On a lot of music scores, on repeated notes, the fingering is always alternating. The answer from my teacher was that it was so that each note sounds slightly different from each other, but lately I tried playing repeated notes with the same finger, and the sound I got was the same as when I was alternating my fingers.

from my experience, it saves wrist and finger tension -- instead of having to quickly raise your hand and hammer it back down again, it has a more fluid motion. for me, it's all contextual though. sometimes i play repeated notes with the same fingering, other times i use different ones.

So for playing slow or moderate repeated notes, using alternating fingers really doesn't help much than.

Sounds like either you misunderstood something from the teacher, or it was about something a little different than what you seem to be asking.

It has nothing to do with making the notes sound different. It's just because you can play repeated notes faster and more delicately if you change fingers. If the repeated notes don't need to be real fast and/or delicate, you don't have to change fingers, but some players prefer usually to do it anyway.

You get more definition and surges of energy with changed fingers.

This is an area where fashions have changed over the years. At one time it was customary to change fingers on every repeated note, however long the notes, and whether or not the fingering of the following passage required it. These days my experience is that many pianists do this only on fast passages, or to take advantage of longer repeated notes to shift their hands for better fingering of the following notes.

I still come across piano teachers who insist that their students use different fingers on every repeated note, but I've yet to hear any justification of this practice that stands up to much scrutiny. I suppose it can be argued that you should learn how to use different fingers on the same note even when you don't have to, because sometimes you will have to. But to my mind that's not a a compelling argument.

This doesn't add up! You can choose between finger and hand action whether it's the same finger or a different one.

It's for the same reason you finger a scale 1,2,3,4,5 rather than 2,2,2,2,2 (which is demonstrably more natural to an absolute beginner.) It enables faster playing. Whether it actually makes a difference in slower passages is debatable. It may just be that we have muscular memory of playing smooth passage-work with alternating fingers. I'm sure there are several theories :-)

This is the correct answer. Ignore the rest.

I think either way is okay if you could managed to "get the sound you want". Argerich does a lot of repeated notes on the same finger

If you were playing rapidly repeated octaves or chords you wouldn't think use of the same fingers to be an issue. With a properly balanced hand, it needn't be an issue with repeated single notes either. However there's no need to be dogmatic. If there's an opportunity to set up for what's coming next then be sensible and use it. You can also vary the contact point with the key.

John

That's an example that doesn't often offer a choice, but depending on the chord, I could repeat it faster and with more dynamic control if I alternate hands.

It saves you having to count if you use different fingers (assuming of course you remember how many fingers you've got ), as in Beethoven's Appassionata (I). In Ravel's Scarbo and many other works, it's impossible to play the repeated notes fast enough with the same finger.

If neither of those applies, I normally decide which method (same finger or alternate fingers) is easier, and use it - playing the piano is hard enough as it is without making things harder just to satisfy some dogma of dubious provenance.....

With slower repeated notes where you have a very easy choice between alternating fingers or using the same finger, DON'T DO IT unless it's for a better fingering before or after those repeated notes. What is the point of it??

However, once they get so fast, you need to alternate fingers.

It gives you way more control and stamina. Imagine playing this without alternating fingers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcsRl_LIJHA

What is the point of alternating, you mean? I can only tell you why I do, even on slow parts.
1. It keeps me from developing the habit of an unnecessary choice which leads to unnecessary mistakes.
2. It almost always helps me develop better fingering for before and after the notes in question.
3. It's an easy way to keep track of an odd number of repeated notes.
4. It looks cooler.

The reason for alternating fingers is because it allows each finger to have a break for a few notes, which reduces tension in the hand.
Famous pianist Ruth Sleczynska said that the reason to alternate was so that you could depend on the action of your fingers and not the action of the piano - in other words, when you don't alternate you depend on the piano to dictate how fast the key can come up and go back down, but when you do alternate, fingers can leave and re-attack the key faster.

What he said.
Orshoulditbe:whathesaid.Writinglikethismakesthingsseemalotmorecomplicatedbutthelackofwastedspaceisquiteproductive!

Howtrue!

Same finger: Up and down.

Different fingers: Curvy motion.

That's why.

This does not seem to make sense. Surely it does not matter how fast the action of your fingers is if the action of the piano cannot keep up with them?

All of the above make practical sense, but to my ears, alternating fingers simply sounds better.

You need to exert more effort in order to lift up and press down again with the same finger. Switching fingers quickly means you can play repeated notes with less strain, effort and tension, just like what fledgehog said.

I was going to quote Mark's post and say essentially the same. Damon, we can agree on some things it would seem.

....and I think it's the first time he thought I was right about something.

We probably agree about a lot of things. The role of government is not one of them.

Actually, I think you are right about many things, just don't quiz me.

Only if you do 'em that way. You don't often come out with nonsensical stuff, but come on - really!


John

I can appreciate why alternating fingers should be easier, and give a smoother result. The problem is, that I have never been able to alternate fingers on one note. Can anyone give me some advice on how to go about it? Does one finger go behind the other, or do they both hit the same spot on the key? Presumably there has to be some hand motion to keep the two fingers in the same place. But unless this hand motion is very precise, my fingers tend to catch the adjacent keys. Any advice would be welcome!

There's a limit of of many characters I can use in the topic title.

Old editions often finger slow repeated notes with changing fingers. According to my teacher it's because before the modern piano action was developed, there was a much greater chance of a note failing to sound if the finger did not come all the way off the key.

The repeated note issue has musical and technical considerations. These may not seem obvious to younger or less advanced players. It is vastly easier to control not just the speed of repetition by using multiple fingers, but the volume as well. With one finger being used the general outcome is that the playing will get progressively louder and the wrist will likely become more greatly fatigued. Repeated octaves are similar. You can use 3,4, and 5 or you can use your wrist only, the net result will be the same and for the same reason. Simply stated, the more fingers you can use the better the control, the greater the speed and the greater stamina you will have. Using Argerich as a barometer is self-defeating. On some things she can coast on her reflexes which are a thousand times better than the rest of us mortals. On the infamous Scarlatti Sonata K.141 you will note that she is using virtually continually 4321 in the right hand...and of course is outdoing most mortals once again. Note to younger pianists...when first doing this it will seem awkward. After a few months it will become second nature and you will amaze yourself and your friends.

I gathered as much! It's just my poor attempt at sarcasm. Which i use alot.

This sounds like a reasonable explanation of what has become dogma in the wold of piano teaching. Changing fingers on repeated notes is only necessary when they repeat very quickly. For quick triplets I start with thumb, 3,2; for quadruplets it's thumb, 4,3,2.

Up to moderately fast tempos, the same finger can be used to repeat a note if the concept of forearm rotation is understood, though for extremely fast repetition it's best to articulate with thumb, 3,2 (triplets) or thumb, 4, 3, 2 (quadruplets).

I agree with everything else you said, but not about the octaves. I wonder how others feel about it.....

I am convinced of the benefits of rapid repetition on one note using two (or several) fingers. But, as I said, I don't know how to do it! Please could somebody advise?

some pianos are better at allowing the performer to be able to do fast repeating notes also

I never finger octaves. This is, reportedly, how Graffman and possibly Fleischer injured themselves. In any case, it's not necessary ever to finger octaves and they aren't initiated from the wrist, even though that is what it sometimes looks like. Repeated octaves are initiated from the key with the finger, a sort of "plucking" movement, that sends the fingers walking slightly in toward the fallboard and back out again. This slight change of position on the key is essential for avoiding that stuck feeling, as if drilling with a jack hammer. (Easier to demonstrate than to describe.)

I agree with you..again!

I too would like to hear what any of the experts here have to say on this question.

I don't think we could do much of a job describing it in "words."

Maybe someone could try to do a 'demonstration video.'

But I kind of doubt that would be very helpful either. I think you'd have to be there with someone who could show you, and watch you try to do it, and guide you about it in person.

P.S. Tell you what.....

Scriabin's 9th Sonata has quite a bit of it, and maybe you can tell something from the video of me playing it in the Cliburn competition. There are 4 instances of it between 9:45 and 9:55. In a couple of them (the first and third ones) I use "3-2-1...." and in the the other two I use "3-1-3-1...."

that video

During that stretch, the camera angle is from overhead, so you can get a pretty good view, especially if you click for "Full Screen." But as per what I said up there, I'm skeptical that we can help you much with anything that we could post, including videos.

oh hey! you went to cornell and studied with malcohm bilson! when i got there i studied under xak bjerken, but i don't think he has joined the faculty yet when you were there. i really liked bilson, he's such an engaging character.

was john hsu (the cellist, took over the orchestra when murray got sick) there back then?

WOW!
Cool!

Yeah, I was there earlier, and didn't know a couple of the people you mentioned. I was one of Bilson's "charter" students -- he arrived in my 2nd year, and I was very lucky that we got someone like him. He wasn't yet into the "early instruments" -- that happened around his 2nd year there.

And yes, I knew John Hsu a bit. He was the chairman at the time, and really he was (I think) the one who started the "early instruments" thing at Cornell and maybe who inspired/triggered Bilson to get into it. He played a lot of concerts up there, especially on the "gamba," and also happened to be at some performances of mine. A few years ago I saw him again at a celebration for Bilson at his retirement. BTW, 'did you know' -- Hsu played PIANO very well too! Never in "public," as far as I know, but sometimes I would hear him running through stuff on the piano, usually in the band office near the lockers (ah, the memories!) and he was really, really good. One time I saw him in that basement office from outside those windows out front, playing Fantaisie-Impromptu, and I remember not just how well he was playing it but how emotionally expressive his face was, and how "at-home" he seemed with the playing. This wasn't just a cellist sitting down and tinkling some stuff on the piano; this was a guy who was also a pianist -- a real, real pianist.

I was in touch with Malcolm during the competition, both by e-mail and phone, and was thrilled that he was interested to follow it and give me his impressions. It so happens also that he will be in Fort Worth in a couple of weeks to give some performances in the same building where the competition was.

oh wow, i didn't know john hsu was the chairman for a while! i knew he played the piano--at least a little--when he was showing me some stuff in our rehearsal for a concerto. he actually had fingering suggestions (changing fingers to get proper phrasing), and i thought, huh, how did you come up with that? i remember a good number of things he said... one is how pianists don't listen to the bass enough (which i thought, at the time, of course you're gonna say that, you're a cellist), and the other is, he said, "I don't understand why pianists when they practice, they practice only the notes, they don't start practicing musically only after they learn the notes?" well, he meant me. the thing is, it wasn't until years later the things he said start becoming apparent to me.

i actually ran into john hsu in a restaurant when i was going to grad school in los angeles. and he still remembered me!

i don't have as many interactions with malcolm. i don't know if when he first joined cornell he did this "big smile to the audience in the middle of a piece" routine (especially mozart, i think) one thing he said, and it was actually to a pianist friend of mine at michigan during a masterclass, subsequently relayed to me, was: "Oh, you know him? You must also be a good pianist then!" I was so very flattered!

I should get in touch when them after all these years. I don't think Malcolm would remember me, but maybe John Hsu. Need to come up with an excuse Also my teacher Xak--he seems to have done very well for himself after I graduated.

That sort of almost brings us back on topic.


I did a lot of choral accompanying at Cornell and I think that's what got me to always listen to all the "voices."


Easy! Just say, "Hey, I was in a restaurant the other day and it reminded me of the time I ran into you at a restaurant."

Or of course you could talk about how we were talking about them right here, and so you got to thinking, "I should get in touch with them after all these years....

My personal fave is 1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1... or 1,3,1,3,1,3,1,3,1.... I find both work better than using just one finger. Faster (if necessary), more fluid (always necessary) and easier (easier is better).

Liszt Hung.Rhap.13-Mephisto 1/Ravel Alborada-Scarbo/Scarlatti Toccata in d/Rachmaninoff 3/Beethoven variations in c, to name but a few examples: impossible to play without changing fingers on the same key.