Piano World Home Page
Posted By: tnew Two conflicting techniques? - 02/19/11 06:56 PM
On one side I hear that you should move the wrists while you play.

On the other side I hear not to move those wrists and to even put on coin on top to keep them level.

Which is correct, is it a matter of opinion, or is either correct depending on the piece?
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/19/11 07:05 PM
They are two sides to the same coin.
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/19/11 07:08 PM
Some pianists live more on one side than the other, and certain repertoire calls out for more of one side than the other.
Great pianists who play a wide variety of repertoire must be well-versed in both ways, to the point of integrating both in almost all of the repertoire that they play.

I hope that helps.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/19/11 07:14 PM
Playing Bach or Mozart you should be able to keep a coin on throughout. In Chopin I doubt you'd get past the first bar.
Posted By: Smallpiano Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/19/11 07:18 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
Playing Bach or Mozart you should be able to keep a coin on throughout. In Chopin you wouldn't get past the first bar.


I wish this piano forum can be like Facebook so that I can click "Like" on this comments.

Thanks
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/19/11 07:41 PM
Thanks back!
Posted By: Gyro Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/19/11 07:59 PM
In the 17th to 19th centuries students were taught to play with a coin on the back of the hand. This limits extraneous body movements and forces you to play mainly from the hands and fingers, which is the simplest and most efficient way to play. Today this old method is mercilessly ridiculed as out-of-date, but note that Bach, Mozart, Chopin, Liszt, Rachmaninoff, etc. all learned like this.

Today students are taught to use the whole body when they play--wrists, forearms, shoulders, torso, butt, etc.--because this makes playing easier; of course, if you have the weight of the wrist, forearm, etc. behind your fingers, this will make playing easier. But note what happens when you do this. If you add the wrist to your playing, this makes playing easier, but now you've increased the complexity of your playing motion by a factor of two; because now in addition to the finger movements you've also got to learn the wrist motions that you've made an integral part of your playing. Add the forearm to your playing and you increase the complexity of motion by a factor of three. Etc.

With easier pieces, the physical assist you get from adding the wrist, forearm, etc. will seem to outweigh the disadvantage from the added complexity of motion, but as the pieces get longer and more difficult, the added complexity of your playing motion will begin to tell, and there will come a point where your playing motion is too complex for playing and you will stall and be unable to make further progress. You see this in classical piano. Students can reach a relatively high level using whole-body playing, but gradually they stall and are unable to make further progress; and only those with tons of talent will be able to keep progressing.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/19/11 09:12 PM
Originally Posted by tnew
On one side I hear that you should move the wrists while you play.

On the other side I hear not to move those wrists and to even put on coin on top to keep them level.

Which is correct, is it a matter of opinion, or is either correct depending on the piece?


If a wrist is moving, it depends whether its moving for a good reason or flailing about due to lack of control. If a wrist is still, it depends on what is keeping it still. I've started writing a blog post about what a huge difference this makes, which I really must get around to finishing sometime soon. A wrist can be completely relaxed yet very still, if you know how to create the right state of balance.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/19/11 09:15 PM
Originally Posted by Gyro

With easier pieces, the physical assist you get from adding the wrist, forearm, etc. will seem to outweigh the disadvantage from the added complexity of motion, but as the pieces get longer and more difficult, the added complexity of your playing motion will begin to tell, and there will come a point where your playing motion is too complex for playing and you will stall and be unable to make further progress. You see this in classical piano. Students can reach a relatively high level using whole-body playing, but gradually they stall and are unable to make further progress; and only those with tons of talent will be able to keep progressing.


I actually agree with this entirely (owing to the absence of your usual thing about how you shouldn't be relaxed). As long as the wrist is indeed properly relaxed while being kept still (due to its place in the middle of a supported chain), I think pianists achieve far more consistency by keeping it still and using their fingers properly. However, the means of keeping the wrist still yet relaxed is one of the most woefully absent things in the majority of teaching. Thinking "keep the wrist still" gives you no chance. A coin on the hand is especially likely to cause seizure- at least, if you don't know what to aim for, it is terrible way of trying to get the instincts to figure out the right way. A flopping wrist is equally hopeless, if taken literally (rather than as a practise exercise) for all the reasons Gyro mentions.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/19/11 11:00 PM
Hey, don't worry about flopping!
Posted By: TimR Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 12:29 AM
Now I understand why piano tuners talk about finding coins in the keybed.
Posted By: John v.d.Brook Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 02:40 AM
Contrary to the posts of some, I'm from the school which believes we have joints for the purpose of using them. Or perhaps we have joints because they gave us an advantage over others that lacked them. Over use for the sake of show is to be avoided just as underuse due to some mistaken believe that Bach or Mozart wouldn't have used them on a modern piano.
Posted By: Opus_Maximus Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 03:39 AM
As in most cases, it depends on what you are playing, how fast it is, and the sound you want to produce. If you watch youtube videos of great pianists playing the same pieces, you will see that they each vary their amount of wrist movement to suit their own physiology and personalities.

What I CAN say is that the wrist is the bridge between the hand and the rest of the the arm (very important), and it thus needs to be always supple in order for the weight and tension in the arm to flow through it and into the fingers.

A stiff wrist likely would not move...while a "flexible" one would coul be bouncing and cascading around like a ballerina...

Just my 2 cents
Posted By: AZNpiano Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:39 AM
Originally Posted by tnew
Which is correct, is it a matter of opinion, or is either correct depending on the piece?

They are both correct! A lot depends on what you are trying to accomplish with the music.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 01:18 PM
Originally Posted by Opus_Maximus

What I CAN say is that the wrist is the bridge between the hand and the rest of the the arm (very important), and it thus needs to be always supple in order for the weight and tension in the arm to flow through it and into the fingers.


That's not strictly true though. A relaxed wrist actually impedes the transfer of forces that are initiated from further back- except in situations where you are pressing forwards with the arm. In those situation, the freedom of the wrist turns a forward force into a downward one through the key. But the problem is that this raises the wrist and hence limits you. You can only do it for a few notes. It's very hard to execute things like rapid scales if you are pushing forwards- and as soon as the wrist is up is it likely to turn into a locked wrist, if you have more notes to execute.

When the forces are initiated at the fingers, the wrist can be as relaxed as you like (provided that it is suspended in the middle of the chain that the arm forms). However, it's frequently because people try to source the energy too much from the arm that they have no choice other than to stiffen their wrists. Other than in the forward press, a relaxed wrist inhibits energy transfer from the upper arm- which is why so many pianists are incapable of releasing it.

Imagine trying to push through a various planks of wood connected by hinges. The further back the energy comes from and the more released joints occur in between, the more erratic the movement and the less energy passes through. It's far easier if the movement is initiated closer up. This does not require joints to be stiffened, as the force never passes through them anyway.
Posted By: apple* Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 01:28 PM
thinking about the how the hand, wrist, fingers and arms work and trying to explain succintly, really detracts from learning how to play. Personally, I learn far more from watching the the hands of a pro, listening to the execution of a master, and actually practicing.

Nyir.. (edited)
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 01:33 PM
apple,

To a certain extent I agree with you.
Behold the wonders of the master.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfDjtOGkjPU
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 01:34 PM
'The wrist: respiration in the voice.' - Chopin
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 01:35 PM
Sorry, but I really disagree. She's a good player, but relative to the highest standards possible I see a lot of wasted effort in her films. The constant forward movements are unnecessary and actually require a lot of work from the arms. Her hand is stable enough for her to play well still, but I think this would put a real limit on the ability to play the most difficult music. Her left hand looks like it's working really very hard in the Chopin waltz. I used to find such things really hard work myself, until I started using my fingers to balance the arm. Slow chords were often the most tiring of all, before.

Since I started analysing with physics, my technique has improved immeasurably. My wrist is now starting to stay completely aligned and comfortable. I used to use those bigger movements myself and I got tired very quickly and had very weak, slow fingers. You're welcome to be skeptical, but I'm only saying these things because the results have been so consistent with the theory. If I were currently learning from that style, I just wouldn't be learning anything. I'd be exactly where I had been before.

Personally, I found that years of vaguery and imprecise expression had stopped me from "learning to play". Understanding technique with regard to a few simple principles (that do not claim to fall outside of the laws of physics) has enabled me to get on with learning to play.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 01:42 PM
By the way, looking at the exterior can be misleading. I want to post a video sometime, to illustrate slurs. One movement is done by pulling a loose arm with the finger. The other (more traditional) is done by rolling the arm through a much more passive finger. When I show this to students they can rarely perceive any visible difference at all. However, the difference I feel (and the mechanical difference between the arm "push" and the finger "pull") could not be any greater. You cannot see these things on the surface unless you look exceedingly acutely. In some cases, I doubt whether anyone could honestly tell the difference.

However similar they look, anyone trying to do the arm slurs in the Tempest would really be pissing into the wind. There's no way to get speed and clarity without using the finger initiated action. This seemingly minute difference makes a world of difference to the results.
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 01:47 PM
lol i meant the guy in the link I posted is the master... not music32 whoever that is....

Great posts, Nyiregyhazi.
Posted By: Dustin Sanders Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 01:50 PM
I choreograph my body and wrist movements to everything I play. So my wrists are always moving. But I am quite sure I could do the coin trick as well if I tried ... never heard of it before. Sounds like fun for a few minutes. In the end though I don't see why it matters. Just stay relaxed and make the music sound good.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 02:00 PM
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist
lol i meant the guy in the link I posted is the master... not music32 whoever that is....

Great posts, Nyiregyhazi.


Yeah, that's a good example. You can see he is still free when his wrist stays still- but it only moves when it serves a purpose.

Personally I find this excessive:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ebYAJcTBv4&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL

As I say, I don't wish to sound harsh on a very good player, but judging from the very highest level of attainment I hear instability and slight vagueness in the sound that I believe is due to excess movement. I used to depend on very big elbow movements myself and I can honestly say I found them more tiring than the approach I am currently working on. I think it's far easier to find the position where the elbow and wrist are safely balanced, rather than keep having to adjust it to prevent fatigue. If it's truly balanced, the fatigue never arises in the first place.
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 02:12 PM
Why are you calling her a very good player?

I see no reason to call her that.

I agree with you 100% about excess movement and uncertainty in the sound.
In the video you posted, she has very little control over the sound and shape, imo.

Very amateurish-looking playing. Too much on the one side of the spectrum and not enough on the other.

Bozhanov would eat her for breakfast.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCFN1TX-iIY

THAT is control.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 02:23 PM
Well, I wouldn't want to sound quite so harsh myself- but by professional standards I'd have to agree that it's not a good example of controlled technique. The "relaxation" movements that a lot of people would praise are exactly the things that very few professionals have any need for (at least, certainly not on the scale seen there).

It occurs to me that these movements are a little bit like somebody hopping around on hot sand. You can move away, but next thing you know, you're on hot sand again and you have to keep hopping around (or find somewhere cool to stand). It's the same with the arm. Moving around to stop yourself getting tired doesn't have any use unless you look for a point where you can stay still without becoming tired. If it's just movement for the sake of getting out of the tiring position, it doesn't lead to anything sustainable. It just means it's a matter of time before you realise you're getting tired again and have to make another big adjustments. These adjustments have a serious effect on the ability of the fingers to act consistently and predictably. If the arm is actually relaxed, it has no need to keep moving (except for enough to line up behind the keys).
Posted By: apple* Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 02:35 PM
I edited my post.. (i really didn't mean to solicit critiques of a PW world member without permission... I simply thought the films show a proper 'lack of extemporaneous movement and project from a great angle to demonstrate that)/

I just wanted to convey the vaguely attempting to articulate what the wrists, fingers, arms and hands should be doing is a bit of a waste of time. .. at least in print.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 03:07 PM
Extemporaneous is exactly how I would describe the movements personally. Those constant motions of the elbow serve no obvious purpose.

I don't think it's a waste of time trying to describe these things- unless done without clarity of expression. If something is too complex to be open to description, it strikes me that it's probably too complex to be a sound baseline for technique. The arm hangs behind the finger (with some of the weight supported at the shoulder, but enough left free to keep to the wrist hanging in alignment). With this approach, everything lines itself up (if not, a faint trace of pulling back away from the keys, will get the wrist entirely aligned). The fine tuning can be rather more complex, but I think the basics can be conveyed very easily in words.

If you take every part individually, alignment looks rather complex. However, when something hangs between two points, it lines up by itself. Realising that has saved me a heck of a lot of time and effort. The problem with massive follow through movements or big elbow motions from side to side is that is completely destroys the natural hanging positions and leaves you having to use countless complex muscular efforts (to avoid falling back down into the natural released state). However, it's far easier to just slowly release those efforts and allow your arm to return to the natural hanging position for itself. Why would you want to keep unbalancing your arm's alignment?
Posted By: liszt85 Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 03:28 PM
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist
Why are you calling her a very good player?

I see no reason to call her that.

I agree with you 100% about excess movement and uncertainty in the sound.
In the video you posted, she has very little control over the sound and shape, imo.

Very amateurish-looking playing. Too much on the one side of the spectrum and not enough on the other.


+1 I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought that. However, since its not very nice to critique a member's playing without being asked to, I think we should stop posting her videos and making critical comments on them. I have made similar passing comments when she herself posts these videos here. She never claims to be a professional pianist. She is a teacher, and hopefully a very good one. I do disagree with most of what she says though, however I understand that sometimes, other points of view might work well too (when it comes to teaching). I'm not sure about that either, but like I said, since its not very nice to do unsolicited critiquing of a member's playing, lets stick to pro videos when we are in a mood to discuss technique. Nothing good ever comes out of a discussion surrounding a member's playing. In fact, in another thread where I argued that her movements were excessive, I believe there was a majority of people who disagreed! Part of it, I believe, is because we have people here who want to be nice to others on PW, so they are reluctant to say stuff (even if true) that might hurt another member (which I appreciate, but think is not good for a completely useful and transparent discussion).
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 04:30 PM
Liszt85,

I am sorry, I had not realized she was a member here.

Doesn't make much difference to me... the movements are excessive, and anyone who claims that they are NOT excessive is welcome to post videos of their own playing showing similar levels of movement, albeit with superior control of the sound.

IMO, that's not going to happen, because I think she controls the piano about as well as anyone can with that level of movement.

As you said, she is a teacher and not a professional pianist. There are many kinds of teachers for many levels of pianist. She doesn't seem like the type of teacher I would pay money to study with.

Sorry, folks, you can call me a you-know-what-hole..... it won't be the first or last time I have been called such....

I do not subscribe to the belief that because people are nice, or because people are on PW, that their mistakes should be overlooked or ignored.

I am interested in quality, and not the lack thereof.

As it has been established in this thread:

There is a spectrum in piano technique. The two sides to this spectrum represent two sides of the same coin.

In my opinion, FAR too many teachers spend far too much time and energy looking only at one side of that coin.

In my experience, many teachers who themselves play beautifully and have a wonderful technique (unlike the lady in the video) STILL only teach the one side of the coin.... and do you know what? Their students never get beyond a certain level, not unless they discover the other side by other methods, or from other teachers.

I lived for years on the wrong side of that coin, and I never won any competitions or impressed anyone whatsoever with my piano playing. I thought it was simply because I didn't work hard enough. While there is some truth in that (I didn't work hard enough), the MAIN problem was that I was working WRONG.

Then I found a teacher who basically runs a boot-camp focusing on that OTHER side of the coin..... and five years later I am finally winning piano competitions and getting recitals in important venues.

Nyir has done a good job trying to articulate some of the things I've said here. For many, his efforts are too verbose.

The hand needs to have its own stability in order to play the piano well. No amount of arm movement or wrist flexibility will make up for a lack of this stability.

This does not mean that, once the hand stability is there, you don't need arm movement or wrist flexibility.

The two sides of the coin are NOT mutually exclusive.

Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 04:44 PM
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist

The hand needs to have its own stability in order to play the piano well. No amount of arm movement or wrist flexibility will make up for a lack of this stability.

This does not mean that, once the hand stability is there, you don't need arm movement or wrist flexibility.

The two sides of the coin are NOT mutually exclusive.

I could nearly go with the above, trouble is hand stability comes through the wrist and arm. There's nothing on the other end despite what the verbose may say.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 04:45 PM
Yeah, I don't understand why almost all teachers seem intent on looking at just half of the picture. Even when both sides are acknowledged fully, the specifics of how arm and fingers actually relate don't seem to get addressed in anything but the vaguest terms. I've found mechanical analysis very useful as it showed exactly what the relation is (in a mechanism that is balanced without effort to stabilise the elbow and wrist) and how I can set about feeling how to achieve it. The only way to be wholly objective about it is take outside of "I was told x" and think about what presents itself as being physically possible and what does not.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 04:48 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz

I could nearly go with the above, trouble is hand stability comes through the wrist and arm. There's nothing on the other end despite what the verbose may say.


That's simply not true. Who are you to say that it's impossible for a finger to grip onto a key sufficiently to stabilise a released elbow and wrist? You cannot define the limits of possibility from your own lack of experience/ability to do this. If you must insist on doing it that way, by all means continue. However, I have no idea what leads you to believe that there's nothing on the other end.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 04:49 PM
The muscles that grip are in the arm!
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 04:51 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist

The hand needs to have its own stability in order to play the piano well. No amount of arm movement or wrist flexibility will make up for a lack of this stability.

This does not mean that, once the hand stability is there, you don't need arm movement or wrist flexibility.

The two sides of the coin are NOT mutually exclusive.

I could nearly go with the above, trouble is hand stability comes through the wrist and arm. There's nothing on the other end despite what the verbose may say.



....so would that explain why you can barely stagger through the easiest of pieces with very little evenness of tone or attention to musical shaping?

Or would that only be explained by your self-admitted lack of good teachers up until Grindea and your lack of practice time?

kbk-the bottom line is, the poor lady in these videos who is the undeserving target of all of this criticism plays a heck of a lot better than anything I've ever seen on your youtube channel.

Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 04:51 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
The muscles that grip are in the arm!


so what? The finger is what is felt to grip onto the key. What is the relevance? Are you also going to insist on pointing out that the electrical impulses stem from the brain? What is your point?
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 04:55 PM
When people move their fingers, the body perceives it from that point- not from within the forearm. Anyone who perceives it within the arm is very likely to be using wasted efforts of a very different kind. I doubt if even Zen masters perceive finger movement primarily from within the forearm. It's not how the body's proprioception works. The fingers are exactly the place to be perceiving this.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 04:55 PM
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
The muscles that grip are in the arm!


so what? The finger is what is felt to grip onto the key. What is the relevance? Are you also going to insist on pointing out that the electrical impulses stem from the brain? What is your point?
Just because it feels like the muscles are in the fingers doesn't mean they are.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 04:58 PM
My point is not about where they are moved from- considering that is not included in the brain's mapping of the movement. Dwelling on the forearms is likely to cause altogether different muscles to be brought into it- and lead to people forgiving themselves totally unnecessary efforts to stabilise the wrist and elbow. What relevance/benefit does dwelling on the initiation provide?

If you can find me a single great pianist who talks about perceiving his flexors before the finger's actions, I would be interested to hear of it.

PS. If you want to be a pedant then please do it thoroughly and extend it to the electrical impulses that initiate the movement. What's the point in a half-arsed job?
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:02 PM
The fact is the 'stabilizing' you are talking about can only originate in the arm. If as a teacher you are looking in the fingers you ain't gonna find it.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:07 PM
Seeing as you ignored it, I'll repeat my post


"When people move their fingers, the body perceives it from that point- not from within the forearm. Anyone who perceives it within the arm is very likely to be using wasted efforts of a very different kind. I doubt if even Zen masters perceive finger movement primarily from within the forearm. It's not how the body's proprioception works. The fingers are exactly the place to be perceiving this."

You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding about how the brain's mapping of movement occurs. It is based around the joints, not around the specific muscles. Where the movement is initiated is not an issue but where you FEEL the movement occurring is. Those who feel it in their fingers do this efficiently. Those who feel it in their forearms are likely involving a whole series of other muscles.

While it is of academic interest to know about the flexors, any teacher who would spend all his time trying to get the students to feel the movement inside the forearms (instead of the fingers) would get nowhere. The brain is not wired that way. It's based upon feeling it at the fingers.
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:07 PM
Dude,
you didn't answer my question.

I am going to ask it again.

If you know the secret to playing the piano, why are you so bad at doing it?!?
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:10 PM
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist
Dude,
you didn't answer my question.

I am going to ask it again.

If you know the secret to playing the piano, why are you so bad at doing it?!?
Dude, you're just rude.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:13 PM
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
"When people move their fingers, the body perceives it from that point- not from within the forearm. .
Yes, but the mechanics don't go away. That the force has to be transmitted by pulleys in the wrist and fingers means the hand can in no way be independent or have its 'own stability'.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:16 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
"When people move their fingers, the body perceives it from that point- not from within the forearm. .
Yes, but the mechanics don't go away. That the force has to be transmitted by pulleys in the wrist and arm means the hand can in no way be independent.


Fine, nobody argued otherwise. But how many times must I ask what the relevance is? How is it any more relevant than thinking that the electrical signals come from the brain? What relevance would either have?

How many times must I repeat that humans perceive finger movement and grip in their fingers, not in their forearms. So if you feel it in the hand then you are feeling it just right. If you feel it in the forearm, it suggests alternate muscles being brought in, rather than those that stabilise the hand.

If you have a point to make (rather than an incidental fact to present over and over) would you please hurry up and make it?
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:18 PM
You missed my edit: That the force has to be transmitted by pulleys in the wrist and fingers means the hand can in no way be independent or have its 'own stability'.
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:20 PM
That I may be. But the fact remains....

You are clearly passionate about music and the piano.
You have had the time since 2007 to accumulate nearly ELEVEN THOUSAND POSTS on pw.

Surely if your ideas work as well as you insist they do, you would have been able to find the time to actually work some stuff up to concert-level....

What's the deal with that?

Sorry for being rude man.

You continually bash what I believe to be an essential side to piano playing.

You have not yet shown any evidence that supports the things you say. Showing us your 10 second 'drop and flop' videos on your toy digital piano doesn't cut it, man.

Once again, sorry for the rudeness.

But I call BS on you.
Back up your ideas with proof that they work, i.e. your own playing.
I have done the same thing, why can't you?




Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:22 PM
No I didn't. I still have no idea as to why this is relevant, other than in purely anatomical terms, or what your point is. Nobody is disagreeing that it comes from flexors and tendons- no matter how strongly you might like to imply that I am. I just don't feel a need to mention it any more than I feel one to bring in the electrical impulses.

You FEEL it in the hand. How many times must I state that? Are you arguing that anyone who does so needs to retrain themself to stop feeling it in the hand and feel it entirely in the forearm? The better I have trained my fingers to work the less I perceive anything in my forearms at all.

Personally I train students to develop correct perceptions of the movements and actions where the body does so best. Not to dwell on the anatomical details that cause it.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:23 PM
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist
That I may be. But the fact remains....

Surely if your ideas work as well as you insist they do, you would have been able to find the time to actually work some stuff up to concert-level....
I have a performance diploma from the ABRSM - you wanna copy?
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:28 PM
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi

You FEEL it in the hand. How many times must I state that?
You're the one who constantly takes a 'physics' line, now you're into phenomenology? The point is the hand cannot be stabilized independent of the arm/wrist. Teachers need to know that as they need to know where tension should or should not be and why.
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:30 PM
No, man. That ain't gonna cut it. I know how easily they give out those things.

I want a video of you playing some standard rep, on a real piano. I want you to show me something SO good, there isn't an 8 or 9 year old anywhere in the world who could top it. Is this REALLY so much to ask?

That is what I want from you to back up your claims. It doens't have to be Ligeti etudes, Gaspard, or Hammerklavier.... but it has to be up to tempo, on a real piano, whatever it is.

Until then, you are selling a pyramid scheme.

Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:33 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi

You FEEL it in the hand. How many times must I state that?
You're the one who constantly takes a 'physics' line, now you're into phenomenology? The point is the hand cannot be stabilized independent of the arm/wrist. Teachers need to know that as they need to know where tension should or should not be and why.


Not if the body's proprioception is based inside the hand. Would you please stop repeating yourself in these single line answers and deal with the points I have made? I use physics to aid the simplest perception of movement. Not to bring in the needless complexity of trying to perceive a simple movement in a more complex way.

The brain has filled in the gaps for us. We do not need to to worry about the flexors. The human brain trains itself to perceive movement WHERE IT OCCURS- not in the muscles that cause it. To devote excessive attention to the forearm is simply to invite extra muscles to become overworked.

Perhaps this is why you are so skeptical about stability? I imagine you are using too many muscles when you try to achieve it. When I used to used to use the same style of movement you do, my forearms frequently went solid. Since I start basing all active movements from inside the hand, I barely feel anything happening inside my forearms. They feel far more passive. It is caused by the flexors, sure. But I have no reason to concern myself with that for anything other than academic interest.
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:36 PM
Pyramid scheme.

http://www.youtube.com/user/keyboardclass#p/u/28/hhiMuQMK1u8
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:38 PM
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi

Perhaps this is why you are so skeptical about stability? I imagine you are using too many muscles when you try to achieve it.
Mechanics dictates the stabilizing force comes from the arms. You can feel it is otherwise all you like.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:39 PM
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist
Not that again? I rather like it (as did other posters).
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:40 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi

Perhaps this is why you are so skeptical about stability? I imagine you are using too many muscles when you try to achieve it.
Mechanics dictates the stabilizing force comes from the arms. You can feel it is otherwise all you like.


You can try as hard as you like to imply otherwise, but nobody is disagreeing that it comes from in the arms. I'm still bemused as to what your point is. If you have one to make, then respond to the issues regarding proprioception. Actions of the hand continue to be perceived in the hand. Unless you have a reason why this might be a problem, you do not appear to be making any point.

Incidentally, discussions tend to progress better if you respond to questions when they are asked- rather than if you keep repeating a statement that nobody disagrees with, without establishing any context to that point.
Posted By: alexb Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:41 PM
Internet advice on such matters is comical. The OP can start with this:

http://www.giamusic.com/search_details.cfm?title_id=197
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:47 PM
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
Actions of the hand continue to be perceived in the hand.
Not by the teacher, and that's the important point when you're making claims about technique.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:51 PM
WHY?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

If you have any interest in discussion, answer some of my questions and establish some CONTEXT for these assertions.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:56 PM
The teacher needs to be aware of what the student is actually doing as well as, to some extent, what the student feels they are doing.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 05:58 PM
WHY??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

What is wrong with perceiving movement about the point where it occurs? I am asking for specifics based on practical consequences- not a minor rewording of the same blanket assertion.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 06:05 PM
You're getting the movement confused with the mover (and getting rather over excited). The teacher needs to perceive both.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 06:08 PM
I think you perhaps misread my question. My question was

WHY??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

It was not "could you please repeat that assertion in a slightly different form?". I am not confusing anything- except what your point is supposed to be. I know what the flexors do. I asked why they are relevant- when our proprioception occurs in the hand. If you have even a shred of interest in discussion, would you please answer it. Otherwise, what is your response supposed to contribute to anything?
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 06:09 PM
There are two sides to the same coin.

The problems tend to come when people DENY the existence of one side.

My old boot-camp teacher denied the existence of KBK's side.... but he could really play the piano.

KBK denies the existence of my old teacher's side.

Problem is, he doesn't play the piano so well.

I say, you need to have both sides for the picture to look good.

Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 06:10 PM
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist
KBK denies the existence of my old teacher's side.
And where does that particular nugget of information stem from?
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 06:11 PM
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist
There are two sides to the same coin.

The problems tend to come when people DENY the existence of one side.

My old boot-camp teacher denied the existence of KBK's side.... but he could really play the piano.

KBK denies the existence of my old teacher's side.

Problem is, he doesn't play the piano so well.

I say, you need to have both sides for the picture to look good.



Agreed. Extreme relaxation approaches can be a good practise method- as long as they are complemented by work on stability, instead of by denial that it serves any purpose.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 06:13 PM
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
I think you perhaps misread my question. My question was

WHY??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Because you need a mechanical view to improve someone's technique; otherwise you may well do them harm.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 06:15 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
I think you perhaps misread my question. My question was

WHY??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Because you need a mechanical view to improve someone's technique; otherwise you may well do them harm.


Specifically to the situation, please- not in vague generic talk. Why would a student be harmed by feeling the movement of their hand inside the hand? The less feeling in the forearm, the less a student is overworking. The trick is simply to watch for wasted effort. If you do it right, you hardly feel anything but the motion.

If you think any pianists feel their flexors before the results on their hands, you must be joking. Looking for things in the forearm is simply inclined to promote forgiveness of wasted efforts in there.
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 06:16 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist
KBK denies the existence of my old teacher's side.
And where does that particular nugget of information stem from?


I believe it was you who said this a little while back? Correct me if I'm wrong.

[/quote]I could nearly go with the above, trouble is hand stability comes through the wrist and arm. There's nothing on the other end despite what the verbose may say. [/quote]
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 06:20 PM
Quote
I could nearly go with the above, trouble is hand stability comes through the wrist and arm. There's nothing on the other end despite what the verbose may say.
Yes. My mechanics are correct.
Posted By: liszt85 Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 06:22 PM
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist
Liszt85,

I am sorry, I had not realized she was a member here.

Doesn't make much difference to me... the movements are excessive, and anyone who claims that they are NOT excessive is welcome to post videos of their own playing showing similar levels of movement, albeit with superior control of the sound.

IMO, that's not going to happen, because I think she controls the piano about as well as anyone can with that level of movement.

As you said, she is a teacher and not a professional pianist. There are many kinds of teachers for many levels of pianist. She doesn't seem like the type of teacher I would pay money to study with.

Sorry, folks, you can call me a you-know-what-hole..... it won't be the first or last time I have been called such....



thumb Exactly my thoughts too. In fact, her videos made me think hard. She's got an impressive resume. Perahia was a classmate (this is brought up quite often in her posts) in high school, and she studied at very good conservatories (or it would seem). I myself chose my teacher based on similar credentials. However, after one lesson, I am not a 100% confident that I made the right choice, so I'm going to take a few more lessons before I decide whether or not to move on o a different teacher. I realize that what's on paper might not be as important as I had earlier thought it to be..
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 06:23 PM
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist
KBK denies the existence of my old teacher's side.
And where does that particular nugget of information stem from?


I believe it was you who said this a little while back? Correct me if I'm wrong.

I could nearly go with the above, trouble is hand stability comes through the wrist and arm. There's nothing on the other end despite what the verbose may say.


He's just being pedantic about what muscles cause that (as if anyone else regards this fact, that we already know, as somehow relevant). He might as well have insisted on adding that the electrical impulses are provided by the brain. Never mind the fact that we feel the action in the hand, not in the flexors themselves. Let's just make it more complicated...

Nobody said it was incorrect (as a strict anatomical description) kbk. I asked what point is supposed to be raised by this accepted fact?
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 06:26 PM
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi

Specifically to the situation, please- not in vague generic talk. Why would a student be harmed by feeling the movement of their hand inside the hand? The less feeling in the forearm, the less a student is overworking. The trick is simply to watch for wasted effort. If you do it right, you hardly feel anything but the motion.
The more feeling in the hand the more danger of injury.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 06:28 PM
well, you can believe that if you must. Presumably Horowitz had less feeling in hands than injured pianists then? Personally, I'd say the more feeling of tightness in forearm, the more danger of injury. With little feeling in the hand, I'd say it's safe to assume an excessively tight forearm. In fact, when I used your approach (and had stiff forearms) I had hardly any feeling in my hands at all.

Tell yourself it all comes from the forearm, and you can start confusing altogether different muscular efforts with necessary ones. When I aim for zero effort in the forearm but perceive movement in the fingers, the flexors work just fine of their own accord. Most pianists do the same.

No doubt you'll take this a callous and unjust attack, but quite seriously, I think this may very well explain the stiff forearms on your videos and the less than agile finger motions. I say that not as an insult but as a sincere professional opinion.
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 06:56 PM
Quit dodging my question, kbk.

Why can't you play better if you understand technique so well?

How come all your videos show tiny fragments of pieces played vastly under tempo showing exaggerated movements?

How come you never post a video showing the entire piece, up to tempo, on a real piano (not one of those silly clavichord things), sounding good?

Is it because, with your technique, you are incapable of playing big pieces up to tempo?
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 07:02 PM
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi

No doubt you'll take this a callous and unjust attack, but quite seriously, I think this may very well explain the stiff forearms on your videos and the less than agile finger motions. I say that not as an insult but as a sincere professional opinion.
Yes, a poor one.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 07:05 PM
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist

How come all your videos show tiny fragments of pieces played vastly under tempo showing exaggerated movements?
Because they are pedagogical! There's no point illustrating something at tempo. The learner needs to duplicate it straight away.
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist

How come you never post a video showing the entire piece, up to tempo, on a real piano (not one of those silly clavichord things), sounding good?
Silly clavichord things? Tell that to Bach - it's the instrument I prefer. Mozart wrote the Magic Flute and his Requiem on one!
Posted By: liszt85 Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 07:10 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist

How come all your videos show tiny fragments of pieces played vastly under tempo showing exaggerated movements?
Because they are pedagogical! There's no point illustrating something at tempo. The learner needs to duplicate it straight away.


Unfortunately, what you're demonstrating needs to be executed well at slower tempo for a "learner" to be able to learn from your videos. The "movements" that you want to illustrate via your videos need to be accompanied by a satisfactory sound too. If not, you could very well make a video without a keyboard (play in the air). So these guys do have a point here and there has to come a point in time when you have to agree, if you want to be honest with yourself.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 07:16 PM
All I have available for filming is the cheapest (just about) DP. Those whom I've made videos for have been very pleased.
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 07:20 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist

How come all your videos show tiny fragments of pieces played vastly under tempo showing exaggerated movements?
Because they are pedagogical! There's no point illustrating something at tempo. The learner needs to duplicate it straight away.
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist

How come you never post a video showing the entire piece, up to tempo, on a real piano (not one of those silly clavichord things), sounding good?
Silly clavichord things? Tell that to Bach - it's the instrument I prefer. Mozart wrote the Magic Flute and his Requiem on one!


First off,

I am not denying the value of slow tempi in making didactic videos.

I am asking you for a NON-dydactic video. A video showing us what YOU can DO as a PERFORMER.

As for the clavichord.... w/e... if you prefer that thing to a piano I can't help you.
I am of the opinion Bach and Mozart would have thrown their clavichords RIGHT in the bin had they had Hamburg Steinways available. This, however, is a different argument, and does not belong in this thread.

What good are all these slow-motion videos if you can't put everything into practice and actually play something?


Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 07:24 PM
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist

I am asking you for a NON-dydactic video. A video showing us what YOU can DO as a PERFORMER.
Why does every discussion with you come down to a p*ssing contest? Get real. Clavichord will have to do!
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 07:27 PM
KBK,
I'm going down to London this week for a competition.
I have connections there and can get us a place with a grand piano (I will be practicing there myself).
You're welcome to come along and hear me in the competition.

Afterwards, you can use my practice space to make a video!

How does this sound?

Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 07:32 PM
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist

How does this sound?
Like a p*ssing contest. Besides, I'm in Bath all week!
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 07:55 PM
Bath eh? I'm giving a big concert there quite soon.

Not a pee-pee contest, Mr Klutz-I've got one of those coming up this week, thank you very much.

I just think the people reading this thread ought to know whether or not this video shows the full extent of your pianistic ability.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9ewCx04_Qc

Because if it does, I don't think you should really be making didactic videos on piano technique, and I am sure 99% of people on this forum would agree with me.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 07:59 PM
Jeez, I like that one too! (I'm gonna listen again!) Notice, the wrists don't flop!
Posted By: liszt85 Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 08:09 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
Jeez, I like that one too! (I'm gonna listen again!) Notice, the wrists don't flop!


Are you serious, kbk? It sounded like a swarm of farting mosquitoes at times. Somebody has to give you a dose of reality. You don't even play in rhythm in that video. You really should quit making yourself look silly here. I almost want my wrists to flop now..
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 08:14 PM
Originally Posted by liszt85
It sounded like a swarm of farting mosquitoes at times.
It's funny you should say that, the French never took to the clavichord - they called it a box of flies!

Anyway, as we seem to be working our way through my vids here's one where there's only one flop - at the very end. But a real beaut!
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 08:35 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi

No doubt you'll take this a callous and unjust attack, but quite seriously, I think this may very well explain the stiff forearms on your videos and the less than agile finger motions. I say that not as an insult but as a sincere professional opinion.
Yes, a poor one.


Well, there's certainly something stopping your fingers from moving freely in the grade 2 Bach Minuet piece you uploaded (where the l.h. second finger totally fails to sound on various occasions). I'm sure it's easy enough to claim that my professional opinions are poor, but the 9 year old student I had (who received 142/150 for his exam) certainly didn't have such a problem in moving his 2nd finger.

That you defend these films only illustrates how low the standards you set for yourself are. If these are the standards you are happy with, how can you honestly expect anyone to take your advice seriously? You may not realise it, but you when refuse to take criticism and learn from it the last thing you are doing is helping to defend your approach. I note that you took down the video of a segment from op. 10 no. 1, after I pointed out that your "better" movement resulted in absence of legato and a heavy thumb accent. Why not have the humility to hold your hand up and learn something- rather than try to sneak out the back door? Admitting fallibility comes across far better than denying it and trying to cover things up- after it has already been exposed. Those I trust the least are those who wish to portray infallibility despite obvious failings- and I doubt if I'm alone in that.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 08:45 PM
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
I note that you took down the video of a segment from op. 10 no. 1, after I pointed out that your "better" movement resulted in absence of legato and a heavy thumb accent. Why not have the humility to hold your hand up and learn something- rather than try to sneak out the back door?
That was more a case of deciding not to throw those pearls from my teacher into that particular pigsty, if you will.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 08:58 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
I note that you took down the video of a segment from op. 10 no. 1, after I pointed out that your "better" movement resulted in absence of legato and a heavy thumb accent. Why not have the humility to hold your hand up and learn something- rather than try to sneak out the back door?
That was more a case of deciding not to throw those pearls from my teacher into that particular pigsty, if you will.


Pearls that caused offbeat accents that the "wrong" way you demonstrated alongside did not? As long as you continue to regard each of these "pearls" as beyond question (rather than look objectively at the results) you're not going to learn anything or further yourself as a pianist. Why are you so intent on not only refusing to learn anything from such mistakes, but also upon refusing to acknowledge having made them? Nobody progresses without being self-critical. Trying to portray yourself as an expert (who is in a position to scoff at any alternatives) without being critical of yourself or having achieved success with your method is simply baffling.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 09:02 PM
The day you have anything to teach me will be the day I hang up my ivories. Specious and verbose speculations cut no ice with me!
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 09:07 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
The day you have anything to teach me will be the day I hang up my ivories. Specious and verbose speculations cut no ice with me!


You have an enormous amount to learn- as your videos show. The problem is that you are too busy repeating second hand information to stop and think seriously about whether it has actually worked for you, or to try any alternatives (whether they come from myself or anyone else).

I recall that Grindea claimed that movements are only up or down- about as far from an accurate map of movement about joints as is conceivably possible. Not everything can be condensed into such simplification (without omitting important information).
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 09:08 PM
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
The problem is that you are too busy repeating second hand information
It's actually called research, not something you'd be familiar with.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 09:11 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
The problem is that you are too busy repeating second hand information
It's actually called research, not something you'd be familiar with.


I'm not getting involved in a slanging match. All I have to say is that my final basis for judgement is based around success and absolutely nothing else. I do not believe in trying to teach anything I have not first succeeded in using myself- whether that comes from something somebody else said or something I have discovered for myself.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 09:16 PM
Well, we're agreed there!
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 09:25 PM
All I can say is that if your youtube films are a representation of your personal success with Grindea's method, we have a very different view of "success" (especially regarding op. 10 no. 1). Again, take that as a cheap insult and ignore it (or respond by accusing me of poor research, or whatever else) if you really must, but it's an honest professional opinion (similar to that which various other pianists have stated here). If you don't want to take it on board, that is your right- but please don't respond with pointless defensiveness.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 09:29 PM
I'll take it for the cheap insult it is.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/20/11 10:39 PM
It's an honest opinion. I am sorry if you choose to take it personally, but I say that solely due to my interest in the field of technique. I would say exactly the same if you were not on the forum and your videos were under discussion. You can't expect to post instructional videos and then have them deemed immune to criticism. I think it's a pity that you would sooner dismiss any honest appraisals as a personal insult/attack, rather than stop to take them on board (especially considering the obvious struggle heard in your slow demonstration of op. 10 no. 1- we're hardly on "subjective" grounds now).
Posted By: AZNpiano Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/21/11 12:29 AM
[Linked Image]

Can we just get along??
Posted By: tnew Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/21/11 04:43 AM
Sorry if the topic created any friction. It appears there are some good points to argue for all sides and that optimal wrist movement is a bit difficult to describe.
Posted By: alexb Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/21/11 05:37 AM
Why not read up some books from the pros in the field? Like Thomas Mark or Lister-Sink? These some of the top people in the field of what is good and what is bad technique. Anyone can give technique advice on the Internet. Some may be be good, some not. Also, technique is not a "standard" really. Each person is different and plays differently. Anyone who tries to impose a standard is fighting a losing battle.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/21/11 06:21 AM
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
(especially considering the obvious struggle heard in your slow demonstration of op. 10 no. 1- we're hardly on "subjective" grounds now).
As usual your argument dissolves into 'cheap insults' dressed up as advice. Spare me the objective tag, as always you're hearing what you want to hear. Since when am I the OP? - do everyone in this thread a favour and keep your insults to yourself.
Posted By: JustAnotherPianist Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/21/11 11:34 AM
KBK,
Please refrain from taking things personally. I watched the video you posted and enjoyed it quite a bit. From my perspective-it seems you use quite good technique for this style of repertoire-although I would be interested to hear how well you are able to control the sound on a real piano, with its massive hammers and great depth.

Thank you for posting the video. I encourage you in future to continually add more 'performance' style videos to your growing collection of pedagogical ones.

I understand what you consider to be the differences in technique appropriate for Bach compared to Chopin-you use more of the 'scratch' stroke throughout the former, with more of the 'flick' stroke in the latter (oversimplification, I know, but I'm not a fan of those terms).

The point I would like to make is that im MY experience this 'baroque-style' technique shows up, along with some supplemental souplesse-type-stuff, a great deal in Chopin.
The lines between what works for what are not always clearly drawn and may very from student to student.

Watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVBCo6bbQwo&feature=related

from 19 seconds to about 40 seconds, I think it is quite clear to see that it is the FINGERS that do the work in this challenging little movement. The arm brings the hand to the right place on the keyboard, and the hand requires great stability for the fingers to be able to do the work well.

To me, this looks quite similar, technically, to the technique which you have shown in your video.

Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/21/11 01:11 PM
Originally Posted by JustAnotherPianist

To me, this looks quite similar, technically, to the technique which you have shown in your video.
If only it were that simple - it's what happens on the inside (invisible) that defines a touch.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/21/11 01:14 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
(especially considering the obvious struggle heard in your slow demonstration of op. 10 no. 1- we're hardly on "subjective" grounds now).
As usual your argument dissolves into 'cheap insults' dressed up as advice. Spare me the objective tag, as always you're hearing what you want to hear. Since when am I the OP? - do everyone in this thread a favour and keep your insults to yourself.


You can't expect to accuse all pianists of "not knowing" how to move in this etude, and then expect nobody to make sincere criticisms of a very slow tempo demonstration with uneveness and errors.

What do you think would happen if you played that work in a masterclass? Would you have a go at the teacher for insulting you? Would you say "no- this is Chopin's technique and I'm doing it correctly"? If so, they would certainly not hold back about telling you that it is not producing adequate results. To claim that anyone is hearing what they want to is simply ridiculous. I've taught students at diploma level and I don't "want to" hear such things as uneveness of fingerwork. However, it's my job to point such things out in even the more advanced level players- whenever it is audible. Perhaps you've never played in public masterclasses, but I don't think you understand what standards are expected at advanced level.

I'm sure it's far easier to paint anyone who has higher standards of excellence than yourself as a wicked aggressor than to take it on the chin. But if I wanted to be insulting I would have used altogether different language. Obviously you're willing to view that as an acceptable standard, but others of us are not. Can we please leave it at that?
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/21/11 02:41 PM
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
But if I wanted to be insulting I would have used altogether different language. Obviously you're willing to view that as an acceptable standard, but others of us are not. Can we please leave it at that?
An insult in any 'language', is just that - an insult. That your lack of knowledge and understanding of piano playing always leads you to attacks ad hominem, that you're unable to 'play the ball', is disappointing to say the least. I think we'll leave it at that.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/21/11 02:55 PM
I'm sorry if you take it that way- but as I already said, it's an honestly stated appraisal. If any of my student played an Etude to me with that kind of uneveness, I should be deeply concerned. Sorry if you choose to be insulted by my professional opinion, but when you present something as advice to others, you cannot expect it to be deemed off-limits for appraisal. In doing so, you make your playing and demonstration part of the topic.

Accusing me of a lack of knowledge certainly IS an ad hominem (and arguably libellous to myself, as a professional teacher). Can you please just accept that you are not beyond criticism and move on- rather than respond with personal insults and libel? I've had enough of having to state the different between honest assessment and personal insults- and I am not going to join in with any of the latter.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/21/11 03:42 PM
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
Can you please just accept that you are not beyond criticism and move on- rather than respond with personal insults and libel?
I would say a piano teacher who can't tell Mozart from Schubert (not even to mention not knowing their piano works!) certainly is in no place to give opinions on my playing however 'professional' they may think they are. Remember, anyone can hang out a shingle! Sue and be damned! Now can we move on?
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/21/11 04:01 PM
Originally Posted by keyboardklutz
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
Can you please just accept that you are not beyond criticism and move on- rather than respond with personal insults and libel?
I would say a piano teacher who can't tell Mozart from Schubert (not even to mention not knowing their piano works!) certainly is in no place to give opinions on my playing however 'professional' they may think they are. Remember, anyone can hang out a shingle! Sue and be damned! Now can we move on?


I have been attempting to over a number of posts. Would you like to stop libelling me and do so? As I've said repeatedly, I am sorry if you feel offended by honest appraisal. If you're going to respond to that by bringing my professional capabilities into question then I take that very seriously.
Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/21/11 04:08 PM
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi

I am sorry if you feel offended by honest appraisal.
We'll just have to agree to disagree on just how honest your appraisals are or for that matter the sincerity of your apologies (I'm an innercity school teacher - do you want to know how many times a day I hear the word sorry?). Now let's move on.
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/21/11 04:15 PM
Unless you have psychic powers, you are in no position to judge how honest my appraisals are or whether I apply the same standards in general. Please stop making personal accusations against myself and my honesty (note that I have only referred to your demonstrations and will not be joining in with anything personal, never mind libellous) and just accept that your personal idea of what is satisfactory execution is not shared by all.

Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/21/11 04:19 PM
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
Please stop making personal accusations against my person and honesty
What accusations? Since when in life are we obliged to accept a person's sincerity? You have a lot to learn (as do my kids at school).
Posted By: Nyiregyhazi Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/21/11 04:26 PM
This accusation:

"We'll just have to agree to disagree on just how honest your appraisals are"

ie. the one that specifically questions my honesty. You can say whatever you like in your next post. I will not reply this time. I am not going to waste any more of time responding to these wholly personal accusations and libellous allegations against me. I am interested in the study of technique (with regard to what leads to advanced standards of attainment- starting with my own playing), not in pointless off-topic argument. If you want to respond to my honest opinion with a string of personal attacks, I'll leave you to it.

Posted By: keyboardklutz Re: Two conflicting techniques? - 02/21/11 04:32 PM
Originally Posted by Nyiregyhazi
This accusation:

"We'll just have to agree to disagree on just how honest your appraisals are"
You really don't get it do you? - just like my kids at school. Respect, belief, is something earned not a right. IMHO you've been crying wolf for years.
© Piano World Piano & Digital Piano Forums