Scales to improve technique

[mozartnoob]

Was just wondering, I heard somewhere that doing scales all differently like legato, staccato, swung, every second note legato, trills randomly placed ect was good for technique. Also heard that Liszt player the scales with the fingerings of the others. Is this any use? If so what should I be doing apart from the ones listed above?

[rmbarbosa]

Some pianists say that scales playing is not useful for de development of technique. They say that one may attain the same gain playing scales where they are included in real music. For example, Mozart, Clementi and others classics are full of scales, so we are "doing" scales when we play them.
Other pianists claim that scales, harps, thirds, etc... are very important for technique.
Personally, I dont know if I could play some scales only playing them when they are present in real music. For example, at the end of the Nocturne post. in C sharp minor (Chopin), there is a very fast "cadenza" of a scale (32 notes in the RH against 4 notes in the LH) wich I couldnt play evenly if I had not a regular scale practice.
So, you may wish to play scales to increase your technique. In order to play them very fast, you may use paralell sets: in the scale of C major, for example, you play c-d-e in unison and then you put your fingers 1-2-3 at 3 different levels: 2 a little above 1 and 3 a little above 2. And you let your 3 fingers fall to the keyboard. Doing so, you play the sequence 1-2-3 very fast. Tens you proceed the same way witn your 5 fingers (F-G-A-B-C). Then you make the union 1-2-3 with 1-2-3-4-5. In instants, you are playing rhe C scale incredibly fast.
As i`m portuguese, I must apologize my poor English. 
Best wishes
Rui
 

[kawai_cs]

As i`m portuguese, I must apologize my poor English. 
 

Your English is great.

The major problem with playing scales fast and evenly lies in crossings (31,13 and 41 ,14). I do not know what Chang suggests in this respect...

[rmbarbosa]

Chang advocate the "thumb over". In fast scales, we dont pass the thumb under the 2 and 3 but we make a lateral mouvement of the arm: C(1)D(2)E(3)-lateral mouvement of the thumb to F.
I use to play 123 in PS and 1 with a very fast mouvement, you see? 123-1. Repeat this 10 0r 25 times. Then you play FGAB in PS (1234) and play 1 with a fast lateral mouvement: 1234-1.
And then all the scale 123-1234-1..... allways with PS.
This is the fastest way to play scales very fast.
Chang has a little video where he demonstrates this.
Best wishes
Rui

[kawai_cs]

Thanks for clarification, rmbarbosa:-) I think what is "thumb under" in slow and moderate tempos becomes "thumb over" at fast speed naturally. Nevertheless, it is good to be aware of the movements to be able to practice them consciously and not just practice "something" until the scale comes out even and smooth.

 I didn't know that Chang has videos, I am curious to watch some.

[brogers70]

I like to practice scales. My biggest technical problem has always been tension in the wrists and hands. With scales, there are no notes or fingerings to worry about (once you've learned them) so you can concentrate entirely on playing without tension, learning how to use the minimum amount of muscle contractions, how to control the volume of each note from each finger, how to play fast without tensing up. And I find that the relaxation I've learned from working on scales that way extends into my playing pieces, whereas I think that if I'd tried to get that level of relaxation working on repertoire, it might have taken longer.

[rmbarbosa]

There`s another thing you may use to improve you scales.
As you said, the problem lies in the passing finger 1 to its new position.
I used to play scales like this: 123-1 (10 times); 123-12 (10 times); 123-123 (10 times) and so on. Along two octaves.
This is very useful for eveness.
Have a try.
Best wishes
Rui

PS - And I do the same with scales beggining in black keys, with the same fingering: 123-1234-1
Ex: C sharp, E moll, G sharp, etc... And I do the same with arps.
Another good exercise is the hexatonic scale, a scale only with hole tons. Ex: CDE Fharp, G sharp, A sharp, C... playing with 1-2-3-4-5-1, then with 2-3-4-5- 1-2...; then 3-4-5-....
It`s very good in order to attain a perfect and easy playing of scales.

[anamnesis]

Thumb under/thumb over in many ways is a red herring to the real issues.

Developing sensitivity and control over the shoulder girdle complex (especially in rhythmic motion) is more important to developing consistent, fast pearly scales, slow legato scales, or any motion at the piano for that matter. 

What happens at the thumb is a follow through from a centralized control (See the link below on the leading joint hypothesis) . It's captured in the rhythmic motion guided by successively more proximal (closer to the body) joints.

Moreover, the shoulder girdle complex, particularly at the the glenohumeral joint is the only part of the upper extremity capable of guiding musical continuity at all levels, whether it be from adjacent notes or the musical long line.

This is because it is the only joint in the upper-extremity that contains a ball-and-socket joint.  Even legato from finger connection ultimately owes it continuity due to that fact.   

Leading joint hypothesis:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2965031/


----

As for the thumb....

There's a range or a continuum of motion that is used for scales so trying to explicitly delegate the motion to be thumb "over" or under creates a dichotomy that doesn't represent the real physical reality.   

What the anti-thumb under crowd is really concerned with are the following:

1. The thumb is often mis-trained to primarily move from the more distal joints closer to its tip. 
It's absolutely vital that you primarily organize your thumb movement from the joint at the wrist. Too many make it a habit to organize their thumb movement at the piano from the more distal joints, not realizing the thumb really connects at the wrist.   

The correct usage of thumb under is not going to involve a snapping of the thumb organized at the most distal joint to force a key connection, but rather the opposition of the thumb in a unified grasping motion of the hand organized at the joint at the wrist (or the movement in reverse, the opening of the hand). 

2. The thumb must not initiate the action on its own or "find the key" by itself.  Again, it's a follow through after being captured from rhythmic motions from higher on up from more centralized controls. 

[rmbarbosa]

A very interesting article.
But I have not see there anytghing that condradicts what I wrote...
In practice, I do know that PS, thumb "over" and thumb "under", speed and its control, eveness of scales - all this may be attained with the exercises I have described.
But those exercises are not in contradiction with the article, the role of the shoulder, etc... I`m more interested in practice than in theory althow theory is important to understand how to practice.

[anamnesis]

A very interesting article.
But I have not see there anytghing that condradicts what I wrote...
In practice, I do know that PS, thumb "over" and thumb "under", speed and its control, eveness of scales - all this may be attained with the exercises I have described.
But those exercises are not in contradiction with the article, the role of the shoulder, etc... I`m more interested in practice than in theory althow theory is important to understand how to practice.

There's nothing necessarily wrong with the exercise.  

What I'm arguing is that the debate over thumb over/under ignores the real source of musical continuity, which requires a blended action involving the entire playing mechanism, with a central control.  Thumb over/under is part of this blended action, but it does not play the main part.

Chang takes a lot of his work from Abby Whiteside, and he's admitted that he doesn't completely understand her writings. Some of his work is his attempt to explain his understanding of her work based on what he does understand, but I still feel he fails at this.  

Just for reference I'm going to paste excerpts from her book:

This flexion or extension of forearm plus rotary action, plus the constant easy adjustment at the shoulder, can put the hand in successive playing positions along the keyboard. As a matter of fact, even when the thumb and fingers are made the chief agents of passing, these "other techniques" are present. The relationship, however, is almost reversed.

The "other techniques" niques" are, in a sense, dragged into the picture whenthumb and fingers are trying to make the adjustment; when the "other techniques" are the positive control for placing the hand in position, the thumb and finger actions become simply an extension  of the "other techniques"-a follow-through. Ease is always the result of a coordination from center to periphery. With control from center the entire coordination operates to make it easy to have a finger available at the moment it is needed for transmitting the power of the arm.

The best proof of this statement is a beautiful scale or arpeggio gio played with complete disregard for any conventional fingering. This often happens with a gifted, untaught pianist. There simply seems to be no difficulty in having a finger ready to transmit power. The entire mechanism is serving the needs of swift change in the position of the hand along the keyboard. Every teacher with a gifted child has had the experience of seeing the child play a fast passage with what seems a crazy fingering. But he plays the passage with fluency and with no thought of its being difficult. Every possible adjustment has come to his aid, and one finger over another has been just as convenient as a so-called properly passed thumb. All technical problems of distance-and surely passing is one of these-if solved easily, bring into play all the movements which can be useful. They are not solved by using one movement in exaggeration. No one action is adequate-even the action at the center of the radius of activity. But only that action can coordinate all the levers needed.

----------

Interestingly she is against, too early use of scales for teaching the physical skills at the piano, because she considers it a more difficult pattern that can lead to bad habits when establishing coordinated rhythmic motion:

Scales which are of the essence of beautiful playing can develop habits which will prevent beautiful playing if they are practiced too soon. They should never, never be used as the basis for developing a technique. The reasons seem obvious to me. All virtuosity and brilliance demand a blended, synchronized use of the total equipment of the performer. To achieve that synchronization, one does not go about developing habits which are opposed to it. Practice perfects only the movements in use.

Scales---a diatonic progression-would foster the use of fingers even if traditional teaching did not emphasize their use in scale playing. Fingers, as stated here repeatedly, are only the periphery of the total mechanism. Emphasis on their use does not develop a blended action of all the levers needed for fluent playing. Scales practiced with a finger technique establish habits which are diametrically opposed to the habits which foster virtuosity and brilliance. But scales which use an established blended activity can refine that activity to its nth degree and increase the beauty of the performer's output. Scales should use exactly the same production as arpeggios. There is no difference between them as far as the need of a blended activity goes. But the diatonic progression does not show up that need as do arpeggios. Thus, unless the blended activity of the whole mechanism has already become the natural manner of playing, scales will emphasize action at periphery, to the detriment of the activity which is the complement of a basic rhythm.