Hi everyone,

I would greatly appreciate it if anyone can give me more insights regarding the Taubman technique. I have carpal and want to get your opinions.How long does it take to learn it?
Is it effective? Been playing piano now for 3 years..

music888,

For many years I couldn't play because of an arm injury. I studied with a Taubman teacher for 1.5 years, and she was wonderful. My issues didn't go away... but she taught me how to manage them.

I've since moved on, and I often don't play in a Taubman way. There are many ways to play, and I think it's too restrictive to always play, say, using rotation. But it's a useful tool that I now have.

I think the most important thing for you is to find a teacher who is *very* bio-mechanically aware and knows how to rehabilitate students. This is more important than the teacher being "Taubman" per se. For instance, my teacher, in addition to being Taubman trained, was very keyed-in to posture and how you sit at the bench. The connections between how I sat and how my hands felt were surprisingly strong. You need to be taught how to listen to your body. Now, I would guess that many Taubman teachers do have those qualifications, because the system was designed/discovered to help ailing pianists like us. But it's not the only way to get there.

(As for your question about timeline, I'm sure everyone's different. In my case, I was a relatively advanced student who had already been playing for 25 years. We spend a month or so just doing scales with rotations, then a month very carefully applying these ideas to a movement from a Mozart sonata. Then I was off and running...)

-Jason

I'd add that I think it's important that it not be someone who's a fanatic about any single narrow approach. I think such people can be more into promoting their single idea than really understanding and helping the student.

Teachers who meets all of the above are worth their proverbial weight in gold.

I've heard a lot of good things about the Taubman method in terms of being able to cure injuries, but I'm skeptical as to whether it truly is the secret to virtuosity (as the Taubmanites claim that it is). If you watch clips of Edna Golandsky, the preeminent Taubman teacher, her playing is sorely lacking in virtuosity. The best teachers are not always the best performers, but when the preeminent exponent of a method- which purports itself as the key to virtuosity- has a very unimpressive technique, then that naturally invites incredulity as to whether the method is as effective as it claims to be.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwY-pDnmSiE In that video, Edna Golandsky demonstrates and explains what she calls "perfect octaves." However, the octaves that she plays are far from perfect. They are played only in one hand, at a relatively moderate tempo, and without much control over the sound. Golandsky's octaves sound rather percussive and labored (they don't have the easy litheness and fluency of a real virtuoso), and her hand looks stiff and inactive. (Perhaps the Taubman method's overemphasis on the forearm causes pianists to neglect the roles of the hand and the fingers.) Although the Taubman method emphasizes a free forearm, Golandsky's forearm doesn't look very free. If you compare her to the Horowitz slow-motion octave video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lT6H-ERo-rk, Horowitz looks much looser in the arms than Golandsky was.

All of that suggests that while the Taubman method may be extremely effective at curing injuries, it doesn't necessarily follow that the method is the ne plus ultra of virtuosity. If non-Taubman-trained pianists can play much more freely and brilliantly than Golandsky, then perhaps the method doesn't offer any special insight that cannot be gleaned through traditional training. After all, if the Taubman technique is very limited in terms of the physical freedom that it offers (as Golandsky's playing suggests), then perhaps much more freedom and technical security can be obtained through the various methods used by Horowitz and other great pianists.

I agree with you, LaRegina, that Taubman is not "the secret to virtuosity." But I don't think that Edna Golandsky is the evidence that it isn't. First, because I don't think we can judge her technique from her lectures (we'd really have to hear a real piece, not some slow octaves); second, because she's an educator and not a concert pianist. Thirdly, because even if we concluded that her technique wasn't greater than the greatest pianists', from what I've seen it's good enough to be casually labelled "virtuoso"; that is, as good as a regular conservatory-trained concert pianist, the kind of technique I can only dream of.

But all this is a red herring as to Taubman's strengths. They've really done themselves a disservice with the fervor of their adherents (which makes the rest of the piano world suspect snake-oil salesmen), and especially with their virtuosity marketing. Their old motto "Virtuosity in a Box" is absurd. The point of Taubman is not to train super-virtuosos per se; it's to teach students how to play in a physically sound manner so as to avoid (or overcome) injury. That one can do so, and ultimately play "virtuoso music" like Beethoven Sonatas and Liszt Etudes, is a testament to their principles, which are very reasonable and scientifically sound. But there are no secrets here, and no quick and easy path to perfect technique, whatever that means.

-Jason

It's true that we would have a better sense of Golandsky's overall musical capabilities if she played an entire piece, or even an entire recital. Nevertheless, if she truly was capable of "perfect octaves", I would think that she would demonstrate that in the clip. If Golandsky truly had mastered octaves, then why not play them at a super fast tempo? If someone said "perfect octaves" and then showed a video of Horowitz playing them, that would at least sound sensible (although it could be argued that no matter how well anyone- including Horowitz- plays octaves, there is always room for improvement). Showing Golandsky's octaves and purporting them as "perfect" is simply ludicrous, especially in light of the fact that there are many pianists who have better octaves than she does.


That's true, although Golandsky does have a Master's degree from Juilliard. My concern is that if their are discernable physical flaws in Golandsky's own playing (e.g. stiff, inert hand, relatively tight forearm), then that casts doubt on the effectiveness of the Taubman method, especially since it prides itself on teaching a free forearm. If great pianists are much freer in the arms than Golandsky, then that suggests that perhaps you don't even need the Taubman method to learn how to obtain physical freedom in your playing. Perhaps the traditional methods, when well-taught, are sufficient to teach how to develop physical freedom and thereby avoid injury and cultivate virtuosity. Taubman technique may be good at teaching forearm rotation, but do you think that other methods are more effective in cultivating finger strength/independence and the arch of the hand?


Do you think that most musicians would label Golandsky a virtuosa? Sometimes I have wondered where the cut-off line is. For example, Dubal pointed out that Brendel's technique isn't big enough for certain Liszt pieces and that Pires' technique isn't big enough for the Chopin Prelude Opus 28 #16. Would that mean that Brendel and Pires are not virtuosi, as apparently their equipment isn't sufficient to handle certain virtuoso works?


You're probably right about that. Taubman's tendency to exaggerate results is what invites suspicion. According to Taubman, the motions that prevent and cure injury are exactly the same as the motions that lead to virtuosity. That precept sounds reasonable, as the more physical freedom that you have, the easier it should be to play with speed, precision, and control over the sound. Tension normally slows you down and prevents you from producing an optimal sound. With that said, while the Taubman method appears to be highly effective at curing and preventing injuries, perhaps it isn't effective enough to also be the key to super-virtuosity. It appears that great pianists have developed a sense of physical freedom and coordination that goes far beyond what the Taubman approach teaches.

Perhaps lots and lots of practice, coupled with knowledge of many different technical schools (as no single technical school is likely to be all-inclusive), is the best method of trying to obtain virtuosity. For example, if you study two different technical approaches, the first approach may provide answers that the second doesn't, and vice versa. (e.g. Taubman teaches how to rotate the forearm, but another method teaches finger independence- something that Taubman omits.) By studying a variety of approaches, perhaps you could combine the knowledge to form something resembling a comprehensive approach to technique.


When you say that Taubman has no secrets, do you think that other approaches can provide just as much- if not more- technical knowledge?

1+ . I've had to struggle with various tendinitis issues on /off thanks to old tennis injuries (too bad I had to quit 'cause my serve was approaching 130mph....) and the real key is how to properly move at the piano. I recommend the book "What every pianist needs to know about the body" by Thomas Mark. I think he may have a video, too, not sure.
There's another issue to consider...you may actually be playing fine (without tension or crazy contortions) but, with time, the tendons age- just like other parts of your body! Resulting in injury , due to years of use (not necessarily at the piano) + loss of elasticity.
so fun...

good luck--

On the OP, I think anyone with injury would be well advised to seek out a Taubman teacher. The Golandsky Institute website is a good resource. If they don't list a teacher in your area, I would contact them because they may well be able to refer you to someone.

I had a repetitive stress injury with ulnar tunnel and tendinitis problems. Ulnar is the elbow, vs. carpal at the wrist--but both problems are caused by nonergonomic movement. In my case, I was playing better than before within a few months, after two years of not being able to play. You do need to be willing to take things slowly at the beginning, though, to retrain.

I would agree that there are no secrets, but I take this to mean that the Taubman techniques are based on applying principles of ergonomic motion to piano playing in a systematic way. So, presumably someone else who wanted to spend the 30 years (or however long Taubman took to develop her approach) might be able to reconstruct something equally effective, if they were really good at it. But better to take advantage of what's already been done.

[quote=LaReginadellaNotte] Nevertheless, if she truly was capable of "perfect octaves", I would think that she would demonstrate that in the clip. Showing Golandsky's octaves and purporting them as "perfect" is simply ludicrous, especially in light of the fact that there are many pianists who have better octaves than she does.

[quote]

The description of "perfect octaves" does not mean that the pianist plays them perfectly. It means that octaves are "perfect" in the same way that 4ths and 5ths are perfect. (It means they are not major or minor.)

Just my 2 cents. I'm not familiar with Taubman.

That gives them way the benefit of the doubt.

Good thought, but we can be pretty sure that's not what was meant, among other reasons because nobody much says "perfect octaves" with that meaning except in theory classes.

Oh, OK. I admit I have not read Taubman ads.

I ventured into the Pianist Corner and received a "smackdown".

I agree with Mark. Considering the video's context (allegedly unlocking the secret to virtuosity), it doesn't make any sense that the word "perfect" would be used to describe anything other than a technically perfect execution.

No, maybe consider it a smackup.
It's all good.

To the OP: I've had problems with carpal tunnel for several years. The condition is a result of my profession -- I'm a software developer. It got so bad that I had to have surgery on my right hand. In spite of this, I've taken piano lessons for the last 12+ years.

Is Taubmann effective? Yes, yes, yes! It's made a huge difference in my playing. About 3 years ago, I switched to taking lessons in the Taubmann technique. I now play with a lots less tension and with much, much better technique. One of the important things about Taubmann for me is that when a passage is difficult to play, it means I'm not using the correct technique. Once I change the technique, the passage practically plays itself! Sounds amazing, but true!

How long does it take to learn the technique? You can probably learn and apply the rudiments in a few months. But technique needs to be an on-going part of one's piano lessons. It's not like you can spend a few months learning <pick any school of> technique and then never have to study it again. IMO, it's something that you and your teacher work on at every lesson, applying it to the pieces you're playing. Just like dynamics, expression, rhythm and all the other aspects of piano playing. So, pretty much figure that technique -- Taubmann or otherwise -- needs to be a part of your lessons indefinitely.

One of the things that contributed to my carpal tunnel issues (and playing with tension) is that my previous teacher didn't teach technique per se. Instead, she assumed you'd figure it out on your own. Personally, I'm much happier with a teacher who teaches technique as part of the overall piano lesson.

In addition to the Golandsky Institute, I suggest investigating the Well-Balanced Pianist Program, which is a bi-annual program that teaches the Taubmann technique. I attended a couple years ago and learned a huge amount in that one week; I plan to attend again this summer. It was also a lot of fun!