Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Adult Beginners Forum Piano Career Academy -diary for Russian Method online course

This was in response to what I wrote.

We're missing each other here. I was referring to teaching, and trying to bring across things. In a very fundamental way, when you teach something you have to make sure the other person understands what you mean. So here it happens that on instruments where you create pitch, such as voice and violin, you can slide up to a note or down from it pitch-wise - this is a specific thing, sliding a pitch up or down. Another thing you can do with musical sound is to join one note to the next note (legato) or have an interruption of silence between them (staccato) with those degrees of silence being infinitely variable. Whether you are talking about pitch or moments of silence between notes - that is a definite precise thing. And that has to be clarified when there is confusion, just as a fundamental thing. It happens that "portamento" is largely used to mean a type of sliding into a pitch: that "portato" tends to be used to mean the silence-thing, but that in some quarters "portamento" is also used to mean the silence-thing. You can be intuitive, mystical and the rest in any art, but when describing something, people must be clear whether pitch or silence is meant.

Yes, Monet and Rembrandt were different. But they both used colours, shapes, and textures (those are the concretes or specifics). If one talked of "red" and the other thought "blue" was meant, there would be a problem. That is what I meant.

I once lost the chance to learn to play vibrato, because my teacher told me to move my "wrist" back and forth, when he meant the back of the hand. The wrist is the knobbly joint bendy thing. When I did precisely what he told me to do, it looked so weird that he got alarmed, and delayed teaching it for another two years. There is a "feeling" to vibrato; it is an emotional, delicate, beautiful, wistful elusive thing - I had that feeling, including in voice. But because he said "wrist" and meant back of hand, I couldn't follow the instructions.

Most of the associated comments go toward that term again. Robert Estrin was aware of the problem which is why I put a double term in his title "Portato (Portamento)"
I agree 100% that the most important thing is concept(s). But I'll say that there is a marriage between a concept and a term, which makes it important and tricky. Your teacher taught a concept, and linked a word to that concept (in that order) so that when in her lessons she refers to "portamento" you keep that whole concept and experience in mind. If she didn't have a word for it, then she'd have to describe the whole thing over and over. Meanwhile when you try to bring this across to a group that has not studied with her, you have to be aware that the term will not mean anything to others - or mean something else You may well have to do an overview of the concept for it to come across, or they (we) may attach our own concept.

I think I get what she is actually doing by starting with this portato/portamento. The way many people learn to play, they are all "fingery" with a static pre-shaped hand and perhaps arms and wrists that are equally static. Trying to play legato and trying to hold on to each previous note last minute can make this even worse. Staccato, otoh, esp. repeated notes or chords, induces a more free and larger motion. Portato is somewhere between the two, and I can see it leading to a more free and graceful motion.

It was interesting to hear Robert talk about his experience as a brass player - the tata vs. the dada. On each instrument you experience it differently. The dada gives the feel of the sound as well. On violin, you create a continuous sound by having the bow rub against the string. If you lighten the pressure, as if you are about to lift off but don't quite so that the sound almost disappears and then comes back, that's the violin portato. (I actually thought the expression came from there, because you are sort of "carrying" the bow by lifting it briefly).

I am familiar with this teacher. I haven't seen this video before - she seems to have brought out some new ones recently. I've done some thinking about the singing she presents, in particular - the same thing that she does around 27:00 (btw, that's "portamento" in the sense of glissing a pitch a short distance toward the target note). My thinking about this in particular:
- You can't bend pitch that way on piano, so what is she actually doing? At the same time she does a sideways motion at the wrist toward the next note. Putting this together - I had feedback that in my own playing, at times I will have a start-stop motion - reach note 1, stop my motion when I land there, restart the motion to get to note 2, etc. I was told of "perpetual motion" by the teacher who tends to stress this. Every time you stop, that's inertia, and effort in restarting. The concept is also "B as precise pitch, then C as a precise pitch, then D as a precise pitch" - like a distinct dot. Her glissing however mentally slides up the pitches so that you might picture a glissando even though you are producing a distinct B, then C, then D .... and joining the mental glissando with motion, this contains that continuous motion. That's what I figured out.

She also highlights that her previous idea had not totally worked for her: just mentally singing the notes didn't necessarily produce relaxed fingers. That makes sense to me, because when I sing (I'm an untrained singer) I'm not using the same physical apparatus as when I play. The whole thing is about JOINING TOGETHER all the things that work together: the whole body and all its part, the sounds you envision, and more. There are probably many ways of doing so.

An intriguing aside: In the beginning she talks about octaves, and how in that dream she dreamed that she had gigantic hands. The reverse of this is imagining that your hands are too small (she does not have large hands) and the need to stretch into the octaves - which creates a subconscious mental strain. By imagining your hands are gigantic, you're doing the opposite. This rang a bell, because a friend of mine took up viola, and her teacher (who taught violin and viola) kept telling her how "big and heavy" her instrument was. She was feeling a lot of discomfort. Then she worked briefly with a teacher who had her play "air viola" while he put on a recording - then had her freeze in place - then placed her actual viola on her. The "air viola" she was imagining was much bigger than the actual instrument. Constantly being told how big and heavy it was had caused her to imagine it that way, and then struggle.

Thank you for your insights.

Yes, the instructor Illinca demonstrates everything repeatedly so there is no confusion in what she is suggesting. There are literally hous upon hours of a discussion about various techniques and gestures that can be used to produce different musical sounds. I believe visual demonstration is always the best way to demonstrate artistic ideas coupled with metaphors if applicable. Individual words are very susceptible to misinterpretation. I would never entertain the the thought of teaching Tai Chi with words. I think it is impossible.

Since I have to hear the sound inside of me prior to playing it, I decided I needed to learn to look ahead in the piece as I play it but more importantly hear the notes before I play them. I am thinking that practicing singing would be a great supplement to my piano practice so I am perusing YouTube for singing exercises and lessons. Hopefully I find a channel that approaches singing less mechanical and more from creating the sound naturally from imagination.

At this point, I am repeating each lesson in such a way that I am hearing the music before playing the notes. Sometimes I have to scan ahead to see the notes before I hear them and then play them. Sometimes I just hear the notes and just play them. In this way I am developing a connection​ between the sounds I hear in my mind and the instrument I am using to produce the sounds. This is my primary focus and the course syllabus very much supports this learning process.

Not so Bastien or Alfred's which I decided to put aside at least for now. I can't figure out what the primary concept is behind these methods but it is not in concordance with this idea that I have. The Nikoleav book and this course seems to embrace a more naturally flowing learning process.

Which Bastien are you with? Primer?

I've done Primer, 1st and now 2nd level. I think it's good to learn to read? Pieces are graded slowly and tries to deal with the most basic concepts in order. Then the music is not like much of a thing... it's not like music most of the time, but I had fun with some uproarious pieces.

It's difficult to explain in words the particular issues I am having with Bastien and more so Alfred's, but there does not seem to be a natural learning flow for me. The early introduction of an enormous about of staccato in the Bastien pieces and the immobility in the Alfred pieces are very descriptive of the entire thought behind the methodologies. My own preference is for flow propogating throughout my body in a harmonious manner.

It's difficult to explain in words the particular issues I am having with Bastien and more so Alfred's, but there does not seem to be a natural learning flow for me. The early introduction of an enormous about of staccato in the Bastien pieces and the immobility in the Alfred pieces are very descriptive of the entire thought behind the methodologies. My own preference is for flow propagating throughout my body in a harmonious manner.

I was always using another method with music I like more, but that one was more difficult so I think Bastien really helped me in learning to read. Not sure how I'd have done with your method, for example. You are learning difficult pieces?

Nikoleav's book is fine for learning to read notes. My approach is constant repetition until the note is connected with the sound in my imagination and the sound is connected to the piano producing a sound back again. For me, relaxation and repetition are the keys.

While looking for some ideas about singing, I came across this quote of Marcel Proust (a famous modernist novelist who is almost impossible to read) concerning the arts:

"The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes."

So for me, piano playing is a way for me to create new eyes into the universe.

I've had some thoughts similar to these also.
Even the most advanced composers of "method books". Did they really understand everything about it?
(What Bastien or Alfred's has or has not, may be fairly simple to figure out, though)

The whole area seems so complex, that not even they would know the whole implication of a teaching material method that they have come up with.
How can one put together a method that is the most efficient and perfect for a piano student? There are thousands of of questions to satisfy. Including all those that nobody has yet come up with.
And it doesn't only involve the work at the keys, but also the total environment from a very early age.
In any case, it's a fascinating subject.

So you have perfect pitch?

My pitch is OK but far from perfect. Like everything else in art, the more one practices and observes, the more skillful one becomes. It is a matter of training the mind and the "body memory" so it connects. In me experience, repetition and relaxation with observation is the key. It cannot be taught, it can be learned.

The objective of my arts study is not perfection, there is no such thing, it is learning from the exploration. As Proust would say: to create new eyes.

Perfect pitch is a term to describe certain individuals who can identify a note name (A, B, C, etc.) based solely upon hearing the note.

This is what johan is referring to, although I'm not sure why in response to what you said. All learning occurs in the imagination, and you don't need perfect pitch to be able to hear a note in your head before playing it.

Yes Morodiene, what I am practicing is hearing the note rather than playing the written note. I have to do it rather slowly with lots of repetition and my buddy had to be relaxed so the sound can "sink in" in propagate.

It is an interesting process to explore.

If you know how a note is going to sound like in your head and/or when played on the piano...

Perfect pitch is not required for this. Relative pitch is all that's needed, and once you've played a piece enough times, this is easy.

And really, that's only for the first note of the piece. Once you've started playing, you have your key and context to hear the note. So if need be, you could play the starting pitch for yourself before playing, but generally I find that's not necessary.

Yes, this is a very nice way to explain it. I am doing it intuitively so I would not have been able to understand it in this way. Nice piece of adfitional knowledge!