Tobias Matthay method

[Molson]

I try to use the Matthay method when playing (especially on soft sounds), because it gives you the most c lear, controlled sound.  The "catch", is that you have to often practice extremely slowly using gravity (the basis of the method) on each note.  If you have used or have tried this method, what do think of it?  If you haven't, I strongly recommend that you look into it.

[rachfan]

Matthay hasn't gotten the greatest press ever since the controversy erupted a few decades ago over whether controlled arm weight produces a rich, singing tone, or whether the same result is available by depressing the key with an umbrella tip or a pencil eraser.   The premise for the latter position is that the sole factor of physics and the only variable involved is the acceleration or velocity of the hammer hitting the string from the initiating force, period, be it caused by the arm or an umbrella, in which case there is no difference.  

I disagree and have always believed that the pianist can in fact make a huge difference in the quality of tone using controlled arm weight.  I was brought up in the Matthay tradition.  My first teacher who studied with several luminaries, spent time with Albion Metcalf whose teacher was Matthay.  So that's how the principle of arm weight was transferred to me from my earliest lessons.  

The only exception that I have found is that in pieces of fast tempo,  the Matthay method becomes less important as arm weight is diametrically at odds with velocity.  Aside from that, I use it all the time in slow and moderate tempi.

[tosca1]

How interesting!  I have also been taught the basic principles of the arm weight approach of Matthay, but this was later in my lessons as an adult.
My teacher was an avid Matthay proponent and while I agree with you David on the benefits of this approach I  also perceive the contradiction between the arm weight method and the ability to play with velocity.
Armweight is ideal for good tone production with chords  and slower moving music.  
When it comes to playing rapid scale passages then well trained finger action is imperative. Even in slow practice there is a point when those arm swings must stop and fingers become the only means of playing a faster group of notes.
For me personally, the great advantage of this approach is the fact that the feeling of "relaxed" muscular freedom is so important generally when playing the piano.  Too much tension inhibits finger action and that affects the quality of tone production and makes performance a nightmare.
When excessive muscular tension takes over the tone becomes thin and brittle and  technical insecurities and stumbles become apparent.
The "relaxed" forearm and wrist can give you greater ease of playing and a beautiful, liquid sound.  
In theory it seems elegantly simple, but in practice it is most difficult to achieve this equilibrium.

Thank you,
Robert.

[rachfan]

Hi tosca1, yes I believe we're in full agreement that Matthay leads to a relaxed approach to playing (but is definitely difficult to learn, acquire and to assimilate into one's approach when first exposed to it).  But thereafter, it is a great asset.  And yes, when confronted with the need for velocity, Matthay has to take a back seat as the fingers must be the primary executants in those instances.

This business on the role of fingers in velocity, with which I agree, reminds me of the Abby Whiteside approach (i.e., her book "Indispensables of Piano Playing"), where she often writes from a phenomenological viewpoint putting huge emphasis on "top arm" (upper arm)--which certainly does have importance--and emotional rhythm, implying to some extent that the fingers will somehow take care of themselves automatically.  This led to the  "fingerless piano playing movement" often resulting in sloppy performance and less than dubious results.  I guess in evaluating any of these approaches, be it Matthay, Whiteside, or others, the final arbiter always seems to be common sense and what works and what doesn't.  

[ted]

I have never had any technical tuition at all but have read "The Visible and Invisible in Pianoforte Playing", which I found most interesting. Reading the posts here I think I might have misinterpreted the whole issue. Does he really say you should vibrate the arm for each note ? I interpreted it as meaning keeping a floating arm and using very individual, clearly delineated finger strokes. He talks at one stage about using "arm vibration" for Fantasie Impromptu for clarity. How on earth could he possibly mean vibrating the arm for each note in the right hand of that ?

Now when I play the initial D minor scale in Mazeppa, (by way of example) I find I can either do the whole thing by discrete finger strokes from a floating arm(sounds nice and clear but is difficult and has an upper limit of speed - still pretty fast though) or I can use a connected touch assisted by weight transfer (can get it much faster but note individuation is lost). The first is like the action of running and the second like that of walking. i.e. the second uses physical legato and the keys always palpably on the beds, but not pushed onto them.

Until now I thought this was the difference he was talking about. It appears I have it all wrong ? Or have I ?

[MatthewClarke]

Hello,
 I use Tobias Matthay's method 100%.
If you find difficulty using it with fast passages, you may need to work on it, you lean enough just to let the 1st key go down, and then you stransfer the weight into the other fingers, you always prepare and feel the resistance of the keys before playing them down, it is quite easy once you do it well, I have been recently working on the Dante Sonata, and in some of the fingery Presto sections, it works great, same with in the Beethoven's 5th Concerto runs, makes pearly passages, and you can get them really quiet because you can feel the resistance.

Bye for now.
...from Matt.