Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Tired Fingers

Yes, you might. But many of us have already fallen into the trap, so feel free to join the club.

We shall see.

I don't think it's misinformation if it works. We are in the art of sound, not the science of it. That's another field.

LOL

Misinformation is information that is false or inaccurate. The assertion that one can play using arm-weight alone, or chiefly, is subject to the same true-or-false standards as any other assertion. It just so happens that this one is false, and it is therefore misinformation.

The ideas are not exclusive of each other. You can, at once, teach a student under the "arm-weight school" whilst remaining grounded in the physics of the situation.

That certainly leaves you out.

(There, I just fed the troll again. What's the matter with me?)

Why don't you ever try to actually contribute to a discussion?

Life is full of mysteries...

Wrong.

The troll is being fed left and right - which post shall he respond to next?

Can you offer reasoning or evidence to support your position? If not, you're the one who is wrong.

Wrong.

@JoelW
If you cannot offer any reasoning or evidence to support your idea that "arm-weight" play is possible, then there is no reason to believe that it is. In fact, the evidence to that claim is exactly contrary.

Google it. It's out there and anyone can find if they wish to.

Atrys,

What level pianist are you?

He's probably just Google-handicapped.

Indeed I have. I've also read books on the subject and have even had a teacher who professed this way of playing. To summarize the evidence, there simply is none. The idea is a misapprehension that is a product of "bias" sensation during play.

Anyone with a background in physics can easily identify the arm-weight teachings as largely false and unfounded, sorry to say.

Atrys,

Please answer my question.

That is my point exactly. The whole "arm weight" concept goes right along with what is actually happening, regardless of the non-scientific name.

I teach voice which is probably 90% technique to being with, and there are things I will tell them - imagery things- that while not scientific coincide with what is scientifically happening and they get the student to make the sound and feeling desired. If I told them they need to contract their Thyroarytenoid muscle they would look at be blankly and not know what to do. If I tell them make a "manly" sound and demonstrate, then they know exactly what I mean and can copy it easily.

The same goes for "arm weight". It means nothing without the demonstration and the sound to accompany it, but combine the demonstration and sound with the name and the student can then imitate. The name is not intended to be scientific, it is intended to describe the feeling in a way that makes it easier for the student to replicate later on and for the teacher to refer to in the future once the student understands the feeling that is associated with that name.

It seems rather pedantic to have to describe this.

@Morodiene
What I'm refuting are claims made by the arm-weight school. When someone makes an assertion, it doesn't matter what "context" it is made in, it is still either true or false. The assertion that one can play chiefly with the weight of the arm is a false assertion, regardless of its intent. That is what I'm getting at.

I wonder what would happen if we just stopped feeding, everyone. Let's try it, as an experiment?