Is this forum meant for players only or do people discuss piano music?

[dedalus89]

Preeetty much got it all in the subject.  I listen to a ton of classical music and lately I've been listening to a lot of Czerny, Hummel, and always listen to a lot of earlier harpsichord music. I googled a thread about Czerny being a waste of time and after dozens of threads nobody had even mentioned his serious music, IE the music he composed to be music rather than his pedagogical works. Some were saying how there's no point in practicing purely technical passages divorced from music and I wanted to scream "then practice his actual MUSIC then!!!". So I decided to make an account.  Hi

[lelle]

Hi! Everyone is welcome here! (With the usual disclaimer: be respectful, talk about the appropriate topic in the appropriate forum etc)

I think the people who come here typically play themselves. But they range from beginner to advanced so it's really all sorts of people and players. And we talk about piano music all the time so go right ahead!

Czerny's main niche in today's repertoire is the pedagogical works he wrote, which most pianists encounter at some point during their learning. Therefore, the vast majority of pianists are going to know Czerny mainly through his collections of studies for early to intermediate players. Often, if no additional details are added, "Czerny", "playing Czerny", "doing some Czerny", "practicing Czerny" etc is assumed to refer to playing his studies, in a similar vein to how "playing scales" or "practicing Hanon" is usually understood.

[lostinidlewonder]

There's plenty of excellent works from his studies and exercises, those who think not just haven't looked at all of them to discover it! That's showing their lack of exploration much more so than Czernys music missing anything.

[mjames]

All of the above.

[dedalus89]

I appreciate the replies! Yeah I also think his pedagogical works aren't completely devoid of musical merit but his sonatas are far more excellent pieces of music.  I find it odd that there are so many (literally dozens) of recordings of his etudes and practices on Spotify but so few of his serious music. I guess that's just owed to the popularity of them among pianists for learning and practice.  But I have to wonder who would ever need more than a couple recordings of his etudes to see how they can sound by a professional pianist as an example.  How many could you possibly need?? :p

Another question I have about the forum is if there are players of keyboard instruments besides just the plain old modern grand.  Fortepianos, harpsichords, organs, clavichords, or even more exotic early keyboard instruments like:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Bible_Regal.png/301px-Bible_Regal.png

Couldn't figure out how to put an image in but that's a regal. Almost like a... keyboard accordion hybrid

[ego0720]

I’m a huge fan reading about Czerny life. The man dedicated his life advancing the art. When he died he donated his earnings to charity.  Gave the basis to the great Frank Listz.

There are many different philosophies on practicing piano. I think sometimes understanding the reasoning is more important. But my experience is connecting the practice in piano and drawing parallels in other hobbies (same problems). And I see the same arguments.  And imo 50-50 between divorcing techniques and musicality.  50% technical dry stuff and 50% fun.  Can’t always survive repeating exercises but these repetitions can build up but it’s how the physical-mental interaction that is crucial to how it shapes the development (a within process that is experienced, not taught).  They can numb the mind however when done too much and a person can be dulled or lose a sense of their musicality.  If a technical exercise can be paired to an application of said technique, then that knowledge can help create rules of music.  Because nobody knows for sure what musicality really means, we can only argue about these theoretical points and what the education should be.  Here is a quote:

“How can there be methods and systems to arrive at something that is living? To that which is static, fixed, dead, there can be a way, a definite path, but not to that which is living. Do not reduce reality to a static thing and then invent methods to reach it. ...Truth has no path. Truth is living and, therefore, changing. It has no resting place, no form, no organized institution, no philosophy. When you see that, you will understand that this living thing is also what you are. You cannot express and be alive through static, put-together form, through stylized movement.” -Bruce Lee

Bruce Lee was big into one’s expression on the individual level.  When it comes to art, that is the ultimate goal. In context Bruce Lee was arguing against the repetitive, mechanical nature of many martial arts that limited the students ability.  I see his point although I don’t share 100% the criticism he feels of the system nor do I completely agree with his conclusion. And -that’s- the point.  Individual skepticism. The concept has to make sense with usage of both brain hemispheres and we begin by not blindly accepting an exercise. And with the myopic lens we have we continue to evolve that view. This is relevant to the practice of piano in the sense of practicing with mindful interpretation and with -purpose-.  As long as one understands, deeper than being told what to do .. that is when they transition to a higher plane of understanding from following the system + methods and making those more of a tool than a lead.  Eventually when one can unify all sense and reason to transcend what appears to be the contradictions of many ‘opposing’ opinions, that’s the next stage.