piano techniques ONLY for the most advanced pianists

[michael_sayers]

Hi Everyone,

Starting at about 30 seconds in, many are demonstrated.  Do not attempt these at a piano competition as the jurors will become envious of your abilities and not give you an award.

Mvh,
Michael

[louispodesta]

Hi Everyone,

Starting at about 30 seconds in, many are demonstrated.  Do not attempt these at a piano competition as the jurors will become envious of your abilities and not give you an award.

Mvh,
Michael

Thank you for your insightful post.  This man had obviously tens of thousands of hours of classical piano training.  And, of course, he is rolling chords, extensively.

However, not meaning to hijack the post, I leave you with a link to a new cutting edge technique school, which is very evident in the playing of Chico Marx.

This is the work of Charles Aschbrenner of Hope College.  This very young (at heart) teacher is a former student of Adele Marcus, Nadia Boulanger, and Robert Casadesus.

What he has done is to take the whole body weight principle and apply it specifically to sections of a piano piece.

Enjoy, and please do not hesitate to visit the website of this true lifelong student of piano pedagogy.
https://www.pulsepatterning.com/

[michael_sayers]

Hi Louis,

Thanks for the informative link!


Mvh,
Michael

[keypeg]

Michael, thank you for that very enjoyable (and somewhat thought-provoking) link.

It's been a while since I've since this.  Thank you for the reminder, LouisPodesta.

[louispodesta]

Hi Louis,

Thanks for the informative link!


Mvh,
Michael

Your kind words are most appreciated.

One of the reasons Charles Aschbrenner has come to this point in his pedagogy regarding the relationship of the entire body to the piano is:  Because, in part, he has spent the last 30 years teaching Dalcroze Eurhythmics.

This is an entire body approach to the study of rhythm (including Solfeggio) which incorporates dance into the study of music.  Please explore this methodology which is now mandatory matriculation at every music conservatory in the world!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalcroze_Eurhythmics

[keypeg]

Dalcroze Eurythmics is mandatory in every conservatory in the whole world?

[louispodesta]

You know what?:  It seems to me that you have challenged me on this before.

So, instead of giving a troll-like response, why don't you take the initiative and contact Charles Aschbrenner, who has lived the modern history of Dalcroze, and find out just what the evolution of this great rhythmic pedagogy is and continues to be.

[j_menz]

Dalcroze eurhythmics is not mandatory in many institutions. I don't know why you keep asserting the "every conservatory" Louis - it's simply wrong.

That said, that the method seems to me a good one and many pianists - particularly those struggling with rhythm  - would benefit a great deal from it.

[keypeg]

Louis,
1.  A troll is a person who writes multiple inflammatory posts for the purpose of getting many people to start getting upset about things.  I have never done such a thing, and asking you a question doesn't fit that definition in the first place.
2.  I have never written about Eurythmics before, ever.
3.  I happen to be in favour of Eurythmics and am familiar with it.

I just could not imagine that it would be mandatory at every conservatory in the entire world, and I also cannot imagine those kinds of statistics to exist in the first place.

Maybe I'm making the mistake of taking seriously what the members here write, and asking questions when something is not clear.

I think that the importance of any system such as Eurythmics rests on its benefits and use, rather than whether it is mandatory  in any number of institutions.  In fact, sometimes quite nonsensical things are mandatory in institutions.  The argument for it stands up quite nicely without that kind of statement.

[swagmaster420x]

Sorry, the point of the original post has gone over my head. Can soemone elaborate?

[michael_sayers]

Louis,
1.  A troll is a person who writes multiple inflammatory posts for the purpose of getting many people to start getting upset about things.  I have never done such a thing, and asking you a question doesn't fit that definition in the first place.
2.  I have never written about Eurythmics before, ever.
3.  I happen to be in favour of Eurythmics and am familiar with it.

I just could not imagine that it would be mandatory at every conservatory in the entire world, and I also cannot imagine those kinds of statistics to exist in the first place.

Maybe I'm making the mistake of taking seriously what the members here write, and asking questions when something is not clear.

I think that the importance of any system such as Eurythmics rests on its benefits and use, rather than whether it is mandatory  in any number of institutions.  In fact, sometimes quite nonsensical things are mandatory in institutions.  The argument for it stands up quite nicely without that kind of statement.

Hi Keypeg,

Louis is not a troll, and to make a claim that he is one is an off-topic way to disagree with his position.  The worst case scenario is that he is mistaken on this subject - I wouldn't know about that, though, because I'm not very familiar with conservatory course offerings in 2015.


Mvh,
Michael

[keypeg]

Louis is not a troll...

Michael - Louis called ME a troll.  And yes, it was an off-topic way of responding to my question through name-calling.  So I gave a definition of trolls in order to show how off that accusation was.   I also expressed support for Eurythmics.  I first became familiar with it via Steiner and the Waldorf schools, when considering alternatives for my now-adult sons.  I was impressed with the role this played in the children's education, and the wholeness of it all.  I can easily see how beneficial it would be in music itself.  I studied Mr. Aschbrenner's information some years ago when it first came up, was positively impressed, and have said so.

If Louis wants to see disagreement and conflict where there is none, that is unfortunate.  But I don't take kindly to being called a troll.

[michael_sayers]

Michael - Louis called ME a troll.  And yes, it was an off-topic way of responding to my question through name-calling.  So I gave a definition of trolls in order to show how off that accusation was.   I also expressed support for Eurythmics.  I first became familiar with it via Steiner and the Waldorf schools, when considering alternatives for my now-adult sons.  I was impressed with the role this played in the children's education, and the wholeness of it all.  I can easily see how beneficial it would be in music itself.  I studied Mr. Aschbrenner's information some years ago when it first came up, was positively impressed, and have said so.

If Louis wants to see disagreement and conflict where there is none, that is unfortunate.  But I don't take kindly to being called a troll.

Hi Keypeg,

I agree that he shouldn't have called you a troll!


Mvh,
Michael

[keypeg]

I also wrote that I was familiar with the system, with the person and site mentioned, and FOR both.  Why that would have appeared to L as opposition - no idea.

[louispodesta]

Thank you Michael for your kind words;  which is his real name just like mine is Louis Podesta.

In regards "keypeg," I specifically used the term "troll-like."  I did so because, in commenting on the value of Dalcroze Eurhythmics, I used the word "all," instead of the more accurate "most major conservatories."

Keypeg, in its one sentence response, chose not to challenge me on the value of Dalcroze Eurythmics, but instead on the use of the word "all."  That is what constitutes "troll-like behavior, in my opinion.

That "keypeg," is what a troll would do with my primary thesis of original performance practice.  They (not necessarily you) would attack the "messenger" because they don't have the musicological facts to attack the predicate.

[outin]

That "keypeg," is what a troll would do with my primary thesis of original performance practice.  They (not necessarily you) would attack the "messenger" because they don't have the musicological facts to attack the predicate.

Actually when people have real expertice on a subject, they should be able to defend their thesis against factual arguments without acting like they have been personally attacked and should not mind being corrected on clear mistakes. It is also expected that one learns from mistakes and do not make the same false claims repeatedly.

[keypeg]

Louis, I did not choose to challenge you along any avenue - I did not challenge, period.  I detest games myself, and I don't play them.    I am also interested in teaching and education - and the reason for that is because of the type of misleading and neglect I suffered myself in that regard in the past, and therefore details on education tend to catch my eye and I wonder about them.  If, for example, every conservatory requires Eurythmics I would expect if I ever manage to go to one to be taught it; I might also think they expect me to already educate myself on that matter.  If otoh it's not taught, maybe I might want to push for it, if I'm in a position to be able to push.  That is why I asked.

People make the mistake on the Net of reacting quickly instead of first checking "What did you mean when you wrote this?"   So I will assume you have now asked that question.  No - I did not write an oblique challenge.  I asked a question just as it was stated, and for the reason that I wrote.

I'm in the middle of remediating my playing because I was originally self-taught.  One of the elements in that is precisely that playing the piano involves more than fingers, and also more than hands and arms.  What happens in the torso and legs and head - everywhere - affects what we can do with those piano keys.  The interplay of what we hear, expect to hear, our bodies, our senses, our movement in space -- all that is involved.  I don't write about it because I'm a learner, not an expert to push these ideas.  Eurythmics address this: Aschbrenner addresses it -- which is why three times now I have SUPPORTED the idea.

[keypeg]

That "keypeg," is what a troll would do with my primary thesis of original performance practice.  They (not necessarily you) would attack the "messenger" because they don't have the musicological facts to attack the predicate.

I am sure that you must have had those kinds of negative experiences in life, and thus expect them elsewhere.  However, fourth time now, I SUPPORTED the idea and continue to support it.  Nowhere do you see a statement of disagreement.  Please do not read into a question what is not there.  A question is a question is  a question.