http://jap.physiology.org/content/99/4/1558.full


http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/strength-training/HQ01710

As someone who is enjoying the ride on the downhill half of the mid-century mark, I found myself spending +/- of the past six months on doctor's orders on a combined cardio and full body resistance training program. Despite my apprehension about the weight lifting having a negative impact on my playing (and remembering Chopin's quote that " a pianist's body should feel very soft life a rubber sponge "), I have noticed a number of very positive impacts on my piano playing including:

- more stamina
- better concentration
- better dynamic control
- improved chord voicing flexibility
- easier " playing with arm weight " / long line contact with keyboard
- increase in maximum tempi, particularly of pieces with wide register and big jumps

In short, I am sold!

Anyone else experience that workouts that are traditionally more associated with athletics and that might even be contra-indicated by some in combination with piano playing have actually improved their piano technique?

I do, but not solely for piano. I do it to feel good in general. We need a healthy diet and daily exercise for our bodies to be at their best. (and that includes playing music)

I work out just about every day and incorporate weights (not free, but machine) into my regimen. I primarily use weights to prevent lower back pain and have gotten into using weights for appearance a little bit.

I have noticed that using excessive amounts of weights, which I've stopped doing, can cause pain in my hand and wrists. So instead of going for more and more weight, I'm now leaning towards more and more reps at a lower setting.

I wouldn't say that working out helps my piano playing though I would add that it does help me in loading up and moving my equipment.

Yes. I see a personal trainer twice a week for weight training. I'm 50 years old. I find strengthening my "core" reduces back problems and improves my posture.

I did this specifically to help increase my stamina at the piano keyboard. Sitting for long periods of time with your arms raised takes considerable strength....

Yes, I do, five days per week, on average, using moderate weights along with cardio-vascular exercises, purely for physical-maintenance, general health reasons.

Regards,

I use heavy weights and few reps, to maintain my muscle mass which would otherwise be depleted with my advanced age and my aerobic exercise (like running on hills, swimming, climbing etc). It's a compromise between strength and endurance, but I reached my limit in both a long time ago. So, I just try to keep what I've got as long as I can, so that I can still do all the things I want to do.

Whether or not weight-training helps my piano playing is difficult to say. Maybe my ffff is more solidly grounded and fuller-sounding, and better controlled than it would be if I hadn't weight-trained......

I just recently started lifting again for the first time in a couple years. If I continue to lift could it actually have a negative effect on my musical performance by changing my forearm strength? Could it make me tense up during playing? i.e. "throwing off my shot"

Yes, for tennis though.

But, wear gloves, your hands will thank you. Especially if you have a risk factor for Dupuytren's.

I'd think you'd adapt to the increased strength, which develops gradually (if it developed overnight, no doubt it'll throw you off your shot...... ). The body is amazing in its ability to adapt to any changes, as long as it's given time.

Friday is Bowflex day. I do strength training once per week. Only once? Yes, highly recommended frequency:

Strength Training Frequency

We've had this machine for almost two years now, and my wife and I haven't missed any of our weekly workouts on it except when we are traveling.

[img]http://nautilus.scene7.com/is/image/Nautilus/100070?$PRODUCTDETAIL_V2$[/img]

The advantages of Bowflex are:

1. You have to make the positional adjustments as you do your "lift." One of the supposed drawbacks of typical weight machines is that you just push on a bar, and don't get the advantage of needing those stabilizing muscles.

2. The resistance increases as you execute the push or pull.

3. There's no momentum involved.

4. The machine is well-made and well-supported (and there's been no rusting, which says a lot in our humid climate).

5. You can find them pretty cheap at garage sales or on Craigslist.

The disadvantages

1. With higher resistances, the feeling is less aesthetically pleasing than lifting a free weight, or moving a bar with a traditional machine. I think this is due to advantage 2 above.

2. With high resistances, as you complete more reps, you find that you can't move as far. It makes it a little harder to quantify your reps.

This topic has appeared many times on piano forums and the general consensus always seems to be that resistance training of all types is excellent for health and has no negative effect on piano playing. My experience is that playing in inappropriate or stressful ways is the main cause of piano related injury. I have always used weights, springs and bullworkers. At various times I have stopped on the advice of other people, once for several months, but all that happened was that I felt worse and my piano playing stayed the same.

And then there's Tzimon Barto who can probably move pianos better than he can play them

see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cf666Warxp0

and http://www.tzimonbarto.com/

I do strength training, but no regular work with weights.

I don't buy into the "I don't want to look like a weight lifter" (which is the most idiotic thing ever, in my opinion... that's like saying "I don't want to play golf because I don't want to be like Tiger Woods") but I just don't like them and they're not dynamic.

When you lift weights, you're only working your muscles in two directions. But your arms are mobile and your muscles move in so many other directions; why are you neglecting all the other motions? Incorrect training => underdeveloped muscles on one side and overdeveloped muscles on the other; also, there are tiny muscles that you might not be able to work with weights...

I do dance/pilates/yoga work that's much more dynamic (in my opinion) and works a diverse group of muscles.

I don't do weights. Bad shoulders, bad knees, and a host of other minor aches and pains are solid reasons against.

I have found that yoga is a big help. Focusing on breathing and the relaxed state of concentration that yoga practice involves are a help for musicians of all sorts. Many pianists experience tension in the neck and shoulder area, and many yoga positions address this directly.

I'm big on yoga too. A lot of yoga stretches help with shoulder/back tension.

I suppose the improvements which I have experienced are a testament to how incredibly out of shape I had become while it seems that you and others were keeping up on the maintenance over the years.

I still am not strong enough to carry an Avantgrand N3 to gigs though!

No weight training and the weakest person I know, it's conceivable to me that strength might assist playing in a lot of ways but, um, there *has* to be some small loss of sensitivity...doesn't there?

Er...no.

Some of the greatest pianists are built like Russian bears - Lazar Berman, Andrei Gavrilov, Grigory Sokolov. They have immense power at their command (just listen to all three playing the huge cadenza to Rach 3), but also the most delicate pppp.

Have a listen to any of their recordings.

It could be, FSOchen. Probably more beneficial to an instrumentalist would be more softer ways of working out, like Tai Chi.

But...I mean, I feel the strain when lifting a couple of kilos and, as such, less than a hundred grams is a noticeable difference to me. It strikes me that someone capable of lifting a hundred kilos mustn't be able to discern quite as distinctly the difference...um...to suggest otherwise is to say that by being stronger one develops *more* degrees of intensity and sensitivity. I'm not denying this outright but merely stating that this strikes me as unlikely; the most sensitive people would be walking monoliths. Um...I would suggest that perhaps the titans you mentioned were simply very sensitive in the first place? It's impossible to know, of course, but I just wonder that perhaps they might have been infinitesimally more sensitive if weaker...likely at the expense of velocity, dynamic range, evenness of large chords etc....I don't know Um...it's just widely unverifiable reports of, say, the sickly Chopin's touch that make me wonder...

I have a garden so I don't have the time to waste lifting lumps of metal about the place. Also my experience in life is that the more muscle-toned the body the less able the brain.

I don't suppose Horawitz "weight-trained".

It is a modern fad. No time for that rubbish, I would be paying to make somebody else rich while the trees grow taller in the garden, pshaw, as we used to say.

I'll stick to playing the piano, stuff the "gym"!

Besides that, it seems so popular with everybody else they don't need me.

Mutual.

Actually, I think that if you have more (power) in reserve, you have more control. Like trying to open the jammed lid of a tin of cookies. If you're close to using all your strength, when it suddenly yields, it flies off because you're right at your limit and can't control it. Whereas someone much stronger can easily hold back and use just sufficient strength to get it open smoothly.

So, at the extremes of dynamics (I admit, more at fff than at ppp, but still....), a powerful pianist has greater control of tone and touch. I think it's possible to hear this in music that demands a huge dynamic range, say, the Liszt Sonata. A less strong pianist may sound more strident at fff, (or maybe he'll just scale down his fff to ff to keep in better control) whereas a more powerful player is able to produce a more rounded tone at fff as well as powerful sound.

It's often noticeable that teenage pianists who haven't yet fully developed their strength don't have the kind of control between pp and ppp that they later show, (as well as between ff and fff).

A little side story...

I work in an environment where physical fitness is taken extremely (really, I mean it) seriously be some of the staff. Others, like myself do not have to bother so much, and get paid proportionately less.

I asked one of my friends who was very fit to help me move my piano one night, he was very willing.

He came to my flat and I showed him where the piano was and where I wanted it moved to, "no problem, mate, let's get moving".

I went to the treble end.....

We moved the piano, had a chat and a drink and off he went.

I saw his wife at work the next day and told her I was very grateful to Malcolm for his help.

"Well, to be honest, he was a bit upset", she said, "he thought you looked stronger than him and he knows you don't work out, he was amazed that you weren't as tired as he was".

I couldn't help laughing and felt duty bound to explain, "Well, ELaine, you know what a grand piano or a harp looks like?"

"Yes".

"Well, an upright is the same shape only it's in a box, I made sure Malcolm had the heavy end!"

She let me down by telling him and I had to cough up for extra drinks.

Anyway, thanks Malcolm, I still appreciate it.

....So...it's not due to the amount of practice and skill they accumulate in later years at all? I agree with a lot of what you say, it's fair enough in most regards, but, as with any opinion posted here not in its entirety, leaves a lot of holes to be exploited. I mean, um, I have to disagree with the notion that more strength = more control; I'd adapt it to more strength = easier control...it's harder to pick up peas with chopsticks, but if you use a spoon, even though you get from one place to another with less effort, there'll be a little bit more wobble...of course, for moving lots of peas, it's incredibly difficult when using chopsticks...possible, but difficult, whereas with a spoon, it's still just as easy and the amount the peas wobble is *reduced*...um...I think that metaphor stands from all analogous standpoints...

It reminds me of a Sherlock Holmes programme on ITV, where Dr. Watson made several attempts to spear the last pea on his plate with his fork. Holmes (played by Jeremy Brett) lost patience, grabbed Watson's fork and, using the curve of the fork, squashed the offending pea instead (and thus mushy pea was born..... ).

The moral of the story: if Watson had a pair of chopsticks (and knew how to use them), he'd have been able to pick up the pea easily. Or alternatively, if he had more strength, and therefore more control with his fork........

Even if this statemenet is true(which is not at all clear especially since we don't kinow if you;re thinking of average amateur pianists or far better ones), I think any lack of dynamic control is because their technique isn't as developed as it becomes later and has absolutely nothing to do with their strength.

If you watch videos of great pianists(Kissin, Lisiecki, Conrad Tao, etc.) when they were very young, they don't look strong yet they have no problem with dynamic control since their technique is so good.

Kissin is probably the one pianist who has made recordings at all stages of his career since he was a kid of 12, playing the Chopin concertos, when his technique was already fully developed, but not his strength. It's noticeable that his dynamic range, especially at the softer end of the spectrum, became more developed as he matured. By the time of his Tokyo recital of 1987, aged 16, he was playing not just with stronger underpinning in ff, but also a greater range at pp.

His recordings and concerts from aged 18 onwards sound to me like the fully mature Kissin with complete control at all dynamic levels.

All the pianists I mentioned and tons of others have Youtube recordings of them playing at very young ages so it was not only Kissin.

They all had sensational technique at a very young age. It's your opinion only that Kissin had any lack of control at soft dynamic range an early age(and the same thing for any other great pianists who you think might be lacking in dynamic control at that age). It goes without saying that there would be some technical improvement in every area for these pianists beyond their early teen years, but implying that they were lacking in dynamic control at low levels(as you did in your first post) and that this was due to their lack of physical strength is quite silly IMO. It's also impossible to know if a greater degree of dynamic variation(if in fact there was any)is related to improvement in technique or simply a desire or play the piece differently.

Perhaps Kissin went from "A" dynamic control to "A+" dynamic control later. His earliest recordings/performances would not have been so celebrated if there was any lack of dynamic control(or lack of anything). His physical presence at age 12 was certainly not great and he lacked the physical strength of an adult but it's mostly irrelevant to playing the piano. Playing the piano with dynamic control at low levels is not like removing tops of tight jars.

It's not at all silly to say that Kissin didn't display quite the range between pp and ppp at 12 as he did at 16. And I didn't say he was lacking in control. In all other respects, he was already the complete package at 12. I don't have any recordings of Lisiecki before he was 16, and I've never heard of Tao, so I can't judge them.

Don't you think it's rather silly to keep harping on a point? Feel free to disagree with me, but to say it's silly is plain silly. It's my opinion based on Kissin's several CD/DVD recordings (I never judge these things based on YouTube videos, where the sound quality is so variable) - no other pianist prodigy has been so frequently recorded in good quality sound from such a young age.

Frankly, my dear, your constant use of the word silly is just plain silly - and VERY, VERY tiresome.

OK, I'll just say your post was dumb.