Need Help With Scales

[palmtree]

I am a late-beginner/very early intermediate player, completely self-taught (at the moment lessons are not possible), and until very recently I have been quite content to practice the 'usual' fingering for scales: 1231234 for the C Major with the thumb under, etc. Then I heard about the book Natural Fingering: A Topographical Approach to Pianism. At first I didn't think much of it--that it was a system that no doubt worked for some, but what I was doing seemed to working just fine--and so I carried on.

But then I was scrolling through this forum, and came upon this thread (or topic, or whatever they're called here): https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=69871.0 It's not particularly brief, so long story short, Bernhard is quoted at some length, saying that 1231234 was the correct C Major fingering, but that the thumb under switch is not good, as:

Because the thumb opposes the other fingers, the easy movement actually moves the thumb sideways (under and out of the hand), while the sideways movement is the one that is required to actually press the keys. So ideally, one should press the keys by rotating the forearm, that is, the thumb is brought up and down the keys not by use of thumb muscles (which incidentally are not located in the thumb – there are no muscles in the fingers), but by rotating the forearm and bringing the whole of the hand up and down.

This is the main reason why thumb under for fast scales is a definite no-no: not only you must use the bad movement (sideways), as you must use this movement while the thumb is under the hand, which means that you have two sets of muscles fighting each other: the ones that bring the thumb under and the one that press the thumb on the key. There is no way you make this movement fast enough or smoothly enough, no matter how hard or how much you practise.

After this, I did a bit of research into the Chopin method, and what's especially striking is how different it is than the Liszt method. The latter seems to emphasize force and power to a degree which is all but outright condemned by the former--and yet both Chopin and Liszt were techincal geniuses. Then we have Czerny, Hanon, and all the rest. There's always some technically brilliant pianist who espouses a great love of some method book which is derided by other equally technically brilliant pianists as a source of carpal tunnel and dead musicality. Does this mean that at the end of the day the method doesn't necessarily matter, at least if it's not outright physically harmful (such as intentionally retaining excess tension in the wrist, or something)? In which case... what on earth is it that matters??

Ultimately, I guess I'm just wondering what everyone's opinions are on this whole situation. What fingering do you use, and how did you come to the conclusion that it was most efficient?

Thanks for taking the time to read this. I'm still pretty new in my piano journey, and I'd really rather not mess my technic up so early, especially if it means a teacher is going to have to go through the pain of sorting it out later.

[keypeg]

Look up "PianoOlogist" on the subject.

[glerzhus]

personally i would say methods are situational and not that they don't matter at all or one method is the one true method over all.  as for fingers i just do whatever feels comfortable.  i usually end up doing the suggested fingering when i'm on the fence about it but if it really feels uncomfortable then i will switch it for sure as long as it makes sense.

[lostinidlewonder]

If you were to play a slow scale without the sustain and it all requires legato, I doubt many people would choose a "thumb over" type movement. At very rapid speeds and/or with the pedal, the option to use it however becomes completely viable.

The thumb is the most complex finger to master as it plays many roles. With a thumb under movement it can feel as a spring shooting the other fingers up as it strikes from a crossed under position, this is a desirable feeling, how the thumb can reposition the entire hand.

Other times the thumb doesn't want to alter the shape of the hand and it is more desirable to maintain the same hand form as much as possible without any sense of contraction/expansion.

This naturally makes it challenging to know exactly what you should use, musical context applied however often makes the situation clearer.

Just focusing on a scale as a technical pattern requires you then to judge what different ways that scale could actually be played, what tempo, volumes, articulation or pedal usage may be applied. A confusion with focusing technique without musical context is that you may think one solution fits all where obviously the options change depending on the musical context.

[palmtree]

Look up "PianoOlogist" on the subject.

Thank you, I did! And I think it did help, I'll try experimenting around with his advice, thank you for the suggestion.

personally i would say methods are situational and not that they don't matter at all or one method is the one true method over all.  as for fingers i just do whatever feels comfortable.  i usually end up doing the suggested fingering when i'm on the fence about it but if it really feels uncomfortable then i will switch it for sure as long as it makes sense.

I guess that does make the most sense. It's just a slight bother to my desire for everything to work in one way 

If you were to play a slow scale without the sustain and it all requires legato, I doubt many people would choose a "thumb over" type movement. At very rapid speeds and/or with the pedal, the option to use it however becomes completely viable.

The thumb is the most complex finger to master as it plays many roles. With a thumb under movement it can feel as a spring shooting the other fingers up as it strikes from a crossed under position, this is a desirable feeling, how the thumb can reposition the entire hand.

Other times the thumb doesn't want to alter the shape of the hand and it is more desirable to maintain the same hand form as much as possible without any sense of contraction/expansion.

This naturally makes it challenging to know exactly what you should use, musical context applied however often makes the situation clearer.

Just focusing on a scale as a technical pattern requires you then to judge what different ways that scale could actually be played, what tempo, volumes, articulation or pedal usage may be applied. A confusion with focusing technique without musical context is that you may think one solution fits all where obviously the options change depending on the musical context.

Thank you! Would you, then, at least in general, advocate against practicing technical exercises completely divorced from a certain repertoire piece, or would you say there is still value in rote scale practice? For instance, I'm about to start Mozart k. 545, and the scales in the first movement do not seem to be able to be efficiently played if you use the 'standard textbook fingering', so if the actual pieces often cannot use the 'standard', then is it a better option to ditch the technical pattern-exercises, and to find repertoire which will ultimately yield the same benefits as those exercises, in addition to being full performance pieces? (I hope all that makes sense)

[anacrusis]

The standard fingerings for scales are tried and true and do the job well. There is a reason they are the standard fingerings, it's because they work.

It's also useful to study and use more unorthodox fingerings to become a more well rounded technician.

[ego0720]

Something to think over is the feel of the flow .. internal regulation of the muscles both large and small that is a combination of technique and ways of playing the scale. It’s also understanding the problem of thumb by design. I recall in one of my friends programming project that he had this flicker on the screen when he was trying to make balls bounce off the borders.  It’s smooth in general but his code never able to get rid of this glitch where for 1 instant in time it just flickers like a candle. I find similar analogy to the thumb being permanently a distortion in the smoothness of the piano play. One can only come very close to removing the flicker but it will only reach the desired smoothness of play asymptotically but probably will never be perfect. You would have to have 10 fingers per hand to be more perfect than you hope to achieve.

I try not to overthink it. I consider the case where fingers do all the work, the wrist does all the work, and in the same manner of the forearm. The right answer is the one where the fingers do the lightest work and spring back to its natural position while using just enough force to hit those keys. The arms-wrist to carry my fingers to desired point within reasonable distance of pressing piano key. Along that thought, I learned to use gravity whenever the motion goes down (make sure u don’t move your arms down when it can drop and relax). I also standardize the same target point on the keys to press (one-half inch from the edge of white keys and one-fourth inch on black keys - as close as one can get but not at the black corner). That requires the aid of the elbow-wrist to adjust for the five finger’s different length. After creating some rules to abide by, I don’t think about them. I listen to the notes in my head and have the arms-wrist-fingers figure out how to execute to emulate the sound. I know that i seldom move my thumb .. more like stiffen it when the wrist drops or moves sideways. I also avoid crushing the thumb with my wrist-firearm.. making sure to levitate them enough to avoid thumb pushing against that.

The biggest point is to create some simple rules of what your shoulders-fingertips can do then make them slave to “singing”. There’s an intelligence at first but you kind of know it’s right when u *feel* the process and hopefully it works with the suggested fingering. I think twice if I find something comfortable that doesn’t match the recommended finger number. When your eyes, ears, and touch harmonize in your brain.. it’s kinda magical and feels great.

[lostinidlewonder]

Thank you! Would you, then, at least in general, advocate against practicing technical exercises completely divorced from a certain repertoire piece, or would you say there is still value in rote scale practice?

Scale on their own are fine but you must realise that not always will they solve every single scale situation in pieces which may add or remove notes and add different intervals here and there etc.

For instance, I'm about to start Mozart k. 545, and the scales in the first movement do not seem to be able to be efficiently played if you use the 'standard textbook fingering', so if the actual pieces often cannot use the 'standard', then is it a better option to ditch the technical pattern-exercises, and to find repertoire which will ultimately yield the same benefits as those exercises, in addition to being full performance pieces? (I hope all that makes sense)

In the Mozart the start you'll notice it requires a small change to deal with the extra note you find while descending thus the scale fingerings must allow you to catch that extra note without having an awkward adjustment you'd find if you try to simply use basic scale fingering theory. So while you still use much of the normal scale fingerings you need to make adjustment to deal with the specific pattern used in pieces.

[palmtree]

@ego0720
The general consensus seems to be that if it is wrong, it's going to feel wrong. Thank you for taking the time to type all that out!

@lostinidlewonder
Thank you for your comment, I'll think about all these things a great deal! You guys have all been a big help.