I've had several examiners and adjudicators, now, commenting that my playing sometimes sounds "forced." I'm having a little trouble understanding what is the difference between forced and not forced, and how one controls such things...

Someone mentioned something about using the back/whole body rather than just shoulders/arms when playing forte, and not doing that results in a forced tone, but I don't understand the physics behind that. Surely that would result in more force on the keys, and so how could that possibly have a less-forced sound? Is it a matter of how the force is applied? because that also doesn't really make too much sense, if one simply looks at the physics of it (all things being equal), as the hammers really only can hit with different velocity.

My current suspicion is that it has something to do, more, with what happens after the key is pressed, rather than before. Or perhaps it's just how one voices a chord can have an effect on this? I really am not sure.

I do intend to ask my piano teacher for some advice, but it shouldn't hurt to hear some other opinions, too.

I think most of the things you mentioned are involved, but you talked almost entirely about physical aspects, and if you're looking more for the basic thing that they meant, it's something else.

Of course they meant something about the sound, and I think the best starting point would be to understand exactly what (to the extent possible) -- before getting into the physical aspects that might be involved. Do you? I suspect that if you think you do, it's not quite exactly what you think....

edit: Including that it probably involves aspects of the sound besides the sound per se!

I think it would be helpful for you to say what you think they meant in terms of the music that was coming out, as opposed to anything physical -- and then we can take it from there.

When people use terms to describe music that are not musical terms, you have no idea what is trying to be communicated. I certainly don't.

If you have a recording (no video) of the performance, play it again to them and ask them exactly what they meant.

It would even be more interesting to play that recording to them days later and see what is then said.

Having said all this, if you have a recording listen to yourself and make your own opinion of your own playing.

My concept of "forced tone" is a sound that is unpleasant (assuming an unpleasant sound is not appropriate for the passage). This would normally occur during the loud dynamic playing and can be the fault of the piano rather than the pianist.

I think I have a pretty good idea.

If he says what he thinks, I do think we can take it from there with pretty good reliability.

The term 'forced tone' is used frequently in reviews of concerts and recordings. I take it to mean that the pianist plays louder than necessary, often with accompaniment also too loud which may be part of the problem.

Horowitz for example, often bangs in climaxes, but he also knows when to scale right down, and he gets his bel canto tone from playing the accompaniment much softer so that he doesn't need to force his tone in the melody. When you play above a certain volume, depending on the piano, the sound can be harsh, which may be what you want (e.g. in Prokofiev) but often it isn't, and the remedy can be as straightforward as reducing the volume of the accompaniment (or rebalancing the melody against accompaniment, or changing the voicing so that inner notes within chords are softer than the bass note) so that the melody can sing without sounding 'forced'.

I have no idea what "forced" means, either. Like you, I subscribe to physics and its laws. When people tell me something that makes no sense physically, I have a very hard time following it. That's not to say they're not right, it's just that I simply have a difficulty understanding what they mean. Best thing to do when that happens is to ask questions directly to that person if you are able. Most are really willing to help you get to the bottom of whatever it is they hear, because they truly want you to know, and almost always want to help.

What I did was jump on youtube and listen to a couple of your performances, particularly Chopin's Raindrop prelude and the 2nd mvt of Beethoven's Pathetique. What I noticed was that you are very rigid in your playing. Exact time/rhythm. Exact dynamics. There's no shape to the music. So each note sounds like it is attacked, and the tone sounds a little harsh. A lot of "bop bop bop bop" instead of "la da dee da". Whether this means "forced" or not is an entirely different story, but I hope this is at least helpful.

I think the "whole body" comments you were getting is an attempt to get you to feel the music more, because it feels like every note is the same.. it's mechanical. Now, some of this could be the fault of the Yamaha upright you were playing, but after several pieces with the same kind of sound, I suspect it goes a little beyond that, and that there is actually some mechanical playing going on.

Interestingly, the Tempest 3rd movement did not have this problem.. but it does have some other issues. You don't bring out the correct beat. There are some technical problems, likely some tension in your hands, and in this case, the tempo is all over the place. This sounds "forced". In some places, you rush very badly and miss notes. In others, you slow down way too much. Doesn't happen everywhere, but it happens enough to be noticeable. Check out 2:55 for a great example of the technical issues in this piece. And at 5:28 it sounds like you're hitting the keys way too hard.

Throughout the piece, I noticed that your fingers are extremely tense and straight. This is probably one of the big contributors to your technique issues. You have to work on relaxing your hand and fingers so that they can play the notes. My suspicion is that there are other mechanical issues that just this one, but that was noticeable, so I wanted to mention it because it will help a lot if you can do it.

I can hear an underlying musical sense in your playing, like you know what the piece should be doing (in most places), but mechanical issues are preventing you from doing it. I would ask your teacher to help you focus on this aspect, because it more than anything else, will vastly improve your playing.

Hope it helps.

I agree. All tone is forced.

Some tone just shows up out of nowhere with no warning...

An analogy would be like the difference between singing and screaming.

I like to think of releasing the sounds from the piano rather than thinking I can make them.

A beautiful piano sings all by itself. I do believe that a certain touch can be critical but also I think the listener chooses what they think may be good as sound as opposed to being a forceful sound.

I have no idea if this is helpful to you.

rada

My first thought was that they meant his technique wasn't quite there yet and some of his chords (or whatever) were too loud and timed poorly. Either way is a reasonable thing to infer, hence my first post in response to Dave. It is basically meaningless on it's face.

YMMV, but I associated "forced" with sounding "rehearsed". Like using the exact same rubato every time you play a piece.

Ok so "forced" is obviously not a helpful description on its own because I interpreted it as harsh tone.

I also think that any tone a piano is capable of producing is fair game to use. Harsh is appropriate at times.

Hi Jolteon,
I guess, if people call your playing "sometimes forced", they just want to be polite and not say, that it is "unmusical".
I hope, this feedback from my side is not perceived as to forced.

Kind regards from the other side of the globe.

(emphasis added)

I think you're the first one who mentioned that -- and IMO that's very likely a big part of it, particularly things like not holding notes and rests quite long enough, and in short, "not breathing." Those kinds of rhythmic things, coupled with the things that others have mentioned, create a jagged, harsh, anxious impression.

I don't agree that it's 'meaningless on its face' to talk about "forced tone," or that it's hard to guess what was meant, provided you've heard the usage in context a number of times. I have, and it has meant essentially what has been said in most of the posts here, with the addition of what you said and what I amplified.

I think we could have done even better in trying to pin it down in this particular instance if Jolteon had said more about what he thought they meant, in terms of the music and sound rather than just trying to guess about the physicality.


I think you were almost certainly right -- provided we add to it this thing that Damon said. I don't think it would very likely be described as "forced" unless the rhythmic aspect was also there. If the rhythm is okay or at least inoffensive, a simpler term than "forced" would most likely be used.

Like "harsh."

To me it also means something like "unnatural", for example if you don't really "feel" the music and one can hear you are making an effort or that you are sort of uncomfortable with it.
(PS: This is an idea I have from a linguistic point of view and what they could have meant, I haven't listened to your recordings.)

If the pianist was criticized for having a forced(as in harsh)tone, then the judges must have thought that the tone was not appropriate for the passage or piece involved. Whatever the meaning of forced tone, it was used as a criticism meaning it was inappropriate.

I've noticed that a lot of posters have focussed on the term "forced tone", but the OP never actually said "tone". It was said to him that his playing sounded forced. I think that's a different thing to forced tone. To me, forced tone could really only mean playing more forcefully than desired for any given phrase/piece. But forced playing, I think, is when you play in a rushed or overly strident manner, rhythmically speaking. Perhaps too metronomically. I think "forced" is what happens when you lose the natural ritards at cadence points, or those subtle rubato effects - especially when tensions resolve to consonances. I think it means your playing doesn't flow in a easeful way - that is, there is the sensation of struggle (lack of ease). A lack of rise and fall, tension and resolution. This might be due to technical difficulties or lacking a proper musical understanding of the piece.

It is not in his original post, but it is in the subject of this thread.

IMO "forced tone" clearly refers to the tone quality and nothing else. (Not the rhythm, rubato, etc.)Kind of the opposite of beautiful tone or golden tone. But each person, depending on their experience or musical knowledge probably has their own idea if what the OP and his judges meant.

Thread titles are often misleading though. I got my information from the post itself, and the wording made me think it was more of a general thing about his playing - not just confined to tone. Though tone may well have been part of that equation.

I guess we'll have to wait until the OP returns to the thread to clarify whether it was confined purely to tone, or his playing in general. I've heard this word used in the past to describe general playing, but not tone, so I'm guessing the latter.

Sure, it was primarily about the tone, but jumping the gun on rhythm tends to give a "forced" feeling to the tone, despite this appearing perhaps logically and linguistically to be mistaken or illusory. Without the rhythmic aspect, it would usually be expressed differently.

Rhythmic factors were almost certainly involved.
(No IMO here.)

edit: I changed my mind after checking out a couple of his recordings. (Post below.)

Quite true Mark, it's the rhythm that gives you the space to shape your "tone". That's why I read it as an all-round playing issue.

'Upon further review...."

I watched and listened to the beginning of a couple of his videos, and assuming those are indicative of how he played in the instances that he's wondering about, I agree that it was most likely just about the tone per se, with little or no relation to rhythm. Obviously I'm surprised the term "forced" would have been used for such playing.

What I hear is little modulation of volume from one note to the next, little flow. (Some, but little.) For the most part, every melody note is struck quite loudly, and equally loudly -- and the accompaniment also.

Jolteon: If that's how you played in the instances you're referring to, I think that rather than worrying about the anatomy, the best thing would be to focus on trying to make the sound flow more, with less emphasis on each and every note and more shaping of the melody, and without the accompaniment intruding so strongly on the melody. Your ear ought to be able mostly to guide what you do physically, provided you know what you're trying to change about the music that's coming out. (On the other hand, if you don't hear what I described in your recordings, or if you just don't agree, then I don't know.)

Hope you'll let us know what your teacher says.

Jolteon,
You mentioned the back/whole body, so I'll mention what my teacher told me in my last lesson about that. I was playing part of the first movement of Pathetique, and she said the chords marked sforzando were too harsh and forced.

I wasn't playing them too loudly, I was playing those with rigid very tense arms (straight back with arms straight forward, locked elbows) instead of leaning into them. She demonstrated that you lean into them using your back (lean from the waist) and shoulders, and she often will follow through by moving her elbow slightly outward.

Since these chords (example measure 45-49) are part of a two-note slur, you lean into the first sf chord, and the second chord she plays with a softer tone, moving her wrist upward at the rest. (She says down, up.) It's very graceful and fluid when she does it, and she has beautiful tone. She says she's working on my tone.

I was taught years ago to play always using just the fingers, hand, and wrist, but not using the upper body in the way that she is teaching me.

Kathy

Yes, but in this case, the specifics are left out. We are to guess when "sometimes" is. Unacceptably vague, because not enough information is provided to correct the situation without making needless assumptions, IMO.

In my world, forced tone = tension. It is possible to play fff with a full rich tone if you are relaxed. Look for tension not just in your back and shoulders. Look in for it in your hands, wrists, forearms, upper arms and mind!

No and no. It's got to do with what happens before AND after.

Think of it this way. How can you possibly get the ugliest, most percussive sound on the piano? Tense up your whole arm and hit without releasing. So, what do you do to obtain the opposite result? The complete opposite. Your whole body needs to be involved. Your arm needs to be free, your wrist flexible and your fingers strong. There is an instant release after you press the key. The weight of your arms needs to go through the key and be released.

But this is very hard to explain online without the chance of demonstrating. You need to find a teacher who understands transfer of weight and knows how produce a natural, good sound.

edit: holy [censored], 3 pages discussing what is "forced tone"? It simply means ugly, hit, percussive sound. It's not a euphemism for something else.........

Poor voicing of loud chords will also make them sound blurry, making you have to struggle to play them louder, "forcing" a decent sound out of the piano. It's a good rule-of-thumb to have your pinkies of both hands playing louder than the rest of your fingers, unless the specific voices of the chords demand otherwise.