Does "finger strength" exist?

[gapoc459]

So I don't really know much about hand and arm anatomy, but I've heard people tell others who ask about increasing "finger strength" something along the lines of "you're stupid; fingers don't have muscles!" In the case that that is true, what exactly is the physiological prerequisite of really good technique? Like I watch Zimerman's interpretations of the Beethoven concertos; he plays extremely fast passages (and trills!) brilliantly and loudly on every key. How can I train my hands and body to be able to play like this, and more importantly, what is it that he is doing that I am not in order to achieve this?

[outin]

So I don't really know much about hand and arm anatomy, but I've heard people tell others who ask about increasing "finger strength" something along the lines of "you're stupid; fingers don't have muscles!" In the case that that is true, what exactly is the physiological prerequisite of really good technique?

Fingers indeed don't have muscles, but there are muscles that move the fingers elsewhere. How well these muscles work is maybe not properly described as "strength" since most people think of weight lifting when talking about increasing strength. I guess the physiological prerequisite is best just described as efficiently working healthy muscles. All the rest is about learning to use them in the best possible way.

Even if there are no muscles in the fingers, there are tendons and ligaments and cartilage. I think it's sometimes appropriate to use the word weak when some of these are not in good shape, but I am not sure how much they could be "strengthened" by exercise.

I've noticed that when people argue over "finger strentgh" it often is more about semantics, what are the appropriate words to use.

[louispodesta]

So I don't really know much about hand and arm anatomy, but I've heard people tell others who ask about increasing "finger strength" something along the lines of "you're stupid; fingers don't have muscles!" In the case that that is true, what exactly is the physiological prerequisite of really good technique? Like I watch Zimerman's interpretations of the Beethoven concertos; he plays extremely fast passages (and trills!) brilliantly and loudly on every key. How can I train my hands and body to be able to play like this, and more importantly, what is it that he is doing that I am not in order to achieve this?

For a well reviewed and widely utilized book on the subject, I recommend my coach Thomas Mark's book, "What Every Pianist Needs To Know About the Body."  It is a very easy read, which comes with a video, and is designed to be used as reference material to be kept by the piano.

A summary of its approach can be gleaned from Dr. Mark's website www.pianomap.com

As far as the trills are concerned, there is evidence that the interossei muscles of the hand can increase in facility with daily practice of trills utilizing alternating accents while playing the trills in triplets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interossei

Finally, and I just passed this onto Dr. Mark in an email, I have noticed recently that when I work out with my chest expander and grip the rubber grips very tightly, I seem to gain strength at the piano.  My logic is that this strengthens, in a balanced way, all of the muscles of the forearm, as well as strengthening the ligaments and tendons associated with such.

Place your thumb in the middle of your lower forearm (palm up), press down, and then articulate the fingers of that hand.  You will feel various muscles in the forearm respond to the movement of the fingers.

Whatever you do, don't waste years of your life (like I did) playing stupid exercises every day.  They accomplish nothing except, if you play the Brahms, you might ruin your hand.

[kakeithewolf]

Fingers may not have muscles, but they do have flesh and bone. Callouses can toughen the flesh, and that's the simpler route to go. The bone, on the other hand, is most effectively strengthened by causing tiny fractures in the bones and letting the osteoclasts rebuild the bone, which causes the bone to thicken and strengthen given time.

[outin]

Fingers may not have muscles, but they do have flesh and bone. Callouses can toughen the flesh, and that's the simpler route to go. The bone, on the other hand, is most effectively strengthened by causing tiny fractures in the bones and letting the osteoclasts rebuild the bone, which causes the bone to thicken and strengthen given time.

Are you saying I could get sturdier fingers by hammering them regularly? 

[louispodesta]

Fingers may not have muscles, but they do have flesh and bone. Callouses can toughen the flesh, and that's the simpler route to go. The bone, on the other hand, is most effectively strengthened by causing tiny fractures in the bones and letting the osteoclasts rebuild the bone, which causes the bone to thicken and strengthen given time.

Without a doubt, this has to be one of the dumbest suggestions ever made to improve piano performance.  In answer to the OP's subsequent question, I will furnish the following information:

There used to be a world class concert pianist by the name of Lorin Hollander who started his career in my home town of San Antonio at the age of 13.  He could play anything.

Then, he got the bright idea to play the Prokofiev 5th Concerto on a regular basis.  Now, to cut to the present, in his own words, when he plays his fingers feel like pieces of broken glass.

So, here is an example of how bone fractures ruined a well established career, and also left the pianist to live the rest of his life in excruciating pain.

Man, you couldn't get a hand surgeon or an orthopaedist on this planet to support your idiotic, and very dangerous logic.

[kakeithewolf]

Are you saying I could get sturdier fingers by hammering them regularly? 

No, that created much too large a fracture. Something along the lines of striking a brick wall for an hour or two a day does the trick just fine.

Without a doubt, this has to be one of the dumbest suggestions ever made to improve piano performance.  In answer to the OP's subsequent question, I will furnish the following information:

There used to be a world class concert pianist by the name of Lorin Hollander who started his career in my home town of San Antonio at the age of 13.  He could play anything.

Then, he got the bright idea to play the Prokofiev 5th Concerto on a regular basis.  Now, to cut to the present, in his own words, when he plays his fingers feel like pieces of broken glass.

So, here is an example of how bone fractures ruined a well established career, and also left the pianist to live the rest of his life in excruciating pain.

Man, you couldn't get a hand surgeon or an orthopaedist on this planet to support your idiotic, and very dangerous logic.

I wasn't recommending it. The OP asked if fingers could be strengthened, and I said yes and told how. I was not, however, saying that it was a fast track to becoming a virtuoso. The callous route isn't all that effective for that purpose either.

I'd also like to note that I'm not recommending that anyone, unless their need for strength is for defense, do this. It's long, monotonous, slightly painful, and takes years to do.

[louispodesta]

Isn't anyone going to say anything about this (words cannot describe) person who, while not recommending, is giving forth instructions on how to ruin your hand?  Have you all gone blind?

"striking a brick wall for an hour or two a day does the trick just fine." Can you good folks read?

 

[pianoman8]

For training your hands, I have a question. Do you play chopin etudes gapoc

[faulty_damper]

Good technique is about interdependence of all parts of the body; over-rely on one and it will fall apart or require endless hours to maintain.  The vast majority of popular concert pianists have this kind of technique.  Unfortunately, while this kind of technique is exciting to watch because of all the effort that is expended, it's a terrible way to play until your grave.  Youth and vigor do not make up for age and arthritis.

About finger strength, yes it exists since fingers require muscles to move.  However, in the context of piano playing, having large forearm muscles is actually a hindrance since it slows down movements due to the larger mass.  Muscle stamina and endurance are a different matter, however.  This is required since the muscles are being used very finely (fine motor coordination) and the muscles must be conditioned, both neurologically and energy-wise, to perform for a given length of time.

There are also other aspects of muscle conditioning that should be mentioned.  The ability to hold a finger spread, e.g. holding an octave, requires significant training which does require the conditioning of muscles within the hand.  If your hands are small, the karate chop muscle on the side of the hand, the abductor digit minima, must be trained to hold the open hand position.  Otherwise, it will fatigue quickly.  As well, training must be done to contract the muscle even more, i.e. increase reach/hand span.

[iansinclair]

When I read about "finger strength" or arm strength or whatever I get this image of a ripped man or woman at the gym...

It isn't strength you are looking for.  A piano key does not take much force to move!  What you are looking for is speed and control (and, if you insist on playing music, rather than "songs", stamina).  Almost any exercise which works on speed and control will do; any exercise which concentrates on strength alone may -- and often does -- get in the way of speed or control or both.

Playing the piano -- actually practicing, and working on harder pieces! -- is perhaps the best exercise of all!

[gapoc459]

Some fascinating responses here, but I'm still not sure I understand how to proceed in practical terms. Of course this is a very small subset of a much larger series of issues, but a simple, practical question is: what can I do in my practicing to ultimately be able to trill (or pretty much everything else, at least from a purely technical perspective) like Zimerman? I'm not particularly keen on the idea of hitting my fingers against a brick wall regularly...

Is it just a question of "actually practicing, and working on harder pieces?"


@pianoman8: A play Chopin etudes a bit, but not regularly. I often use No. 4 to warm up in the morning. I have heard that they are among the best methods to help improve technique in all aspects.

[faulty_damper]

You'll have to work on the neurological as well as the muscular aspect.  This means increasing the speed at which the nerves can send signals as well conditioning the muscles to contract and relax quickly.  You'll have to put in some hard work for this.  You'll also have to push the limits at which your muscles currently work and that means that they may burn and your mind may fatigue in the process. Just practice trilling by focussing on the muscular aspect.  Coordinating the forearm rotation will help immensely so you don't over rely on just finger movement.

[awesom_o]

@pianoman8: I have heard that they are among the best methods to help improve technique in all aspects.

Who told you that?

Chopin Etudes are for people who already have beastly technique to learn how to play musically.

[kakeithewolf]

Isn't anyone going to say anything about this (words cannot describe) person who, while not recommending, is giving forth instructions on how to ruin your hand?  Have you all gone blind?

"striking a brick wall for an hour or two a day does the trick just fine." Can you good folks read?

You're forgetting that the key in this is restraint, not power. I used to do the "striking a brick wall" (though the wall was made of cinder blocks instead) trick often. I didn't strike it with all my force, because that would have been a great way to ruin my hands. Instead, I pulled my punches, and hit it only with enough force for it to smart. Over the years, my hands became stronger. However, this means little, since I forgot to work on my near atrophied arms.

[rmbarbosa]

"Fingers have not muscles but they have flesh"...
Sorry... flesh is muscle and muscle is flesh. And actually fingers have muscles, not only tendons but muscles.
But this isnt very important. The most important is arm weight and wrist flexibility. In order to achieve a good sound.

[faulty_damper]

I say nay to the arm weight and wrist flexibility.  Arm weight is a mythical phenomenon, often discussed but no evidence to support it, and wrist flexibility isn't all that important since most people already have the necessary flexibility for piano playing.

[awesom_o]

I say nay to the arm weight...  Arm weight is a mythical phenomenon, often discussed but no evidence to support it.

Do you have any evidence for this claim??






  just kidding..... I totally agree with you!

[lelle]

and wrist flexibility isn't all that important

Do you play piano with rigid wrists??

[awesom_o]

Do you play piano with rigid wrists??

I was going to say.... wrist flexibility is extremely important. I'm also curious, Mr. Damper, do you play with stiff wrists?

[iansinclair]

Is it just a question of "actually practicing, and working on harder pieces?"

As an example... (actually, they are not all that hard) take a look at the four Schubert 90 Impromptus.  Granted, for left hand technique all but the first are pretty sketchy, but I have sometimes wondered if dear old Franz didn't write them as cleverly disguised exercises for various aspects of technique!  #1 -- the fast staccato (both hands), very light.  Full finger independence (right hand -- you have to get that melody clear!).  #2.  Need to work on scales?  Go for it.  #3.  Finger independence again, with a vengeance.  #4 up to tempo -- agility, independence, you name it.

Just for starters.  My point is that almost any moderately advanced piece (even, for that matter, dead simple ones like the first movement of the Moonlight!) can be regarded and used as a useful exercise, as well as being entertaining -- and adding to your repertoire all at the same time.

[anima55]

My teacher used the word 'articulate' a lot!  And he often wrote on my music 'articulation'.   I think that concentrating on articulating each note gradually encourages finger independence and I am tempted to believe that finger independence should be used in place of finger strength.

Finger strength may imply pressing down hard with the fingers which is not something that is likely to promote fast, even playing.  Good articulation and finger independence comes with careful practice and a critical, listening ear.

[faulty_damper]

Do you play piano with rigid wrists??

No, they are not at all rigid.  They move very fluidly to adjust the angle of the hand but they do not move with the mysticism and aura as Valentina Lisitsa's, which seems excessively done more for crowd-pleasing entertainment than actual piano technique.

When I say flexibility is not important, I mean that the range of motion is not important since most people have sufficient range of motion.

[kevin69]

I say nay to the arm weight and wrist flexibility.  Arm weight is a mythical phenomenon...

Can you explain what you mean by 'arm weight' here, please?
I'd always read this literally up to now, but you must be using it in some other sense.

[lelle]

When I say flexibility is not important, I mean that the range of motion is not important since most people have sufficient range of motion.

I think when people talk about wrist flexibility in relation to piano playing they mean this fluidity/suppleness/freedom/flexibility you describe that you have. Having wrist flexibility is not about bending the wrist beyond their normal range of motion but it means to play without any stiffness in the wrists.

[faulty_damper]

Can you explain what you mean by 'arm weight' here, please?
I'd always read this literally up to now, but you must be using it in some other sense.

Arm weight means using the weight of the arm to depress the keys.  This cannot possibly happen in most instances because the resulting sound - extremely loud - would occur if the arm were to freely drop.  As well, the finger tips would bruise from the repeated impact.

I think when people talk about wrist flexibility in relation to piano playing they mean this fluidity/suppleness/freedom/flexibility you describe that you have. Having wrist flexibility is not about bending the wrist beyond their normal range of motion but it means to play without any stiffness in the wrists.

But that's not the definition of flexibility.  If suppleness is what's meant, then the word suppleness should be the word used.  Otherwise, pianists would be doing flexibility exercises trying to increase wrist flexibility to no appreciable technical improvement.

[lelle]

But that's not the definition of flexibility.  If suppleness is what's meant, then the word suppleness should be the word used.  Otherwise, pianists would be doing flexibility exercises trying to increase wrist flexibility to no appreciable technical improvement.

If I look up the translation for flexibility into my own language I get its equivalents to "suppleness" "elastic" "pliable" and, indeed, "flexible". But I agree, I too think "suppleness" is a better word than "flexible" (if I recall correctly Cortot asks for extremely supple wrists). But it's like finger "strength" and finger "independence". Bernhard says finger independence doesn't exist because the fingers are connected via tendons. But as I understand it finger independence means that when playing, you are able to use whatever finger you want quickly and accurately and without stiffening the wrist or arm, no matter the tempo. The same goes for strength, it's not about pumping iron with your fingers but being able to produce good, strong tone no matter what finger happens to be playing (so it's a matter of coordination).

[brogers70]

If I look up the translation for flexibility into my own language I get its equivalents to "suppleness" "elastic" "pliable" and, indeed, "flexible". But I agree, I too think "suppleness" is a better word than "flexible" (if I recall correctly Cortot asks for extremely supple wrists). But it's like finger "strength" and finger "independence". Bernhard says finger independence doesn't exist because the fingers are connected via tendons. But as I understand it finger independence means that when playing, you are able to use whatever finger you want quickly and accurately and without stiffening the wrist or arm, no matter the tempo. The same goes for strength, it's not about pumping iron with your fingers but being able to produce good, strong tone no matter what finger happens to be playing (so it's a matter of coordination).

Yes, I like the way you describe this. As you can see from this and many other threads, there is virtually no way to describe the mechanics of piano playing that cannot be understood in a sense which makes the description ridiculous. Your statement is good common sense.

[hardy_practice]

Arm weight means using the weight of the arm to depress the keys.  This cannot possibly happen in most instances because the resulting sound - extremely loud - would occur if the arm were to freely drop.  As well, the finger tips would bruise from the repeated impact.

Let your upper arm be relaxed at your side, hang your hand from your wrist, touch finger 3 on a key - you're ready to use arm weight.  Just loose the biceps so your forearm falls and the finger goes into the key.  What you do next is the real art!

[faulty_damper]

That may work some of the time, however, that won't work for scales nor arpeggios, nor loud chords.

[hardy_practice]

For louder chords you add the triceps into the mix.  I wouldn't add arm weight to scales and arps apart from the accented notes - it slows you down (Hummel's advice).

[stephenv]

Has anyone here read the work of George Kochevitsky:  "The Art of Piano Playing, a scientific approach" ??

Although it was written in 1967, I find it relevant and revealing when approaching piano technical work.   

Kochevitsky gives a "Historical Survey of Theories of Piano Technique"  covering much of the well known "schools" of technique.

You might find a worthwhile read. 

[cometear]

Arm weight means using the weight of the arm to depress the keys.  This cannot possibly happen in most instances because the resulting sound - extremely loud - would occur if the arm were to freely drop.  As well, the finger tips would bruise from the repeated impact.

The entire arm does not "drop" or "depress." That is absurd. Some of the weight is distributed to the finger(s) which are to play. Shaping, by using the wrists and forearm, lightens or heavies the arm weight which produces the desired music. I am trying my best to describe it with words. Arm weight is just a term and a basic starting point to reach a solid technique. Key word being solid.

[cometear]

Let your upper arm be relaxed at your side, hang your hand from your wrist, touch finger 3 on a key - you're ready to use arm weight.  Just loose the biceps so your forearm falls and the finger goes into the key.  What you do next is the real art!

Very true. I like the way you put this.

[cometear]

That may work some of the time, however, that won't work for scales nor arpeggios, nor loud chords.

If I'm reading this correctly, you're saying arm weight cannot be used for scales, arpeggios, and loud chords? So I'm assuming you mean that these supposed "finger muscles" or your forearm muscles should be used?

[cometear]

Without a doubt, this has to be one of the dumbest suggestions ever made to improve piano performance.

I'm surprised you could narrow it down to one response. These responses are all very unsupported and uneducated.

[nyiregyhazi]

Very true. I like the way you put this.

Then why did you say that it's not about dropping the arm? It's no use denying that and them agreeing with a post that explicitly describes precisely that, in the very next breath. To avoid being harmful, descriptions of arm weight need to be clear about what it can and cannot do. In anything of even moderate speed, it cannot replace the finger movement. When you merely release the arm, it falls-unlese you stress that the finger is going to need to move the key. The description you agreed with mentioned no such thing and was thus asking for the arm to collapse down.

[cometear]

Then why did you say that it's not about dropping the arm? It's no use denying that and them agreeing with a post that explicitly describes precisely that, in the very next breath. To avoid being harmful, descriptions of arm weight need to be clear about what it can and cannot do. In anything of even moderate speed, it cannot replace the finger movement. When you merely release the arm, it falls-unlese you stress that the finger is going to need to move the key. The description you agreed with mentioned no such thing and was thus asking for the arm to collapse down.

I meant to include the part after, "What you do next is the real art." or something like that. You have to start with all the arm weight to understand how it must be done. If you can exaggerate it, you can always minimize it. You can't expect to do it small at first. We, as humans, do not have the control to put in small and precise motions. If you can habituate yourself to doing something largely, than it can be always made smaller. What you do next is really an art. To control the distribution of the weight is an art.

[nyiregyhazi]

I meant to include the part after, "What you do next is the real art." or something like that. You have to start with all the arm weight to understand how it must be done. If you can exaggerate it, you can always minimize it. You can't expect to do it small at first. We, as humans, do not have the control to put in small and precise motions. If you can habituate yourself to doing something largely, than it can be always made smaller. What you do next is really an art. To control the distribution of the weight is an art.

What's next is too late if the finger either collapsed or stiffened to prevent that. Distribution of weight is indeed an art but it doesn't even get off the ground unless you know how to use your fingers rather than separate arm descents on each note. Failing to even mention the finger role is an excellent recipe for completely misunderstanding the role of weight and thus setting up a cycle that is almost impossible to break - where notes are moved by slow and unwieldy arm drops rather than with precise finger actions.

The problem with arm weight descriptions is that they put all the focus on something that is actually very easy to accomplish. The primary difficulty lies in using the finger properly rather than stiffening it or drooping it. It's when you get this wrong that the loose arm aspect is hard to achieve. You can't be loose by trying to plop the arm on to ten individual notes per second. Fingers need to move them while the arm drifts laterally.

[brogers70]

Wow. My teacher is of the "arm weight" school. And I thought that in playing a run of thirty second notes, or hemi-demi-semiquavers (to use the obviously clearer terminology) that arm weight meant one was supposed to raise and drop the arm for each note individually. My common sense was utterly unable to see that that was not the intention. I'm so glad someone stepped in to clarify that.

[nyiregyhazi]

Wow. My teacher is of the "arm weight" school. And I thought that in playing a run of thirty second notes, or hemi-demi-semiquavers (to use the obviously clearer terminology) that arm weight meant one was supposed to raise and drop the arm for each note individually. My common sense was utterly unable to see that that was not the intention. I'm so glad someone stepped in to clarify that.

Your sarcasm might be pertinent if appreciating that the arm cannot drop that fast were enough to automatically inspire train fingers to move well enough to produce fast scales. Perhaps I should phrase an equally sarcastic sentence portraying that absurdity to be the case? You really think basic common sense is enough to provide a good technique?

The point is that when you train someone to play by dropping their arm and fail to show them how to play without dependence on arm pressure, even the realisation that fingers need to start adding more movement won't override the instincts that have been acquired by training of something else altogether. I speak as someone who had scarcely any idea quite how overly dependent I was on trying to bob the arm literally at high speeds - no matter how obvious it might that it would be rationally impossible to truly succeed that way.

PS. I know of people that honestly have no idea that fingers must take over. I've heard plenty of people claim that the arm provides the energy for key movement. Either they have no concept of what energy actually is or they believe that the fingers are merely passing on movement rather than generating it. It's amazing what enough years of irrational indoctrination can impart as literal beliefs. Just look at Taubmanites and rotation. Most of them literally seem to think rotation is the energy source. I'd say that people who have put 2 and 2 together and seen reality from a truly pragmatic point of view are genuinely the exceptions.

[cometear]

What's next is too late if the finger either collapsed or stiffened to prevent that. Distribution of weight is indeed an art but it doesn't even get off the ground unless you know how to use your fingers rather than separate arm descents on each note. Failing to even mention the finger role is an excellent recipe for completely misunderstanding the role of weight and thus setting up a cycle that is almost impossible to break - where notes are moved by slow and unwieldy arm drops rather than with precise finger actions.

The problem with arm weight descriptions is that they put all the focus on something that is actually very easy to accomplish. The primary difficulty lies in using the finger properly rather than stiffening it or drooping it. It's when you get this wrong that the loose arm aspect is hard to achieve. You can't be loose by trying to plop the arm on to ten individual notes per second. Fingers need to move them while the arm drifts laterally.

Fingers do indeed have a role! Letting them collapse, droop or stiffen is defeating the purpose. It would be just as bad as using just the fingers. I agree with that.Those who play with the arm plopping up and down are learning the basic feeling of using their arm. They probably have used their fingers for their entire lives. The next step is to feel like the arm goes straight across. No up and down. Feel like there is a pressure, from the arm, on your finger tips. Your fingers should not be the origin of this pressure. The arm should produce a constant weight. Whether you play a scale, arpeggio, or chords, there should be a constant and definite weight produced by your forearm. That is why bench height is important, to maximize the energy you can produce with your arm. The point I am trying to make is, fingers do not independently work. They do not produce the energy to depress the keys. Your arm is the weight.

[cometear]

Your sarcasm might be pertinent if appreciating that the arm cannot drop that fast were enough to automatically inspire train fingers to move well enough to produce fast scales. Perhaps I should phrase an equally sarcastic sentence portraying that absurdity to be the case? You really think basic common sense is enough to provide a good technique?

The point is that when you train someone to play by dropping their arm and fail to show them how to play without dependence on arm pressure, even the realisation that fingers need to start adding more movement won't override the instincts that have been acquired by training of something else altogether. I speak as someone who had scarcely any idea quite how overly dependent I was on trying to bob the arm literally at high speeds - no matter how obvious it might that it would be rationally impossible to truly succeed that way.

PS. I know of people that honestly have no idea that fingers must take over. I've heard plenty of people claim that the arm provides the energy for key movement. Either they have no concept of what energy actually is or they believe that the fingers are merely passing on movement rather than generating it. It's amazing what enough years of irrational indoctrination can impart as literal beliefs. Just look at Taubmanites and rotation. Most of them literally seem to think rotation is the energy source. I'd say that people who have put 2 and 2 together and seen reality from a truly pragmatic point of view are genuinely the exceptions.

Interesting how I had just tried to make this point. I'm sure we'll just go head to head on this topic, so I'm going to stop defending my perspective. We obviously believe two different things.

[nyiregyhazi]

Fingers do indeed have a role! Letting them collapse, droop or stiffen is defeating the purpose. It would be just as bad as using just the fingers. I agree with that.Those who play with the arm plopping up and down are learning the basic feeling of using their arm. They probably have used their fingers for their entire lives. The next step is to feel like the arm goes straight across. No up and down. Feel like there is a pressure, from the arm, on your finger tips. Your fingers should not be the origin of this pressure. The arm should produce a constant weight. Whether you play a scale, arpeggio, or chords, there should be a constant and definite weight produced by your forearm. That is why bench height is important, to maximize the energy you can produce with your arm. The point I am trying to make is, fingers do not independently work. They do not produce the energy to depress the keys. Your arm is the weight.

Actually, they do produce the energy. Because otherwise the arm would have to drop once per note.

In my case, my arm bobbed not because I'd only used my fingers but because I'd been told to drop my arm weight and use my arm to produce the energy. I did exactly what you said is good and didn't learn to move my fingers instead. When I learned to move my fingers, I learned to stop bobbing my arm. Some things are simply exactly as they appear. A bobbing arm means too much falling and too little finger movement. Only way to stop the arm bobbing is to produce movement in the fingers instead. That means that is where the energy is coming from too. Something that rests at constant height does not transmit energy. Movement transmits energy. An arm that bobs transmits energy and one that drifts sideways while fingers move keys doesn't.

[awesom_o]

The point I am trying to make is, fingers do not independently work.

Your fingers don't independently work at all?

Does this mean that when you try to move one finger, all of the other fingers move automatically, without your control or consent?

[cometear]

Your fingers don't independently work at all?

Does this mean that when you try to move one finger, all of the other fingers move automatically, without your control or consent?

At the piano, you can use your fingers independently. I am saying you shouldn't not you can't move them independently.

[cometear]

Actually, they do produce the energy. Because otherwise the arm would have to drop once per note.

In my case, my arm bobbed not because I'd only used my fingers but because I'd been told to drop my arm weight and use my arm to produce the energy. I did exactly what you said is good and didn't learn to move my fingers instead. When I learned to move my fingers, I learned to stop bobbing my arm. Some things are simply exactly as they appear. A bobbing arm means too much falling and too little finger movement. Only way to stop the arm bobbing is to produce movement in the fingers instead. That means that is where the energy is coming from too. Something that rests at constant height does not transmit energy. Movement transmits energy. An arm that bobs transmits energy and one that drifts sideways while fingers move keys doesn't.

Alright, now to the next step. It remains at a constant height but there is forearm rotation which than rotates the finger. There is your energy. Arm weight + Forearm Rotation = Finger Movement = Energy. The sound will be terrible without a forearm shape. It's not like someone could get this in a day, week, or even year. It takes time. Maybe you've achieved this stage without calling it "rotation" or "shaping." You probably have and have misinterpreted the Taubman Approach's teachings. From what you are saying, I see similarities in what is taught in the Taubman Approach and what you are doing. I am just speaking in terms I am familiar with and you speak in terms you are familiar with.

[nyiregyhazi]

Alright, now to the next step. It remains at a constant height but there is forearm rotation which than rotates the finger. There is your energy. Arm weight + Forearm Rotation = Finger Movement = Energy. The sound will be terrible without a forearm shape. It's not like someone could get this in a day, week, or even year. It takes time. Maybe you've achieved this stage without calling it "rotation" or "shaping." You probably have and have misinterpreted the Taubman Approach's teachings. From what you are saying, I see similarities in what is taught in the Taubman Approach and what you are doing. I am just speaking in terms I am familiar with and you speak in terms you are familiar with.

You're using terms I'm familiar with incorrectly. That doesn't help anyone. The reason I used to use my arm as a literal energy source (resulting in tension and over work at high speeds) is the simple fact that bad explanations incorrectly told me to attempt precisely that. I appreciate that you're reciting terms in a widely used context, but the many who use them that way are completely mistaken and misled me spectacularly as a result. You don't have to repeat their errors.

Double rotation involves arm energy, yes. Although not so obvious, each side of the arm goes up or down during the rotation. This quite visibly moves the finger and turns the knuckles. The problem is that there's absolutely no such thing as an "internalised" version as an energy source. It's like referring to smouldering ashes of long burnt out wood as a heat source (because the burning is now "internalised") or more literally closely, like picking up an object that is a metre away by"internalising" the movement down to only reaching 30cm. It's simply irrational nonsense. Traces of movement can remain but they are absolutely not the energy source unless they are significantly amplified. Reduce the visible rotation of knuckles, and there's no credible explanation of keys still travelling the whole distance as a result of that smaller movement. At this point, fingers have to become the energy source, by taking over the movement.

PS. One of the grossest oversimplifications of double rotation is to suggest that all rotation must be aimed at generating down force. That's a huge limiter and liable to cause tension and burden. I practise double rotation as an exercise (although it never became truly useful until I discovered for myself that however much rotation I do, the fingers need to move more still). I also practise rotating in the opposite direction to open-rather than squash down on the hand position. Try it for five fingers. Start on the thumb, with the fifth drooping. Slowly rotate progressively towards the thumb while playing all five fingers. The rotation doesn't press down but instead raises the fifth finger knuckle and straightens the alignment behind each finger. The arm provides zero energy but instead makes room for finger movement to pass on energy. When mastered, it becomes significantly less effortful than literal transfer of arm energy via the pronounced movements of double rotation. All movement is from the fingers here, with neither force nor arm movement being passed through into key movement. The knuckles are being raised, not pressed down on. This alternative is vital, as doing everything with downforce doesn't encourage anywhere near as much freedom of movement in the fingers. Those who don't learn to move their fingers always struggle to reach the stage where the arm just drifts sideways- for the simple reason that this stage can only be reached by moving keys with finger movements.

[falala]

Fingers do indeed have a role! Letting them collapse, droop or stiffen is defeating the purpose. It would be just as bad as using just the fingers. I agree with that.Those who play with the arm plopping up and down are learning the basic feeling of using their arm. They probably have used their fingers for their entire lives.

This is a very interesting point.

I think one of the problems with some schools of thought about arm weight, rotation etc, is that they are presented as the primary starting point for learning to play, as if the fingers themselves are largely irrlevant (which seems to be what nyiregyhazi is saying was the problem with his early teaching).

But the people who learn about all this arm weight stuff usually did it fairly late in their education, AFTER having had years and years of lessons focused primary on good finger technique. Some of them unfortunately then make the mistake of seeing the arm weight approach as a REPLACEMENT for finger technique, rather than a SUPPLEMENT to it.

There really is nothing wrong with sitting and playing the piano with your fingers, if it works and gives you the result you are looking for. Contrary to what seems to be implied sometimes around here, it doesn't necessarily involve stiffening the wrist or anything else (and many of the leading finger-technique pedagogues, like Margueritte Long, actually took great pains to emphasize the importance of a flexible wrist). And also contrary to popular myth, it doesn't result in lifetime crippling injury in the vast majority of cases (ie, except when something has been done wrong).

At the piano, you can use your fingers independently. I am saying you shouldn't not you can't move them independently.

Why shouldn't you?

[j_menz]

There really is nothing wrong with sitting and playing the piano with your fingers

I'm greatly relieved to hear it.  If I use my toes, I fall backwards off the bench, and my nose and elbows both seem prone to unsightly callouses (as well as being possessed of a lamentable lack of accuracy).