Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum Fingers and arms

I already posted this in Pianist Corner, but I thought it might get more interesting response here.


'Fingers help us to control consonants, while arms help us to shape vowels.'


One of my favourite teachers and I were talking about this yesterday. I think it contains a great deal of wisdom, while also being very succinct.

There have been several threads around lately in which people have argued about the different approaches to piano playing. I think everyone agrees that in order to play high-level repertoire with refinement, pianists must incorporate in their technique the use of their arms AND their fingers in a unified way.

Hopefully this will clear up some of the disagreement which has gone on here.

It's really not as simple as saying 'for Mozart and Scarlatti, we use only the fingers. For Chopin and Brahms, we use the arms' (not quoting anyone directly here).


Discuss. This has nothing to do with teaching beginner/intermediate students-it is a concept that I think for the most part only very advanced students would able to rationalize.

There's a reason I have titled the thead 'fingers AND arms', rather than say, 'fingers VS arms'.

What about your shoulders?

Back?

Core?

Mind?

Of course it's more than arms AND fingers.

I think discussing it like this is a bit moot - which is why there are so many arguments about it.

To all of this I would respond with 'Yes!'

Like many nuggets of wisdom in piano teaching, it's more of a subtle metaphor than a scientific declamation.

Of COURSE the mind, the entire body, etc, are involved in playing the piano.

I said nothing in my OP to belie that.

There is more to playing the piano at a high level than wiggling the fingers and moving the arms; no one can argue against that.... this adage was not intended to serve as a replacement for good teaching from square one onwards, nor was it intended as some proclamation from on high: 'Piano is playing happens with the fingers and arms. Nothing else matters'.

No, I know I didn't mean to imply that you meant that.

Just an opinion, but for Scarlatti and Mozart as well as for the piano repertoire spanning centuries, the finger, arm, wrist, unified alliance applies. I guess I wouldn't separate these composers out from the Romantic era ones you listed. I was particularly influenced by the book Conversations with Arrau by Joseph Horwitz, which illuminates the pianist's thoughts about the unity of arm, fingers, etc. He often talks about "shaking" out trills, etc.

Many very young students can assimilate the total use of arm/fingers. We now see so many youngsters as young as 6, or even younger, (if a teacher takes the this age group) using the bigger movements, and not just fingers down. It's a matter of how and whether they are exposed to this kind of teaching. I noticed a very interesting demonstration on you tube of a teacher I have come to know, and briefly corresponded with. Here is a link to a lesson she has with a 4 year old. I like how the child uses the springing forward wrist in the lesson on staccato.

http://www.youtube.com/user/pianoteaching#p/c/3F80F9DB8A7E4720/0/7MXzzq-oofQ

Her site has examples of her teaching. I am quite impressed with the results.

To be honest, I don't particularly like that approach to staccato- if used as the main one (although I don't want to leap to the assumption that she doesn't also teach finger staccato, based on a single film). I used to do all my staccato with arm actions and got very tired as a result. After a certain speed, only finger actions will suffice for the main part of the action. If you didn't already learn those actions in a slow speed, trying to suddenly bring them in at a fast speed is almost guaranteed to fail.

At the time I did my grade 8, I might as well have been playing octaves, for all the effort I was having to use throwing my wrist around on staccato scales. I think it's very important to teach the finger actions as the basis for staccato. There's a difference between understanding the finger's role in the whole, and basically throwing it's role out entirely (other than to support arm forces).

What do you mean when you reference the back? I'm not writing it off but, while I have heard many people reference it, I have never heard anything that gave me any more than the vaguest idea as to what is meant by this. What specifically are you supposed to be perceiving/doing in the back- other than using it to maintain good posture? Seeing as most explanations are so ambiguous, I've always be inclined to view it more as a metaphor that helps raises self-awareness. If it's more than that, what exactly is a person supposed to be doing with it?

I'm just a piano parent and an amateur player, but my kid has been doing a bunch of fast staccato pieces lately and his teacher has been very discouraging of arm movement. Fast close finger movement. He does this kind of arm movement in other places though.

That's an adorable video however! She clearly works very well with young beginners. I love it - very sweet!

There is not one type of staccato.. That is true. I think Ms. Gorin is teaching this mode, which in my opinion, practices a nice follow through. Finger staccato is another form of staccato.. as is a forearm staccato. I believe a pianist needs to have a repertoire of motions.

About the wrist:
In my own studio, I find that some students stiffen their wrists, tighten their sound.. and when they need a soft landing at the end of a phrase, the stiffness causes a poke. It can also cause injury.

This is why I am impressed to see Gorin being aware of that follow through motion.. But again, I am sure she does not rely on one exclusive approach.

She has apparently authored a book on how to teach students below five years of age. And it spins fairy tales as a backdrop. I'm interested in securing a copy, though in general I don'teach students as young as four.. but there could be exceptions. This teacher is seemingly very equipped technically and musically.

Sure- but it's also important to remember that the follow through actually requires more effort than simply releasing muscles. The follow through can be a good way of preventing ongoing pressure into the keybed- but if the student doesn't ever learn how to prevent a heavy landing without that follow through, they're going to have real problems when there is not time for the follow through at all. It's essential to learn how to get the soft landing without it- then you can follow-through whenever you feel it serves a purpose, rather than because there is no alternative.

Here's a test video I made recently.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yqwVxTKtoQ

Although I have recently been working at much smaller wrist movements, I first learned this some years ago. It surprised me to realise just how many of these excessive follow-throughs I was doing. Working to eliminate them actually reduces the effort massively. You can't "relax" upwards against gravity- unless what you are relaxing from represents drastically more work than the effort required to lift your arm. If what you're relaxing from is indeed more effort than lifting your arm in the air, it really shouldn't have been anywhere near as much exertion in the first place. Lifting your arm doesn't necessarily do anything to deal with the problem at all- but simply brings in a new effort. While I stress that I'm not saying there's no place for such movements, looking objectively at what I used to be totally dependent upon has been a huge eye-opener and saved me much wasted effort.

I'm not going to speculate on what the teacher does and doesn't teach, outside of that film. However, I wouldn't regard that video as a good example of the baseline for coordinating arm and finger technique. I'd put that down as a rather specialised type of movement where the fingers only remain still enough to transmit energy that is provided by the arm. It's a movement that has its place, but it's definitely the exception rather than the rule- otherwise a speed wall inevitably tends to arise. You cannot depend upon that style of motion beyond a certain speed.

Incidentally, while many athletes do squats, I don't know of any who train their legs simply by holding heavy weights and then standing still without moving up and down from their legs. Why would the pianistic equivalent of that be more healthy than actually moving your fingers? The more think about this, the more bizarre I find it. Surely training movement should come first?

It may be more indirect, but balance and posture are sure important in playing piano. And the back supports the shoulder and neck muscles. Leaning forward or backward for technique is also very helpful (more exaggerated for young ones who haven't fully reached the level of coordination required, but definitely there in most pianists).

We didn't even mention the feet and legs