Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Playing piano purely mechanical??

I had an argument with someone yesterday and we talked for an hour and I couldn't convince him that playing piano is more than pressing the right keys at the right time. But he insisted that all these people that play, let's say, classical music in concerts are just 'copying' someone else's work and they are not doing much at all. I showed him a recording of Freddy Kempff playing Pathetique, he said it's mechanical, "That guy just knows the right keys and presses them real fast... also he is just playing someone else's work why do you admire him so much? I only respect people who play their own music"

My room mate thinks the same. Yesterday he told me "There is nothing to it, great pianists just practiced so much that playing has become mechanical for them... Would you admire me if I wrote real fast? It's the same thing..."

What about expression... own interpretation... why don't they understand it... How would you convince such people that what pianists like this one have achieved something admirable and it's not just repeating something or pressing keys, there is much more to it, they have magic in them and they make music, they don't just repeat it like a cd player....

They might not be capable of hearing or understanding music in a way to understand that, or maybe they have the ability but don't want to think hard enough about it to tap into it.

But maybe some day they will.
And maybe you'll have a chance to try with them again.

The thing you described can happen on any subject -- whatever......cars, for example. You might be talking about how one car is better than another, or just different. Some people won't be able to tell the difference. If they realize it's just them, that's not too bad -- but some people will swear you're just imagining the difference or making it up.

If I were arguing with your friends, I'd ask them what they think about other instruments. Does a violinist, or a clarinetist, produce something other than mere mechanics? What about a vocalist?

If they say "yes", then it seems they perceive the piano as fundamentally different, similarly to how some people don't consider photography a true art form, because "all you do is press a button." I'd try to convince them that timing, velocity, pedal, use of hand weight, and many other factors make the piano as expressive a medium as the violin and the human voice.

If they say "no", then they're saying there's no real expression in the performance of classical music in general; that musical performance can always be reduced to its mechanistic parts. But then, I'd ask, is there any valid performance art, or is it all just mechanical "copying"? What about acting? Or dance? Then I'd try to get them to articulate what they think the difference is between that medium and music performance... with the aim of getting them to realize that there's no real difference.

Sounds like fun. (Sarcasm? I'm not sure.) Anyway, have fun with it.

-Jason

They think about every instrument in the same manner. The first person I was having that argument with plays guitar in his free time, his opinion is that not only playing is mechanical but also doing covers or own interpretations is not making music but simply repeating someone's work...

So (following my above argument) is acting and dance pure mechanics and nothing else? If they say "no", try to get them to articulate the difference-- if you poke hard enough, these "differences" should all fall apart. If they say "yes", then they have a peculiar theory of artistic aesthetics that extends way beyond the realm of the piano.

-Jason

I'm guessing your friends have no experience in interpretation?

My thought is that somebody who's unfamiliar with what goes on in classical performance simply doesn't have a lot to compare it to, so they really DO think that everything that gets performed was written on the page. Have you tried showing them a midi recording, with all the right notes in truely mechanical time, without dynamic shading - all the notes there, as fast as anyone could want it, but sounding terrible...

The contrast might help them understand how the written music is just a blueprint, and how the performer must read between the lines and develop an understanding of the piece in order to bring it to life. The greater the understanding, the more the performance can express.

As for creating a new work vs performing something Beethoven wrote, well there are many different ways to approach music. I think creating original works is a fine task, perhaps if I aspired to be a composer I'd do more of it, but in the meantime I doubt I could write as well as Beethoven, so I'll play his music.

Which brings up another question for your friends - do they believe in such a thing as quality in art?

An analogy that might be more accessible for them could be actors - they're highly respected for how they deliver lines that someone else wrote.

The art is in imagining the entire work before any execution. If you don't have the whole work, what is related to what - why and how, in your mind as you play it will be mechanical.

Your friend is, quite obviously, one brilliant individual. That quote reminds me of one that I read on Youtube in regard to a Kissin performance:
"when he plays he only touches the notes that are necessary, from a strategically planned angle so he doesn't touch anything else"

Where do these people come from?

I know the perfect piano teacher for your friend: http://www.concerthands.com/. There's a good chance that they were simply messing with you to rile you up. Guys your age often do that for fun.

Johann Sebastian Bach: "It's easy to play any musical instrument: all you have to do is touch the right key at the right time and the instrument will play itself."

Perhaps you might show him Wilhelm Kempff in comparison to Freddy Kempf (one 'f' with Freddy I believe). All the same notes (and even in the same order) but different interpretations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSNBPtyVnx4&feature=PlayList&p=81BB570E319C82F2&index=12

Or better still Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata first movement (since it is so well known):

Valentina Lisitsa: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHd8jwXBzXE

Wilhelm Kempff: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6txOvK-mAk

Brendel (no video): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4b-PHPuwiM

All three very different.

I am so sick of that stupid misquote. It was reported by someone called J.F. Köhler. Bach replies to a compliment about his organ playing - "There is nothing remarkable about it. All one has to do is hit the right notes at the right time, and the instrument plays itself." - probably very applicable to organ playing but certainly NOT ANY OTHER INSTRUMENT! From The Bach Reader ed. David and Mendel.

or from Spitta: Once when some one had spoken with enthusiasm of his wonderful skill on the organ he said with indifference" There is nothing very wonderful about it ; you have only to hit the right notes at the right moment and the instrument does the rest."

Personally, I don't take offense to the characterization. I don't delude myself into thinking I'm creating art. I'd rather play something I like, at a high quality, than write or improvise sloppy drivel.

Have them listen to these 10 great piasnists playing the opening solo piano intro to Beethoven's PC No.4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZGiGMCiB3k

Never argue with idiots...people watching may not know who is the idiot.

You're right. Freddy, has one, Wilhelm, has two.

I guess your friends should never go to the movies, since the actors don't write their own lines!

It's a good thing it wasn't me who was arguing with your friends because I probably would've strangled them. You can't argue with people like that - you just call them idiots and leave.

Frankly, I think they're not far off the mark. It's no wonder most people aren't interested, when the vast majority of pianists exhibit so little creativity.

So a great pianist could not play a single phrase from a Chopin nocturne with any musicianship, if he did not know the whole piece? Cortot would have played a phrase from a piece he'd never seen more mechanically than somebody who had imagined the whole piece? It might be played differently, if related to the rest, but why on earth should it be 'mechanical' in any sense whatsoever? I think you're confusing the notions of basic musicality with the issue of context (not to mention getting carrried away with nonsensically vague soundbites).