Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner No universally good or bad technique?

kbk, I respectfully submit that you might not appreciate the gravity of Rick's question to your hypothesis.

Very funny tJ, how about this: No, he would have more because he lacks the advantage his own weight (this is with the 'springs'). Also he will have to hold his arms in position rather than have gravity position them.

I decided to put extra springs in my space station piano only to make it feel as closely as possible like it would on the surface of the earth. They wouldn't be a perfect substitute, but if chosen correctly (initial length and spring constant), they could reasonably approximate it.

But really, I thought my question might make you think about what you mean when you say tension. And also offer you the opportunity to clarify or restate your statement about tension mostly being the fight against gravity. I assume you meant the players' own gravity (arm and hand weight). I assume this because the gravity portion (as differentiated from the friction, spring, and inertial force portion) of the piano resistance could be reasonably duplicated (perhaps not cheaply) by other means (springs or solenoids). So if you were playing on just such a piano, on Earth, how would you define tension in your playing? If you respond with "the fight against gravity", then obviously your arms are what you are referring to. You need to keep your "system of interest" consistent, and I think it should be the player - not the piano.

Rick, the 'fight against gravity' is indeed mostly arms though obviously sitting up is involved as well. What isn't tense is under gravity's influence (you are no longer fighting it). You need to know when that is desirable and when it's not. How about a more concrete example? You need to hold your forearm up (fight against gravity) but do you really need to stick out your elbow (position your upper arm) when gravity will do it for you? But, on the other hand, when you release your forearm you are allowing gravity to become a partner in the playing mechanism. What I am saying is too many players fight gravity (too much tension) when they should be making it their partner.

I'm glad you foud it useful. Let me know how you find the essay, and you might want to check out the "practice capsules" as well:

http://www.musique.umontreal.ca/personnel/Belkin/Piano/TechAdvice/AdviceMAIN.html

best wishes,

Alan

Definitely of big interest, Alan! And thanks for linking to your full essay which I am keen on reading as soon as possible -- I'll have a lot of time during worktime on Monday :-)

In my opinion, technique is relative to the piano you are playing and how you perceive the sound you are producing with it. Plain and simple.
Practice on your piano/keyboard using only fingers, body/shoulder weight and whatever fancy or new techniques you come across, because let's face it: if you go to a house, school or stage, and they ask you to play the piano residing there, most likely the technique you use at home will not work to get the sound you want because of the level of maintenance and preparation that particular piano has.

But if all this would be correct it becomes more and more unclear to me how you can write books on good/correct piano technique? (I should say that I have not read thoroughly, but rather glanced over several of them). Now I am not suspecting that people like Neuhaus didn't have very clear reasons for their endeavours. I rather guess that I don't yet understand them in the context of my thinking above. Or people like Abby Whiteside with their dismissing of finger technique -- their suggested way of playing might be exactly the right thing for realizing some target sounds in some phrases, but not as a universal approach to realizing all sound images. I am confused... [/quote]

I agree with you that it might be a bit strange to label these books as "books that are about the most great and appropriate technique" but maybe we should look at them this way: as BOOKS OF EFFICIENT TECHNIQUES:D
After all, isn't that what all of these books are about?? Techniques of efficiency and not the best or the most superior technique:)
This might be the way to look at it!

There IS such thing as universally good technique. Unfortunately, two pianists, both with the same beautiful techique, might each describe their technique in terms of very different vocabulary. One might stress the importance of the arms and shoulders, while the other would emphasize the importance of the fingers. Same technique, different ways of describing it.

Keyboardklutz has demonstrated in the past, through his videos, that he knows very little about technique. He thinks dropping arm weight and flopping around with loose wrists is the solution to just about everything. This could not be farther from the truth. He will read this and try to refute what I'm saying with detailed references to Matthay ad nauseum. Ultimately, kbk, the proof is in the pudding.

Real pianists tend to be highly efficient in their movements at the keyboard. Highly economical. They don't flop their wrists around needlessly.

I cannot explain proper technique on a forum. It's just not that easy. The ability to develop an excellent technique can only be taught to a certain extent. Ultimately, much of it depends on talent.

There IS of course a range in what is healthy, proper technique, which depends on individual factors like body shape and size, but the parameters are not all that wide. Most pianists with good technique look pretty similar at the piano.

Bottom line: if the music
- sounds the way you want it to sound
- pace the tempo you want
without hurting or tiring your hand, than the technique is *good enough*.

Piano performance is about:
- figuring out the way you want different types of music to sound
- expanding your repertoire by improving your technique

I am sure the piano can relate in some ways to the harp.

The old style of playing the harp was called the French method. It was the way you held your hands. Some people swear by it, but many I have talked to say it causes problems.

The movements if I recall correctly, were stiff, and very uniform

Peoples hands would literally lock up after playing for so long. Its a difficult position.


Salzedo in the 1920s developed a much easier and proficient way of playing. Which allowed for greater dynamics. Moving the hands and arms. Flowing, less uniform and more free.
____

PS Salzedo was probably the most inventive genius that ever came to the musical performance front.

Look him up. Great musician for the harp and orchestra, Probably the greatest known harp figure ever.

Strange, another poster used to paraphrase me (the old straw man trick) in exactly the same manner. Where do I say 'flopping around'? You need enough tension for the moment of key depression, then flop (which is a non-doing - 'flopping around' requires tension to achieve).

The 'universal' technique is the one that uses the least resources (tension) to bring about a conception. It's a kinda Occam's razor argument.

Though I'm by no means a teacher, I would sum up technique in one sentence: Do what you've gotta do.

Allot of people are extremists and act as if you must either leave your fingers curled or leave them flat. I just let those things happen naturally. A matter of fact, I tend to play black notes flat and white notes curled because it provides the most even approach to playing and reminds you of where you're at.

Regarding the wrists, I usually keep them steady during finger independence excersises so that I don't use it as a crutch. Outside of the those excersises, I use them freely. Of course like JustAnotherPianist said, it's best to conserve energy in what you do. I don't force my wrists steady unless it will make fingering more consistent. But also, I see nothing wrong with "feeling" the piece. I've seen very skilled pianists play Scriabin with very organic and unnecessary wrist movements, but they were still excellent performances.

Ultimately, the'do what you gotta do' and 'if it sounds good in the right tempo and you aren't in great discomfort' are fine.

Call me a weirdo, but I think technique should also LOOK sexy. It should look easy. It should look like the pianist always has much, much more in reserve.

There IS a specific way of developing this type of technique.

Lang Lang, for example, tends to get business done. His Don Juan is very beefy. Watching his hands, however, for me, at least, is ghastly. It looks sooooo uncomfortable. Whenever he needs power, he raises his wrist and collapses his hand. He can get speed and power (in Tchaik1 octaves and stuff like that), but he sacrifices control in doing so.


Watching Pogo, or Cziffra, it just looks so comfortable. So easy. So sexy.
KBK, the technique which you discribe neither gets business done NOR looks sexy.

You are not entirely off the mark with the idea of releasing tension between large, powerful chords. There is certainly an element of that in healthy, well-developed technique.

But when I see your videos demonstrating, at slow speed, your so-called 'drop&flop', I cannot help but disagree with the importance you place on this.
I never practiced anything to do with this, yet I do it naturally in my playing. The tension-releasing thing, imo, is so insignificant, so small an aspect of proper technique, that it just doesn't deserve much importance, let alone the complete obsession that you have with it.
The reason it's just not that important, is because, with proper technique, you don't GET very much tension. This is all quite difficult to explain in words on the internet. Which is why the proof really IS in the pudding.
In order to develope my technique to the level it is at, I came from quite a different angle.

A boat is only for getting where you're going, you leave it when you've arrived. Trouble is so many, unlike you apparently, missed it!

+1 pianoman

kbk.
To some extent, yes.
the trouble is, I'm afraid your boat went down with all hands....

MY boat, while neither the mightiest aircraft carrier in the world NOR the speediest of watercraft, is capable of taking me anywhere I want to go in comfort and style.

I don't think you get it. You jettison the boat once you've arrived. Technique is definitely not what making music is about.

Oh I get it, kbk. And I really don't mean to come off as such a dick here.
I just don't think you should be giving people advice about piano technique on a piano forum.

Hmm. That does come across rather dick-like.

Sorry bud, it's purely based on your playing ability. Proove me wrong by showing us something worthy.

Cruel but fair, like you say.

Maybe you'd like to 'proove' your playing before throwing stones? anybody can harp away.