Why do you all of you despise Hanon

[devron]

First of all I would like to start by saying I just found this forum searching around on google and I joined it immediately because I was looking for an urtext archive of classical sheet music. I find it really cool that there is a place now where I can continually Pursue my desire to study music in general.  Further I would like to say, I just graduated from usf with a music degree in performance and academics.  Funny enough the first thread I read bashed what made me grow in ways I have never seen as a pianist.

Yes it was Hanon, my teacher before, my university professor lived and swore by them.  It's is one thing to just play these exercises and yes even though most people were expressing some versatility in how they used them.  I was a little disappointed to find out how close minded and one sided some people were, every single persons body is different. In saying that some things work better for some people then others, all great pianists from any era did things their own way and still becAme unbelievably successful so who are you to say what works and what doesn't.  I am most defiantly not the best pianist, but what I can say is I have learn a lot from Hanon because there is so many different point of views you can look at it from with even the first ten because I never learned any more then those.  My piano teacher just had about 20 different ways to play these ten simple exercises. 

I see the points people made where yes you can learn a larger repertoire but I feel I certainly left holes that I could see in my other classmates technique. Problem is learning a piece to establish technique you have to learn the notes before you can actually start to work on whatever technical issue you are trying to address. The nice thing about using Hanon was it was all familiar notes just a different way to view them so I was just able to focus on that specific technique I was trying to perfect or improve. I felt I need to say this because reading that last thread about people Hanon saying it obsolete, it is effective if you use it correctly and i am proof of it because I lacked everywhere else in rhythm, interpretation, voicing, characters and mood but where I thrived around my peers was physical technique.

After time I became better at all of these because I was just able to let my hands relax and focus on whichever one I need to. Any piece I have picked up through my college career, although some things were tough I was never technically beat by anything and I attribute it all to Hanon. Last to say is, yes I didn't learn a lot of pieces in my younger days it was all hanon for about the first eight years of my playing then I would play a piece after doing those exercises that focused on that topic.  All I wanted to say is it works and works well

[awesom_o]

Please use paragraphs when you post. Nobody will read a vast wall of text without paragraph spacing.

[winstonian3]

I don't disagree with what you're saying; I did a good chunk of Hanon and I don't regret it. A few things: Hanon, like you said, does not work on musicality. There are some exercises that double as both technical exercises and musical exercises and I think that's a better use of one's time. Furthermore, Hanon does not work at all on reading, which is a very important skill for young pianists. I'm not bashing Hanon, but at the same time, if I had to do it all over again, I think I would concentrate on other exercises rather than Hanon.

[devron]

See I think it was important before I ever laid my hands on a piano and start to play a piece my fingers knew what to do.  I am strictly referring to Hanon as a base exercise because there is only so much you can learn from it yes but establishing strength and independence between fingers quickly because you don't have to focus on learning the notes you already know them.

Anyone can learn how to read music whether it is a struggle for some or not, but not everyone can establish a very good technique because it takes tireless hours of repetition because it forces us to play a piece over and over again or playing an exercise. Problem is when you leave that piece you may forget it over time and you leave a portion of that technique behind. Later on then never see something like that until you run into a more difficult work and you realize wait my fingers can not do this certain thing because I have not done it in forever.  Our fingers are muscles and they need to be worked as such and just playing music can not do it all. 

I have never felt the wear and tear I have received from Hanon in any piece I have played ever, I can see the different every single day even now when I take an hour or exercises a few times a week.  My fingers literally feel exhausted and I feel blood rushing to them but after on those days where I pick to do Hanon before I get better practice then ever because all of the intricate muscle that aren't worked during these pieces are destroyed and torn.  I just don't see how you could just throw that away if you were going to start again and never do them it seems insane to me.

[indianajo]

Hanon is a European phenomenon IMHO. In the midwest USA we do Edna May Berman Exercises, followed after book five by Czerny in the Boston edition. Before Berman, age 8,  I developed control of the fourth and fifth fingers by doing Schmitt exercises in the G. Schirmer edition.  I used to do these exercises while reading a book, they were so physical and so mindless. 
In 63 years  I have never ever seen a Hanon book in a music store. I  had never heard of Hanon until I signed up for this UK based forum.  
It doesn't help a bit that in the second line you used the European snob word "urtext".  That string of letters is not in my five pound Random House dictionary, and as a English non-word I will not be using in the future to talk in English.  

[devron]

 I prefer the snob word urtext because this certain edition there is less markings in it then most music, it leaves my mind to do the thinking not what is written on the page.  Whether you believe it or not it makes a very large different when you see markings in music even though your not paying attention to them. Most of the best pianist in the world aren't American, so why are they more successful then us?

Yes that is how you gain control from your certain exercises but just as I said every single person is different and how they learn so how can you just discredit them. Who gives a crap if you have never seen it in a music store, does that mean it can't be applied just because you don't see them anywhere you go to find your music.

My main point is they work and there is no reason to tell someone they don't because they do so why discourage some teacher immediately because he decided to start with Hanon. You automatically assume he is stupid and is not knowledgable about anything if that's where he chooses to start you. How does that make sense please explain?

[faulty_damper]

My main point is they work and there is no reason to tell someone they don't because they do

I'm assuming that by doing Hannon, you are following his instructions on how to do them, e.g. lifting fingers high and such.  If not, then that doesn't count as Hannon.

You have no evidence that it works other than anecdote and some famous pianists doing and recommending them.  Even these famous pianists have no evidence that they work other than to justify doing them.  It's probably false attribution.

I've done them myself and had pain in my left hand doing them exactly as he prescribed.  The pain was unbearable.  It's only when I didn't do them as he prescribed that I didn't have pain. 6 hours a day for two weeks netted no improvement in my technical skills so I eventually abandoned them.

[j_menz]

Our fingers are muscles

If that is true in your case, you are in a very small minority.

[devron]

Wow way to read a part of a conversation and pull it out of its context to try to make me look stupid.  Learn how to argue a point dipsh** and if you don't have anything to input to a conversation then just don't say it. I am trying to have am actual conversation about this so the less of you input the better from now on would be great

[j_menz]

Wow way to read a part of a conversation and pull it out of its context to try to make me look stupid. 

How does it's context make it any less silly?

I am trying to have am actual conversation about this

No, you're trying to pontificate about it. Somewhat different.

On your main thesis, not everyone here despises Hanon. Even amongst those of us who do not regard his exercises as either necessary, sufficient not the most effective/efficient way to learn things, "despise" is an inaccurate and rather loaded  term.

He may have his uses, though there are, I would suggest, more palatable alternatives for most of them.

[devron]

How can that not count as Hanon regardless of how they are played with my fingers or does it magically turn into another exercise because I am approaching it in a different manner then most, it is still Hanon that fact does not change.  The patterns being used between each of fingers is still there so why is it different, explain?

I didn't make any attribution to anything about how pianist are they way they are I simply said that most are not American. I didn't diverge anywhere else about how they do things, just that they are not American which they are not.

[devron]

And from what I have been reading despise is quite the appropriate term, go read through the thread right below this about. Teach introducing Hanon, it make be different that does not make it obsolete that is my point.  My objective in posting was to discover why you people think this way, saying you despise it was not an attack it was to learn why you think this way.  All that has happened is I have been scrutinized about it instead of people making an argument and having a conversation about it.

How can you say context doesn't matter that is the basis of the interpretation of anything, as a pianist I feel you should understand that

[j_menz]

My objective in posting was to discover why you people think this way

As one of the non-fans of Hanon, then, let me explain.

Hanon takes a limited view of what is required to play the piano, concentrating on finger "strength" and independence. Not that these are bad things, but there is more to it than that, particularly in more advanced repertoire. If done correctly, the are some additional benefits to his exercises, such as the development of an appreciation of the structure of and relationship between keys. Also good, though often they are not actually approached in such a way as to generate this outcome.

In the context of a more fully rounded approach, the omissions in Hanon (whether strictly his own omissions or those aspects routinely ignored in his deployment) may well be unimportant as they are picked up elsewhere.  Without this, Hanon tends to encourage two particularly bad habits of practice: (1) that drilling is the way to achieve all outcomes - ie, if it doesn't work, just keep doing it until it does; and (2) a tendency to focus on the mechanical production of notes without an equal emphasis on musical production of notes. Again, thise outcomes are probably as much to do with the way Hanon is used as Hanon himself, though the fact that he is so routinely used suggests an inherent weakness.

More importantly, even than that, is that extended and largely exclusive drilling of exercises (of which Hanon is one of the more routinely used examples, with Czerny probably running neck and neck) is, for many people, just plain boring. The risk is then not so much that they will turn out to be bad pianists, or injured pianists, but that they will turn out not to be pianists at all.

[devron]

Yes I do agree with you on a lot of those points because that was how I felt when I got to college, I knew none of anything but how to make my fingers work it just made them strong. Interpretation, thought and practice taught me how to control them I better was to create different colors and moods, is there any exercises you would suggest then to better myself in these areas because I have not done things of this nature. This is the reason I started this thread I wanted to find the gaps of knowledge that I should have and fill them in but I would not peruse anything unless I knew it was better then what I was already doing

[j_menz]

Three suggestions, and a combination of all three is probably best.

Firstly, The Bach Two Part Inventions, and then the 3 part ones. Good for all sorts of things.

Secondly, start on some of the Chopin Etudes. I'd suggest the Trois Nouvelle Etudes to start, but then any (and all) of the Op10 and Op25 ones. Get a copy and just start where they seem most suited to what you can already do. If you have a teacher, that would be best, but if not, read up by doing a search here (or elsewhere on the web) about the ways to approach the technical (and musical) issues int the one(s) you choose.

Thirdly, spend time each day sightreading through as much repertoire as you can get your hands on. Start with (much) easier pieces - the goal is to be able to do a sight-unseen first go read through at a tempo close to the right one while considering dynamics and so forth. This will improve your musical breadth, and also flesh out what you have learnt from Hanon by showing how it applys in a wide variety of circumstances.

Record yourself, and listen back. Compare what you have done to some of the great pianists interpretations on Youtube or wherever. Learn from the differences.

[faulty_damper]

How can that not count as Hanon regardless of how they are played with my fingers or does it magically turn into another exercise because I am approaching it in a different manner then most, it is still Hanon that fact does not change.  The patterns being used between each of fingers is still there so why is it different, explain?

Hanon prescribes very specifically how to move the fingers. If you deviate from it, then it's no longer Hanon since it's a finger technique, though a very inefficient one.

You can find many of the patterns in actual music, such as in Bach's or Mozart's work.  You would never play Bach or Mozart with such a technique since it would sound unmusical.

And welcome to the Forum!

[devron]

I have played multiple etudes already and a few sonatas and fantasy Bach and Mozart. I know I have a very good sense of musicality but one thing was interesting was musical breath. At the moment I am working on the ballade in f min by Chopin. A better musical breath would be very beneficial because at some times I lose the energy of the piece which basically makes that work sound like garbage although it has gotten much better over time it is something that I would like to take to every piece I play.   

[dima_76557]

Hanon prescribes very specifically how to move the fingers. If you deviate from it, then it's no longer Hanon since it's a finger technique, though a very inefficient one.

You can find many of the patterns in actual music, such as in Bach's or Mozart's work.  You would never play Bach or Mozart with such a technique since it would sound unmusical.

Hanon (as does Liszt and the rest of the bunch) gives exercises for an area that is VERY difficult to work out separately without hurting yourself (that's also probably what causes all that hate against them). It is NOT meant to play works of art like that. Compare it to the many very difficult exercises ballet dancers have to do at the barre: not strength, but body intelligence is trained. Although they will never dance like that, the workout is necessary to be integrated afterwards into natural whole-body movements. Ignore the workout and you'll never become a good dancer.

[devron]

Wow that defiantly opened my eyes to something I didn't even think of before, i always just did the exercises because that is what I was told to do. It's for someone to back up the things I did growing up and not to say that I should have done things a different.

I was always told in college I have a very good natural body movement when I play, I never realize this may have been the case.

[faulty_damper]

Hanon (as does Liszt and the rest of the bunch) gives exercises for an area that is VERY difficult to work out separately without hurting yourself (that's also probably what causes all that hate against them). It is NOT meant to play works of art like that. Compare it to the many very difficult exercises ballet dancers have to do at the barre: not strength, but body intelligence is trained. Although they will never dance like that, the workout is necessary to be integrated afterwards into natural whole-body movements. Ignore the workout and you'll never become a good dancer.

So you're telling me that in order to become a good musician, one must do exercises?  I don't believe that because I don't do that.  Likewise, I'm also a pretty decent dancer, and I don't do exercises.  I do, however, practice dance the way I practice the piano which is with musical/artistic intent when I focus on technique.

[dima_76557]

So you're telling me that in order to become a good musician, one must do exercises?  I don't believe that because I don't do that.  Likewise, I'm also a pretty decent dancer, and I don't do exercises.  I do, however, practice dance the way I practice the piano which is with musical/artistic intent when I focus on technique.

I explained what Hanon and similar exercises are used for. Everybody is free to do as they please.

P.S.: "Pretty decent" is not the level you need to make a profession out of anything. For expert piano playing, you need first of all not strength, not even coordinated strength, but rather expert timing into the instrument's point of sound, because your unique sound/touch is the soul of what people experience as your personal trade mark. "Musical/artistic intent" alone without the required basics of versification in tone production will not get a person international recognition. So sorry, but I didn't make the rules.

[j_menz]

your unique sound is the soul of what people experience as your personal trade mark

Your Russianness is showing. 

Though the "personal trademark" thing does activate another concern I have with these sets of exercises generally.  They often have a one-size-fits-all mentality to them.  That's no doubt not a problem if they are used intelligently (and probably under guidance), but it seems to me that too often not the case. We all have the same things to learn, but we all have different starting points, and more easily acquired skill, and our own special weaknesses and difficulties.  Proper training needs to account for these.

A great ballet dancer may do the routine at the barre, but they do much else besides. And some people work just as hard, or harder, at the barre and still make third rate dancers because they do not address their specific issues.

[dima_76557]

Your Russianness is showing.  

Ukrainians have the same "problem". Just watch Cliburn winner Vadym Kholodenko give the following little masterclass to Aaron Petit. His first comment is about projecting the sound into the hall towards the listeners, and not keep it for yourself around the instrument. That is the expert timing I was referring to. Also watch his fingers while he sightreads (!) the piece at 5:35:

And some people work just as hard, or harder, at the barre and still make third rate dancers because they do not address their specific issues.

Of course. That's why we should never blame the barre (=Hanon) for our personal failure. Thinking our personal issues away by doing something that is supposed to be "musical/artistic intent" won't give really great professional results either.

[faulty_damper]

A great ballet dancer may do the routine at the barre, but they do much else besides. And some people work just as hard, or harder, at the barre and still make third rate dancers because they do not address their specific issues.

You can see the differences between top rate and third tier dancers just in the way they practice.  The latter spend an incredibly amount of time doing stretches, warmups and little else.  The best spend most of their time refining actual elements.  This is just like in piano practice.

[j_menz]

His first comment is about projecting the sound into the hall towards the listeners, and not keep it for yourself around the instrument. That is the expert timing I was referring to.

It's also first a matter of thinking, then of doing. A conception of the sound "out there" rather than the sound "here". You can't (reliably) do that which you do not first conceive.

Also watch his fingers while he sightreads (!) the piece at 5:35:

Why? He didn't. 

 

I also don't think the "!" is warranted. Brahms is easier to read than he might be thought to be.

[j_menz]

You can see the differences between top rate and third tier dancers just in the way they practice.  The latter spend an incredibly amount of time doing stretches, warmups and little else.  The best spend most of their time refining actual elements.  This is just like in piano practice.

That is probably true, though a more historic/developmental perspective would be required (what they did on the way as much as what they do now). All I know about dance (other than watching it) comes from the movies, so I'm not in a position to say anything about the details of that.

[dima_76557]

I also don't think the "!" is warranted. Brahms is easier to read than he might be thought to be.

It was not actually the reading that impressed me, but the artistic result he gets while doing it as if he had practised the piece for months on end while apparently using "forbidden", "unmusical", "tension-triggering" etc. movements that remind of Levine, Hanon, etc. (indirect touch with a whole-finger swing from the knuckle bridge of the hand). I mean: his quality of touch (=expert timing) makes the instrument a completely different one from the one the clip started out with.

[j_menz]

the artistic result he gets while doing it as if he had practised the piece for months on end

Well, since he was giving a masterclass with that in it, one assumes that he had at least though a bit about it.

Also, one assumes that he uses the same hand style when doing things he has learnt (though perhaps slightly different, on reflection, as I find I do), so that may not be surprising. No doubt Gould would still look like Gould, and Arrau would still look like Arrau as well. And no doubt each of these would again make that piano sound like a different instrument.

The problem with the original performance, in that regard, is that it sounds too much like a piano and not enough like the pianist.

[faulty_damper]

That is probably true, though a more historic/developmental perspective would be required (what they did on the way as much as what they do now). All I know about dance (other than watching it) comes from the movies, so I'm not in a position to say anything about the details of that.

I was actually thinking about rhythmic gymnastics when I wrote my previous reply and there are globs of videos just on them practicing, particularly the top performers/athletes.  I'm quite particular about Evgenia Kanaeva, who won some Olympic golds. (She retired recently at a ripe young age of 22... only to marry a hockey player... and now she's carrying his baby. )  The coaches never thought she had the chops to be an elite athlete but by happenstance was able to get a spot at a top training facility.  Just goes to show what these famous coaches know about "talent" or whatever it is we call it nowadays.  I can totally relate.

I apologize for the jacked up version of the Chopin Impromptu.

[dima_76557]

The problem with the original performance, in that regard, is that it sounds too much like a piano and not enough like the pianist.

I would phrase that differently: the problem is that in the original performance, someone who has no real contact with the instrument yet used the piano to try and play a piece, while Vadym really PLAYED the instrument; it reacted to his well-timed strokes/communication and started singing by itself. The piece itself is not the significant factor here because he did the same on the Cliburn competition with hair-raisingly difficult repertoire for which he set new standards of execution (Liszt's transcendental etude no. 8 "Wilde Jagd", for example).

[j_menz]

I apologize for the jacked up version of the Chopin Impromptu.

My bleeding ears accept your apology.

[j_menz]

I would phrase that differently: the problem is that in the original performance, someone who has no real contact with the instrument yet used the piano to try and play a piece, while Vadym really PLAYED the instrument; it reacted to his well-timed strokes/communication and started singing by itself. The piece itself is not the significant factor here because he did the same on the Cliburn competition with hair-raisingly difficult repertoire for which he set new standards of execution (Liszt's transcendental etude no. 8 "Wilde Jagd", for example).

I think we mean much the same thing - the difference between a piano being an instrument to be played upon and becoming an extension of ourselves. I don't know that "well timed strokes" is the whole story. And the piano didn't start singing by itself, it started singing for him.

[dima_76557]

I don't know that "well timed strokes" is the whole story.

It is indeed the essence of the pianist's craft, very much like bowing technique for the violin and the cello. The rest is making something acceptable of the notes the composer gave us to work with.

[andrewkoay]

Hanon is pretty good to improve finger independence and dexterity. The fact that the exercises are so simple makes it ideal to use to focus on honing your technique (instead of struggling to complete some difficult pieces)

But I think I'm starting to use something even simpler to teach my students (myself included):
C D E F G F E D C, and other combinations of this five notes. That will truly expose a lot of their problems and allows me to teach a great deal of concepts to them.

[enochy]

I'm just scrolling through, looking at these long lines of text.

Lemme answer your question.

It's good and all technically but it's a chore.
It doesn't have a melody line which makes it boring to most.

[pianoplunker]

I have found Hanon to be very useful at helping figure out fingerings for parallel octaves or sixths or scales or whatever .  But I despise the notion that this book should be played entirely in 60 minutes to achieve great technique. I dont care how great of a pianist. nobody wants to go hear a performance of the Hanon Book. I would rather play 60 minutes of great music and let the Hanon book be used as a guide only as needed.  And the idea of focusing on speed during practice is not a great idea in my opinion