[hardy_practice]

I play with a quiet hand every single day!

If you are a skilled chef you can do some incredible things with chalk and cheese. The drier texture of the chalk compliments the moist, exciting flavour of the cheese.

I do it on clavichord and early piano.  Jeez, it's a struggle on anything with modern action.  Maybe over the years you've built the musculature.  Hmm, I wouldn't come round for dinner though.

[nyiregyhazi]

I play with a quiet hand every single day!

If you are a skilled chef you can do some incredible things with chalk and cheese. The drier texture of the chalk compliments the moist, exciting flavour of the cheese.

exactly. The fact that hardy assumes two radically different techniques is exactly why he struggles on a heavy action. You can't hope to play the explosive finger work of Chopin 's first scherzo with a bobbing arm or consistently notable arm pressures. For the majority the arms just float around laterally the same as in Mozart. Everyone's INSTINCT is to think that the arms do it all on a heavy action. But allowing this instinct to control your technique is exactly what leads to failure to meet the demands of a modern grand.

[nyiregyhazi]

I do it on clavichord and early piano.  Jeez, it's a struggle on anything with modern action.  Maybe over the years you've built the musculature.  Hmm, I wouldn't come round for dinner though.

it's not about musculature. You need to join the arm with the hand by creating length and having the knuckles propped up via the contact with the keys. When you master this on a heavy action, a very subtle adaptation of the same technique makes everything work all the better on light actions. But if you survive a stiff arm by sticking to light actions, you will never succeed in transferring it the other way around.

[hardy_practice]

But if you survive a stiff arm by sticking to light actions, you will never succeed in transferring it the other way around.

I must have missed the bit where I stated I have a 'stiff arm'.  I don't suppose you could stick to the article? 

[awesom_o]

You need to join the arm with the hand by creating length and having the knuckles propped up via the contact with the keys. When you master this on a heavy action, a very subtle adaptation of the same technique makes everything work all the better on light actions.

I agree with this completely.

However, I find Steve's playing to be very beautiful here:

In my opinion, his arm is anything but 'stiff'. It's actually incredibly fluid. It allows his hands to play the difficult counterpoint with great attention to the clarity of individual voices AND their role in the overall musical texture.

The funny thing is, I use the exact same technique on a modern grand. I call it the Chopin technique.
Finger-substitution galore!

[nyiregyhazi]

I agree with this completely.

However, I find Steve's playing to be very beautiful here:

In my opinion, his arm is anything but 'stiff'. It's actually incredibly fluid. It allows his hands to play the difficult counterpoint with great attention to the clarity of individual voices AND their role in the overall musical texture.

The funny thing is, I use the exact same technique on a modern grand. I call it the Chopin technique.
Finger-substitution galore!

It works okay in that one, but his arm is simply locked stiffly in the Bach film.

However, even in that one, it works for the situation but the style of movement wouldn't transfer to a fast étude on a modern grand. The arm is not quite joining the wrist by creating length, but is instead relying on small generic relaxation movements to avoid stiffness. When you try to apply the same to a really advanced piece, those kinds of generic movements won't fit it in. The arm needs to start simply maintaining length and moving laterally with the direction of the note. Playing every note twice is the ultimate test for this - on light and heavy actions alike. If you don't both join every finger to the key properly and create enough length to avoid tightness, the whole thing becomes so unstable that it won't allow two precise and reliable articulations of each finger. It's amazing what how much you can expose from this practise method. All kinds of subtle but significant problems come straight to the surface, allowing corrections.

[hardy_practice]

Could you please stick to the article?  The mumbo jumbo above is OT!  Try discussing the merits of yer man's 'scientific' theory.

[nyiregyhazi]

Could you please stick to the article?  The mumbo jumbo above is OT!  Try discussing the merits of yer man's 'scientific' theory.

the only mumbo jumbo is in the article. Good technique is transferable. Any pianist who can play both quickly and lightly on a standard piano will play light actions equally well. Those who depend on light actions to get by can rarely execute truly difficult music to a high standard even on light actions, unless they also have the technique to play standard pianos. They just get to hide more of the holes.

Ultimately, you can hide behind a light action up to a point, but you cannot hide altogether if the basic technique is not up to scratch. Show me a pianist who can run his fingers like Tatum and you'll have a pianist who had a right to prefer light actions. But most people who "prefer" the light action are simply trying to hide from problems in coping fully with standard techniques

[hardy_practice]

the only mumbo jumbo is in the article. Good technique is transferable. Any pianist who can play both quickly and lightly on a standard piano will play light actions equally well. Those who depend on light actions to get by can rarely execute truly difficult music to a high standard even on light actions, unless they also have the technique to play standard pianos. They just get to hide more of the holes.

That's a start, but now you're just gainsaying the article.  The point is that there is a special touch for the most light (and therefore sensitive)  pianos.  Modern touch is too crude - as it requires movement of the hand/arm.  Basical, IMHO, subtleness was comprised for volume.    So no, they can't play light actions 'equally well' as they've not got the sensitivity of the quiet hand.

[dima_76557]

The point is that there is a special touch for the most light (and therefore sensitive)  pianos.  Modern touch is too crude - as it requires movement of the hand/arm.  Basical, IMHO, subtleness was comprised for volume.    So no, they can't play light actions 'equally well' as they've not got the sensitivity of the quiet hand.

Chopin preferred Pleyel, as I recall, because they were light. Liszt preferred the heavier Erard, but he could play anything he got his hands on. Chopin, for example, didn't exactly complain about how Liszt played his works (especially the etudes), so I think that conclusion about lack of finesse doesn't seem to be warranted.

[awesom_o]

I feel that the piano I made my recordings on is an incredible instrument. Its action is anything but crude.... if the musical results are crude it is entirely the fault of the player, not the machine.

The action is extremely deep and extremely heavy, compared to historical instruments. It is also extremely responsive. In the right hands, the modern concert grand can achieve an unbelievably wide dynamic range.

I do not like the modern concert grands from many makers. I find the action too light and too smooth for my taste, particularly on the new Japanese machines from Kawai and Yamaha. I like an older Steinway, with a nice, heavy set of hammers glued on.

I can play much faster on the new machines from Mason and Hamlin with the WNG action than on anything else I've ever touched... but to me speed isn't everything. I prefer tone.

[nyiregyhazi]

That's a start, but now you're just gainsaying the article.  The point is that there is a special touch for the most light (and therefore sensitive)  pianos.  Modern touch is too crude - as it requires movement of the hand/arm.  Basical, IMHO, subtleness was comprised for volume.    So no, they can't play light actions 'equally well' as they've not got the sensitivity of the quiet hand.

choose a stance and stick with it. You complained when I spoke of your stiff arm in Bach. Now you're complaining about movement of the arm? If the arm does not move at all, it's stiff. A free arm at least moves in response to reactions - which is needed in any style.

If you're asserting that all modern pianos require active instigation of key movement from the arm, you're plain wrong. The whole purpose of the exercise where I play each note at twice is to eliminate downward arm pressure. The finger has to produce all key movement. The arm only makes room for it with freedom and lightness. Obviously you're simply using the wrong technique, when faced with a heavy action. Small wonder you have a problem with them.There's nothing coarse about how an artist like Benjamin Grosvenor shapes every note. All pianists who can control the sound on a heavy action control light ones too. Only pianists who cannot control a heavy action will struggle to control a light one.

Your whole argument is simply one big attempt to spin doctor your inability to deal with standard concert grands as being evidence of sophistication on your part. It's no such thing, but simply evidence of technical problems. Sophisticated quality of movement works on all actions. Chopin himself said he liked a Broadwood to express himself when he was feeling strong enough.

[awesom_o]

I'm beginning to suspect you may be jealous of Steve's incredible control of polyphonic textures!

[nyiregyhazi]

I'm beginning to suspect you may be jealous of Steve's incredible control of polyphonic textures!

I doubt if it's half as much of a challenge to convey polyphony on a clavichord as to project an intense but not forced inner voice on a modern grand, while both subduing the surroundings and keeping internal phrasing. Modern pianos are where the real challenges lie. Again, if you can differentiate between sounds like Horowitz on a modern grand, there will be little difficulty in controlling dynamic levels of clavichord. It won't go back to the other way though.

[awesom_o]

I agree with you. I would not have considered any other piano for recording the 24 Chopin Etudes.

I'd be extremely interested in recording the 32 Sonatas of Beethoven using a forte-piano.

Definitely going with a modern instrument for the Liszt transcriptions of the Symphonies, however.

[hardy_practice]

Chopin, for example, didn't exactly complain about how Liszt played his works (especially the etudes), so I think that conclusion about lack of finesse doesn't seem to be warranted.

A famous episode as Chopin is writing home!  I have a theory about that, I was saving for another thread - but here goes: Liszt was the first hard drilled pianist, he admits it himself.  Chopin loved the precise sound drilling gets you and wanted to 'steal from him the way in which he performs them'.  He would never have exchanged it for his more intimate, natural style though.  Chopin's style never took off,  everywhere now we hear finely drilled pianists!  Though admirable, definitely not my cup of tea.

[hardy_practice]

I feel that the piano I made my recordings on is an incredible instrument. Its action is anything but crude.... if the musical results are crude it is entirely the fault of the player, not the machine.

By touch I meant the player.  If, as you say, your hand is still then you've managed to overcome the problem.  I really do hope that's possible.

[hardy_practice]

I'm beginning to suspect you may be jealous of Steve's incredible control of polyphonic textures!

Now I'm getting embarrassed!

[hardy_practice]

If the arm does not move at all, it's stiff. A free arm at least moves in response to reactions

There you're wrong.  Move your finger in the air - does the arm move or 'react'?  The arm has to 'react' with heavier touches because the fingers alone don't have the required mass.  They do for a very light touch which is why the arm doesn't move and isn't stiff either.

[dima_76557]

A famous episode as Chopin is writing home!  I have a theory about that, I was saving for another thread - but here goes: Liszt was the first hard drilled pianist, he admits it himself.  Chopin loved the precise sound drilling gets you and wanted to 'steal from him the way in which he performs them'.  He would never have exchanged it for his more intimate, natural style though.  Chopin's style never took off,  everywhere now we hear finely drilled pianists!  Though admirable, definitely not my cup of tea.

Could I see a decent quote to back up those assertions? I know that Chopin didn't like the "Elvis image" in Liszt (a little jealousy maybe?), but "drilled", "drilling" as a description of Liszt as an artist I have never seen him say or write in my life. Chopin's self-imposed seclusion and "intimate style" was mostly because of his physical condition, and also because he had terrible stage fright, so he was never really able to drive an audience wild as Liszt could.

[nyiregyhazi]

There you're wrong.  Move your finger in the air - does the arm move or 'react'?  The arm has to 'react' with heavier touches because the fingers alone don't have the required mass.  They do for a very light touch which is why the arm doesn't move and isn't stiff either.

That's because the reaction from moving air is negligible. If your yardstick involves failing to account for the significant reactions that occur when moving piano keys (by referencing a different situation in which reactions are no issue) t's small wonder that your arm is so stiff on that Bach film, or that you have such a problem with a concert grand. You're applying an idea to situation that is radically different.

[hardy_practice]

Could I see a decent quote to back up those assertions? I know that Chopin didn't like the "Elvis image" in Liszt (a little jealousy maybe?), but "drilled", "drilling" as a description of Liszt as an artist I have never seen him say or write in my life.

In his youth Liszt travelled every where with a small silent practice keyboard.  All the time on trains for instance he was drilling his fingers.  Here's a picture of it:

[hardy_practice]

That's because the reaction from moving air is negligible.

As is the reaction from a piano made in 1800.

[dima_76557]

In his youth Liszt travelled every where with a small silent practice keyboard.  All the time on trains for instance he was drilling his fingers.  Here's a picture of it:

I have one myself, and I wouldn't want to live without it! I NEVER drill my fingers though.

Do you know the history of the dummy keyboard? Do you know why it is used? Certainly not to "drill" your fingers. It is used to focus your mind on the finger patterns without having the audible cues. It deepens, refines quality of touch because you are forced to listen to your inner sound image and adapt your touch accordingly. I would highly recommend it to anyone as THE ultimate way of checking how well you know the pieces you play.

[hardy_practice]

On a train!?

[dima_76557]

On a train!?

On a train, in a stagecoach, wherever. External sounds don't distract you if you are able to concentrate. Besides, how else was he to prepare for concerts with no instrument available?

[hardy_practice]

On a train, in a stagecoach, wherever. External sounds don't distract you if you are able to concentrate. Besides, how else was he to prepare for concerts with no instrument available?

Practising at least 10 hours a day? To Chopin's 3?  and all that Czerny?  Reading a book at the same time?  Here's Alan Walker:

'According to his own testimony, Liszt sometimes practised for ten or twelve hours a day, and much of this labour was expended on endurance exercises -scales, arpeggios, trills and repeated notes... As early as 1828 Liszt's Paris studio contained a piano with a specially strengthened keyboard on which it was impossible to play without effort...He also suggested to the same pupil that repetitive exercises be mastered while reading a book, in order to avoid boredom...It was Liszt's view that all keyboard configurations, however complex, could be reduced to a small group of elements - scales, octaves, leaps, repeated notes etc - and that if the student worked at them consistently, he could meet any challenge.'

[thalbergmad]

What did Liszt know??

He was not aware that all you need to do is read Chang and play Scarlatti.

How he wasted all those hours

Thal

[thalbergmad]

He also suggested to the same pupil that repetitive exercises be mastered while reading a book, in order to avoid boredom. '

Better to use a Turkish pipe like Thalberg.

Thal

[hardy_practice]

...or a little bottle like Chopin!

[nyiregyhazi]

As is the reaction from a piano made in 1800.

Your point being what? Even if that were true, it simply clarifies why you cannot deal with the reactions of a modern grand. And it isn't true. When Beethoven stretched the pianos of their time to their limits of FF, the reactions against the key bed would be very large. Comparable to thin air? Hardly. A light action can make it all the more difficult to get a big sound without hitting the key bed hard and receiving a big reaction. It's arguably harder to get a big sound without a hard landing, when the hammer has less mass. If you're happy to settle for a small dynamic range, then you can hide behind a light action. But to play Beethoven effectively on a period instrument, you need to learn how to deal with significant reactions without tightening the arm. Everything you write makes it clear that you are trying to fight reactions, rather than using a connected chain to absorb them passively. You're completely missing the point, if you seriously believe that accomplished virtuosos use brute muscle force to deal with them. You're only creating limitations for yourself, via the inaccurate analysis of what so many fine pianists are really doing to overcome a hard action. Your description only applies to what you are trying to do (quite incorrectly), not to inherent necessities of mastering a firmer action. What you describe about the arm having to "react" is exactly how to kill any hope of getting used to a concert grand. If you learn the alternative of keeping the arm lengthened but passive you'll likely find softer actions to be much more responsive too- once you've learned how to remain stable without fighting either big or small reactions at all.

[awesom_o]

I do think Andrew has a point. A very good one, in fact.

His point is the very reason why I prefer a firm action to a softer action.

In my humble opinion, Steve, the technique which works so well for you on period instruments is not so very different at all to the one which I use on the modern concert grand.

Obviously I have spent a huge amount of time on modern instruments, so my body has adapted to them well. But I promise, when I come to visit, you will find my touch dainty and smooth, and you needn't fear for the well-being of your beautiful little instruments.

[dima_76557]

Practising at least 10 hours a day? To Chopin's 3?

It is perceivable that Chopin simply couldn't do more because of his physical condition, really. He also dreamed of having the strength and endurance Liszt had.

When one student broke a string playing one of Chopin's polonaises, Chopin remarked that if he had the required strength, there wouldn't be a string left unbroken. Please, let's not make a pussy of Chopin.

and all that Czerny?

 
You have no idea who Czerny was and what he was after, really. He may have been the greatest teacher who ever lived.

Reading a book at the same time?

I can imagine why he did that. I'll leave it for you to guess.

EDIT: Think of how the great Michelangelo painted his masterpieces while having people read and talk to him.

Here's Alan Walker:

'According to his own testimony, Liszt sometimes practised for ten or twelve hours a day, and much of this labour was expended on endurance exercises -scales, arpeggios, trills and repeated notes...

This does not mean that he drilled those exercises mindlessly. Rachmaninoff also had a dummy keyboard. You must have read the story about him practising Chopin's thirds etude. This has really nothing to do with drilling.

[hardy_practice]

Your point being what? Even if that were true, it simply clarifies why you cannot deal with the reactions of a modern grand.

Why always about me??  The article doesn't mention me at all!  Please stay OT!

And it isn't true. When Beethoven stretched the pianos of their time to their limits of FF, the reactions against the key bed would be very large. Comparable to thin air? Hardly. A light action can make it all the more difficult to get a big sound without hitting the key bed hard and receiving a big reaction. 

Au contraire, actually kedbedding was de riguer in Hummel's time.  I discovered that for myself on one of my instruments but here's Hummel:

2. Piano-fortes, generally speaking, are constructed on two different plans, the German or Vienna, as it is termed, and the English; the former is played upon with great facility as to touch, the latter with considerably less ease. Other modes of construction are compounded of these two, or are merely partial variations upon one or other of them.

3. It canot be denied but that each of these mechanisms has its peculiar advantages. The German piano may be played upon with ease by the weakest hand. It allows the performer to impart to his execution every possible degree of light and shade, speaks clearly and promptly, has a round fluty tone, which in a large room contrasts well with the accompanying orchestra, and does not impede rapidity of execution by requiring too great an effect. (It is self evident that we speak here only of the instruments of the most celebrated Vienna and German makers.) These instruments are likewise durable, and cost but half the price of the English piano-forte.

4. To the English construction however, we must not refuse the praises due on the score of its durability and fullness of tone. Nevertheless this instrument does not admit of the same facility of execution as the German ; the touch is much heavier, the keys sink much deeper, and, consequently, the return of the hammer upon the repetition of a note, cannot take place so quickly.

Whoever is yet accustomed to these instruments, should not by any means allow himself to be discomposed by the deep descent of the keys, nor by the heaviness of the touch ; only let him not hurry himself in the time, and let him play all quick passages and runs with the usual lightness of finger ; even passages which require to be executed with strength, must, as in German instruments, be produced by the power of the fingers, and not by the weight of the arms ; for as this mechanism is not capable of such numerous modifications as to degree of tone as ours, we gain no louder sound by a heavy blow, than may be produced by the natural strength and elasticity of the fingers.

In the first moment, we are sensible of something unpleasant, because in forte passages in particular, on our German instruments, we press the keys quite down, while here, they must be only touched superficially, as otherwise we could not succeed in executing such runs without excessive effort and double difficulty. As a counterpoise to this, however, through the fullness of tone of the English piano-forte, the melody receives a peculiar charm and harmonious sweetness.

In the mean time, I have observed that, powerfully as these instruments sound in a chamber, they change the nature of their tone in spacious localities ; and that they are less distinguishable than ours, when associated with complicated orchestral accompaniments ; this, in my opinion, is to be attributed to the thickness and fullness of their tone.

    (quoted in Colt, C. F. The Early Piano. Stainer & Bell, London. 1981)

[hardy_practice]

It is perceivable that Chopin simply couldn't do more because of his physical condition, really. He also dreamed of having the strength and endurance Liszt had.

He was quite robust at the time.
Jan Matuszynski TO HIS BROTHER-IN-LAW IN POLAND  [Paris. 1834]
. . . My first thought was to call on Chopin, I cannot say how glad we were to meet again after five years of separation. He has grown tall and strong, so that I scarcely recognised him

This does not mean that he drilled those exercises mindlessly. Rachmaninoff also had a dummy keyboard. You must have read the story about him practising Chopin's thirds etude. This has really nothing to do with drilling.

Mindlessly or not he drilled himself, as Czerny had drilled him.  As did Rachmaninoff.  That's the point.

[dima_76557]

Mindlessly or not he drilled himself, as Czerny had drilled him.  As did Rachmaninoff.  That's the point.

Not true. You can't prepare yourself for something great by "drilling yourself". What you condition is what you get.

There are 5 Master Classes by Lazar Berman on YouTube. Too much of a shame to even give a link to them. See for yourself the difference between drilling yourself and be ready and organized enough to be able to do something on a spiritual level. Technical foundation absent completely in all of them. Instead, all of the students had drilled themselves in something that was supposed to look like an "interpretation", and Berman had no other options then saying some ridiculously obvious stuff, this accent, that note, 99% of the time telling them what was written on the page. They were not ready for any spiritual communication with a friend. All they could talk about was the weather so to speak; nothing in common, and that state of mind can't be changed on the spot. It takes years and years of meticulous preparation into a certain direction, a way of working that makes you free, instead of enslaving you into the position of a machine.

[hardy_practice]

I don't think you get the meaning of drill.  There's hardly a pianist known to us today that wasn't and isn't drilled.  In this modern piano world it's a necessity.