If I understand correctly, I think the word "tension" is being used to mean different things by different people. Nyiregyhazi is using tension in the physics sense to mean simply a pulling force, a stretch. Angelina seems to be using it in a more figurative sense, as in "Wow, that boy sure is tense", meaning really tight, a bad thing. A totally relaxed muscle can do no work. A muscle under tension can do useful things. In that sense, tension is a good thing.

I agree the hand must be capable of supporting the 'whole weight of the arm'. Whose isn't? It's the constant tension in the hand that's the real bone of contention here.

From another thread - I remember every detail. The Germans wore gray, you wore blue:
Here you are saying you 'grip' all the time. = tension all the time.

I don't see any shape changes.

And here again, as I'm trawling, is Fraser on Peter Feuchtwanger:
Which is why I put my money on Feuchtwanger (who incidentally, helped Argerich out of technique trouble).

Besides, 'generators of pianistic potency' - what a hack!

Can you maintain consistency for even two posts in a row? Yes, it DOES maintain a small amount of tension. As I explained, the force does NOT stop acting on the hand after the key has been depressed, contrary to your nonsensical assertion. So if you want to maintain the shape, as you described in your last post, you need a small amount of balancing muscles tension. Just as you need to use a small amount of muscle tension to avoid falling off the stool. Or do you preach to relax those too? Please try thinking about this seriously before coming back with the small-minded assumption that ANY tension is bad. Muscle seizures are bad, but small functional tensions are a part of everyday balance and movement.

Why did you ignore the points in my previous post? Why bother replying if you are too lazy to stop and consider the fact that a hand in 'natural' position on a keyboard can only be balanced in that position by a muscular force. I even made exactly the same point in what you quoted, for God's sake! You cannot further a discussion or your personal understanding by ignoring such fundamentals. A relaxed hand collapses. No competent performer pulls their hand away a split second after every note. so why do their hands not collapse? Stop and THINK about that please...

Also, your arch is clearly not capable of supporting the weight of your arm, as your films show. That's why we have to train it to progress. Whipping your hand away is no more condusive to progress than it would be for a jogger to stop every time he feels a hint out of breath. The fact that you spend so little time working balance is almost certainly why you over-tense so notably in the process of playing most chords. If you worked on finding a comfortable balance, instead of collpasing or seizing your arm away, you could progress.

Well, you're a funny guy alright. However, I actually find it more sad than anything, that you would prefer not to back down in your argument (by going so far as to claim that your hand looks stable in such overwhelmingly exaggerated collapses) than to start opening your mind to the thing that leaves you playing with so little ease or agility. Are you trying to convince me or yourself?

Has Argerich ever said that Feuchtwanger specifically helped her technique in that regard, i.e. ridding herself of tension involved in maintaining an arch unnecessarily? Argerich has definitely praised Feuchtwanger highly in general terms as a teacher, for example, as quoted in the PDF advertising Feuchtwanger's masterclass coming up at the end of this month in Austria: "Peter Feuchtwanger has great experience as a teacher and to work with him has always been a great experience, his advice always being extremely helpful, never arbitrary, and of an incredibly high standard..."

(Emphasis in bold is mine)

Unless Argerich has detailed what she took away from working with Feuchtwanger, including if she mentions ridding herself of unnecessary tension that this was specifically to do with not maintaining an arch unless absolutely needed, what has been added here? I can't see where Feuchtwanger declares that maintaining an arch between notes and chords, if it is a relatively relaxed arch and comes completely naturally to a pianist, is definitely a "bad" thing. From what I'm reading, Feuchtwanger has a wonderful and admirable approach to teaching piano technique: as much "fostering" and "encouraging" as "teaching". His opinion is that the natural position of the fingers is flat rather than curled, yes, but where is the support for Klutzian "drop and flop"? Being a strong opponent of admonitions like, "You must hold your hand like you are gripping an apple", does not make one a proponent of Klutzian "drop and flop". A renowned pedagogue disagreeing with our Nyire on the necessity of an arch does not mean that said renowned pedagogue agrees with your drop and flop. ("The enemy of my enemy is my friend" doesn't work with concepts!)

What I have seen in the multitude of successful concert pianists, who have played technically demanding programs on modern instruments for many seasons without injury and to great acclaim, is a majority of noticeable maintained arches, a minority of a shallower/flatter hand position, but no dropping and flopping.

I hope you aren't suggesting that Zhang is a "good" rather than "great" example of accomplished piano technique?! But my "we" was a general "we", as in, "if one were to..." If one is to emulate examples, why not follow the overwhelming majority of successful pianists? As to whether I know what to look for, that's very general, but if you're suggesting that Zhang or other concert pianists drop and flop but I fail to notice it, I doubt it, but please give a specific link and timestamp and I'll do my best.

Someone opened this thread asking how to obtain a fuller, richer sound, and you came along with suggestions that some of us see as avant-garde -- definitely off the beaten track. The onus is on you to demonstrate the soundness of "drop and flop". Constantly flinging questions back at, or demanding videos from, anyone who doubts your ideas probably doesn't help persuade anyone!

Julian, thanks for that info.

K, N and A,
As has already been mentioned previously, one of the reasons underling your non-conversation is an evident misconception of the word "tension".
There is no such state as complete relaxation in a live awake organism. There is always an involuntary level of muscle tone (generated by muscle contractions, subtle as they may be)in the entire body. The "shape" that a particular body part takes will depend upon its specific anatomy (muscle size number, distribution and attachment to the skeleton) as well as gravity. The intensity of this muscle tone AT REST (as manifested by the amplitude of the muscle contractions) is variable and dynamic even at complete rest. It is affected by the individual's physiology, intake of stimulants, psychological factors etc..
To better illustrate this fact, look at the hand shape of an individual in deep sleep. The hand is NOT in a playing position. It is floppy and does not take the shape of an arch naturally. And that hand still has some baseline tone!! Even the hand of a dead person, after rigor mortis has resolved, will not have the shape of a playing hand. More interesting, an individual who suffered complete paralysis from a peripheral nerve injury will not have a hand in the shape of an arch.
Thus 1) there is always muscle contraction or tone as a baseline or background in the most relaxed state. This component is variable and not completely voluntary but it can be modulated. 2) Shaping the hand in an arch like configuration requires some muscle contraction and is not a passive act. However, a state of muscle contraction is not the same as muscle tension. Tension, as commonly defined, is a "pathological" state of sustained contractions with little or insufficient relaxation. Thus the recommendations for economy of movement, "relaxation" of the hand when not in action.. Again, this latter condition is not the same as complete relaxation. So a hand in a playing position is not physiologically relaxed but there are degrees of such.
Another note of interest, equally "relaxed" hands of different individuals can have a different appearance due to a variety of factors, such as anatomic variants and uneven flexor / extensor tone distribution . What N sees as arch collapse in K's hand, is actually IMHO one such example. I have not analyzed the videos carefully or slowed them down, so take this suggestion with a sprinkle of NACl *. But even when K plays, his 'arch", the component of the hand between the wrist and the knuckle, is flatter than most. He may have a variant in his hand anatomy there (interossei, metacarpals) or he may be unconsciously extending his fingers / collapsing his knuckles ..

Anatomy lesson is over. Now please carry on..
P.S. Do you both teach piano ??
* Also I am not a piano teacher, but rather a not so relaxed student

Constantly demanding videos?? Dear me, where does that one come from? If you haven't watched this one Julian, do. (and by the way Drop n'Flop is very much a Matthay concept. http://www.archive.org/details/visibleandinvisi009582mbp)I can only assume you have no knowledge of the history of technique.

If I were you I'd read more, post less. By the way, you seem to know nothing about Peter Feuchtwanger either!

Thanks for all that. Yes, it's called tonus. Are you familiar with Jacobson You Must Relax? He makes it very clear, and shows you how, to reduce this to a minimum. A very famous man in the world of relaxation.

Tension, as commonly defined, is a "pathological" state of sustained contractions with little or insufficient relaxation.

True. But if someone says release as much tension as possible, it becomes a different thing entirely. In no way does that inherently imply to find the 'right' amount of muscular activity. I don't personally use the word "tension" to encourage grip (even if that is quite literally what it is- tension within a muscle), but I don't like the idea of generally saying "remove all tension" any more than saying "be tense" You have know where to remove tension and where to feel the muscles doing something. As you say, it's important to be clear that it's not merely on or off. You can only truly understand it by realising that you have to converge on a comfortable mid-point, in order to balance forces. The idea of of just turning it on or off is not conducive towards any sensitivty of control.

What N sees as arch collapse in K's hand, is actually IMHO one such example. I have not analyzed the videos carefully or slowed them down, so take this suggestion with a sprinkle of NACl. But even when K plays, his 'arch", the component of the hand between the wrist and the knuckle, is flatter than most.

I take your point. However, compare the film of him moving above the keys. The arch is VERY pronounced when he hangs his hand. When he plays, you can see huge deformation of the hand, mid-strike, as the keys push back onto the shape of the hand. It is also notable just how inconsistently this occurs- showing wildly variable levels of tension. From the point of view of physics, this collapsing structure is is very poorly equipped for controlled energy transfer- and requires tensions in the arm for it to be stabilised. For that matter, it often looks to me as if he is actively forcing his fingers to straighten, rather than hanging his fingers down in anything like relaxation. Not only does it provide weak function, I don't see anything notably relaxed much of the time.
Also, yes, I teach in a couple of schools. I'm rather lucky to have a lot of advanced students in one school, where I have a number of post-grade 8 players working towards diplomas.

There are benefits to spending a little time on this for certain problems (particularly locked wrists). However, kbk is a powerful warning to us all as to what happens if you get so lost in a single element that you forget to consider the importance of everything else that is required...

Thank you (NOT), Mr Hyperbole - as hackneyed as your hero! Err..., it's three and a half minutes from a 90 minute DVD??

Yes, and your point is what exactly? Your many youtube films illustrate how lost you have become in this single three and half minute element and just what harm this does to your playing.

Do you have any interest in understanding how to play the piano well? If so, would you like to go back to the point about what a lot of nonsense your claim was- that no force acts on the hand after the split-second of striking. And think about what a complete lot of ill-thought out bull that demonstrates your claims to have been?

Discussions progress when people stop to think and respond to important points. Not when they ignore them, because they don't sit conveninetly with a preconceived opinion.. If you're not interested in discussion or thinking about this, then please stay out of it and stop wasting everybody's time.

If you're gonna flame I'm switching you off again. Goodbye!

Yes, apologies for introducing such inconvenient facts to the discussion. It really is sad how you attempt to argue on rational grounds and then simply hope to ignore it when somebody illustrates that your premise was based on a innacurate facts. You're the only one who is losing out, if you think that a relaxed hand can balance on a keyboard, contrary to all known science. You can slip out the back door when someone demonstrates a gaping hole in your premise here. Sadly, that won't make definably erroneous premises succeed at a piano.

Good luck with the flopping. Do let us know if willfully ignoring the laws of physics ever brings you any competence at playing the piano...

WOw , on that last video, the slow motion induce unwanted accentuation, the move get more natural when build with some speed. I belive that the student did not understood what was asked.

Also, the thumb have no much to do with those wrist moves.

I wonder it those are specific exercises to train to have amore relaxed wrist, or what ?

The same basic moves are always neede whateve rthe method is, whatever the posture is.
I may say whan I see the availeable mass at the keyboard, that this pianist does not need much to have tone (and the exagerate dmoves of the wrist ar emor eperturbating her than anything else)

But I recall once having been asked to exagerate the wrist (to fight a tendency to tighten it) , I guess that the intention is to catch , make the student aware the sensation provided by a good transmission thru it, during the 2 basic moves : weight transfer and pushing pressure.

WHen I think of it, even the hand have enough weight to play.
ANd eventually the "free fall" can be applied even to a finger.

What seem important to me is to have a very instantaneous impulse at the good moment exactly when wanted, then just be quiet and ready for the next. That does not mean changing the hand in cloth between notes, but be "alert" (lot of adrenalin !!) all those impulses are extremely fast, even a simple finger playing a note is an extremely fast move, simply some time, as in legato the fast move is more within the arch (or the inside of the hand) it is not seen as a finger move.

It makes sense to ask you to provide videos to support "drop and flop". You made an interesting claim, please support it, help us see what you mean. However, I think it makes little sense to harangue Nyireyghazi to post a video, almost as if he has to prove he is an outstanding technician to be entitled to doubt your claim. But maybe that's just me.

That's a video of a student at a masterclass, correct? Surely there must be at least one video of an actual concert pianist employing drop and flop?

I haven't read the book from cover to cover, but I found it and dipped into it with interest some months ago when I referenced it in an earlier thread.

I don't pretend to be a historian of technique, but I think it would be an exaggeration to say that I have "no" knowledge of the history of technique. Matthay taught, among others, Myra Hess, Clifford Curzon, and Moura Lympany (at least, those are the best known names to me). Here's a video of Curzon playing Schubert in 1968: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_aUhqA15-U. There are dozens upon dozens of chords at moderate tempo in those pieces, and I don't see any drop and flop anywhere. Did he unlearn what he learned from Matthay when he got older, or could it be that "drop and flop" was not part of the technique that Matthay's most successful students took away from their time spent studying with him? I have already acknowledged that I am not a historian, and I do not know the answer. But I think it is a worthwhile and interesting question. And I have read nothing so far to suggest that "drop and flop" is not the fringe, hardly-practiced idea I think it is, regardless of whether someone advocating it published a book and was a well-regarded teacher overall.

I don't call telling N to 'get off his arse and post a video' constantly demanding videos, do you? Another Mr Hyperbole.

As for Drop n'Flop, every time you see a pianist's wrist move down, they are dropping. Sometimes it's a very fine movement which is invisible (see Matthay above).

Yes.

Why trouble yourself with the "history" of technique anyway? KBK simply knows that this is where can rote learn a few things, without having to use his own brain- giving him a rare opportunity to forge an impression of superior knowledge on the matter. It's really quite saddening that he almost seemed to be on the verge of learinng something, but preferred to make the comical claim that his hand maintains a consistent shape while playing and change the subject- rather than acknowledge how evidently a supportive hand is superior to performing the task of playing than his own contrasted mess of uncontrollable tensions and flops.

The more I see his posts, the more I realise that he simply has no interest in either learning anything or improving his own playing. I can see now that there's no point in bothering to respond to a person who is more interested in trying to come off better in an argument (regardless of how poorly evidence or facts might support his stance) than in thinking about technique or in engaging in thoughtful responses to conflicting ideas- no matter how well evidenced.

Oh. So we have to devote EVERYTHING to that which is invisible and completely ignore that which is extremely transparent ie. knuckles that do not collapse under force- (after all that is the result of tension and all tension must be bad)? I'm really struggling to convince myself that even you truly believe this steaming heap of ordure. We are to believe that the benefits come from something INVISIBLE that the pianists don't even know they do, whereas that which is plain for all to see is actually a bad thing!!! Clearly they programmed you pretty damned well in the indoctrination clinic.

Have you ever read the Emperor's new clothes?

PS. At what stage do you intend to make this invisible in your own playing? Does it typically settle in by the time the performer has reached 50 or so? Looks like you still have a long way to go. Quite a slow burner of a method, eh?

I've find the pianist Clifford Curzon a little too constrained in that piece, , I cant get why but I can hear it in the tone.

I'll look for a better sample.

here is one : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ym4Z8NHqQk&feature=related

There also you can hear the relaxation state of the hand (Schnabel)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvdWPpXpnsQ

IMO, if you want to see the correct way to sit at and play the instrument you would be much better off to look instead at Arthur Rubinstein.

Plenty of Drop n'Flop here, shame about her shoulders.

Well, you go and try to play Schubert the same way some might play Liszt and see what the results are then.

N: yes the louder it gets the more you have to let go of the force or 'tension' used to create loudness. Otherwise what happens? The muscles contract and the sound is not full. That's all I was saying.

That sounds like where I'm coming from. A bit like a follow through.

That's simply not true though. You let go of tension in SOME muscles. And others MUST to employ tension to produce the sound. Even with a flop, muscles need to support the structure, or your palm collapses into the keyboard. I would never say "tense up more" to a student. However, if they are not using the necessary muscles correctly, seeking to "let go of as much tension as possible" produces no improvement. They need to be shown what muscles to use. Since I started using my hands better I feel great comfort in my shoulers. They haven't become tired from playing for ages. I didn't willfully change anything there though. They were just no longer forced to compensate for a weak support at the hand. Seeking to relax never topk me any closer to doing so (after all, it's impossible with a slack hand), yet learning which muscles to USE solved the problem.

It may work for you to think this way, but I can assure you that you are certainly not producing sound through universally letting go of tensions. You are doing it by releasing some and increasing others. There is a balance that must be struck. You can fall foul on either side, which is why simply saying relax more can be such harmful advice to a number of people- when the reality is that they are underusing vital muscles.