Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner - Non Classical Is only the Classical Pianist Corner Obsessed with "Tone"

There have been lots of posts in the past on the Pianist Corner forum about tone and the physical side of playing the piano which can be summarized as " only careful years long study with a master teacher on a fine acoustic instrument can insure that the pianist will not injure himself and produce an ugly banging tone ".

Whereas here the approach seems to be more about making music with the assumption that both acoustic and digitals will be used. Do I have that right or are there players and instructors on the non-classical side who are obsessed with "tone"?

Because classical pianists are dealing with music that is pre-conceived, that is, no mater how many times you approach the piece, everything remains the same, all notation unchaged, the ONLY parameters that they have to impart any of their own creativity whatsoever, aside from tempo, is their erroneous delusion that they can somehow alter the "tone" of the piano.
The tone of the piano is inherent in the piano itself, not the player. The tone of any one note, any key depressed with enough force to sound a note at any volume will be the same as if depressed by Lang Lang, Theolonius Monk, a 4 year old child touching the piano for the first time, or a machine designed to depress keys.
As long as a note is depressed at the same velocity, and with the same force, there will be no difference in the physical acoustics of that note with regard to it's acoustical, timbral profile.
What the classical pianists erroneously refer to as "controlling tone" is the control of ASR, the note envelope. The attack, sustain, and release of each note WITHIN the contect of the line (phrasing).

Well well well. Look who's back. Howdy BJones!

Interesting, I just made another post about Tone. I am as obsessed with tone, particularly duplicating somebody's tone like Keith Jarrett. My teacher is obsessed with tone as well.

And yes, agreeing with V1 here that in reality, we are talking primarily about attack (minimize), sustain (maximize), release (hide). Plus of course its relative contrast against other notes. I'm not sure anybody in Classical would disagree with this.

I would say, for beginning jazz learners, there's so much to learn like swing and improvising, and speed that tone isn't at the top of the agenda. But it eventually has to get there.

You're confusing me with one of my students. Howdy anyway.

But there is a relationship, no? I don't know if you are aware but the account in the name of BJones was banned a couple months ago. The fact that your post above is quite similar in style to BJone's posts certainly arouses curiosity.

That is correct, but just one note itself can also be a "phrase" inflected upon by consumme jazz players like Miles and Wayne Shorter, who can do more with one note, sounding it with the perfect attack, sustain, and release at the most tasteful of times.
The same notes, melodies, harmonies, etc. are common to jazz and classical. Any part of even the most extended "jazz lines" can be found somewhere in classical literature, but take on an entirely differnet sound when phrased differently.
If you listen to my youtube video, you'll hear very large complex aggregates that I'm sure can all be found within the music of Ives, Honegger, Bartok, Sorabji, Varese, Messiaen, Ravel, Rzewski, etc., etc. likely some voiced the exact same way, many of whom are my influences as well as jazz players. My thinking is more like theirs, linear, multi-contrapuntal layers rather than vertical, chord and melody, like most jazz players cultivate due to learning jazz formulations on 32 bar tunes, chords/substitutes/melody.
What makes it sound like jazz is the inflection, the relative ASR of these aggregates to each other within the flow.
Classical and jazz are the same language, spoken with a varied dialect. The dialect all depends on the individual's approach.

That's good that you have suspicions but BJones has studied with me for his entire adult life and is a good friend. Almost 20 years. I haven't read all of his posts but do you suppose that I may have rubbed off on him to some extent?

Possibly. I strongly suggest you refrain from any sort of put down of classical pianists, because that kind of behavior is what ultimately got BJones banned.

[edit] It's also interesting that there was a banned user by the name of Virtuosic1 who came before BJones.

Sounds like my jazz teacher

It's just plain rude and disrespectful to disgrace a fellow pianist , becuase of the genre they play.

I don't recall putting down classical pianists. Are you referring to my assertion that it's a delusion to think that the inherent characteristic tone of any one particular piano can be altered from pianist to pianist? You did show up immediately after I posted that the tone will remain the same whether played by a classical pianist, jazz pianist, a first time pianist, or a machine.

Whom did I disgrace? And where?

Thank you for what was cloaked as a warning, but is actually a thinly veiled threat.

"Because classical pianists are dealing with music that is pre-conceived, ........ the ONLY parameters that they have to impart any of their own creativity whatsoever, aside from tempo, is their erroneous delusion that they can somehow alter the "tone" of the piano.
The tone of the piano is inherent in the piano itself, not the player........... depressed by Lang Lang, Theolonius Monk, a 4 year old child touching the piano for the first time, or a machine designed to depress keys."



I find that a little disgraceful.

The part about "erroneus delusions" is quite insulting.



You, BJones, Virtuosic1, and Disciple are all one and the same person. It's too much of a coincidence to have four people with exactly the same writing style, and exactly the same bias against other genres.

Isn't there a thread here about how the "truth can hurt"?

Can you explain the technical errors in my statements above?

Can a pianist alter the characteristic tone of the piano?
Do classical pianists often digress about the "tone" of certain painists. "He has a singing tone", "Her tone is superb"?
Do classical pianists readily change the composer's notation?
Does the tone of the piano change when the envelope of the key, the depth, and the force imparted by the player is played by diferent pianists?

I don't understand how my pointing out these facts is a "disgrace"

Try replacing 'classical' with 'jazz' and see how you like it.

You're far too sensitive. It would be a delusion for someone to believe that A-440 is A-439, or A-441, dependent upon whether a classical pianist or a jazz pianists was playing.
It would also be delusional to believe that the inherent tone of a piano, it's physical acoustical properties can be controlled, and is different whether played by a classical, jazz, mariachi, samba, or polka pianist.
You don't agree with that? Do you actually think that a pianist can control the timbral spectrum of the piano?

I can replace it with any word. I'm not hyper-sensitive.