|
Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
|
|
68 members (aphexdisklavier, bobrunyan, anotherscott, AaronSF, apianostudent, beeboss, brdwyguy, benkeys, 17 invisible),
2,192
guests, and
372
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 384
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 384 |
@EM Deeka, music theory is understood in terms of the keyboard. That is the origin of the current analytical system of organising and understanding compositional structure and relationships. Theory IS piano/keyboard. You could also develop a violin-based theory for violinist, but then there would be issues with communicating with other musicians (i.e., using different terminology). For now, we talk in terms of piano.
BTW, I think guitarist think in a different system of relationships (i.e., they have their own theory). While music theory can easily be visualised on a piano, Music Theory is not different for guitar or violin !! And certainly "Theory IS NOT piano/keyboard"
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 19,678
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 19,678 |
Bear in mind also. The fingers in golf are the opposite of piano. In golf, you eliminate any control from the fingers. In piano, the control in fingers is everything.
Actually .... that view might actually explain your pain in piano playing, because in piano, trying to put control into the fingers is precisely the thing that can create problems. I have spent over a year retraining from "fingery" playing to allowing the entire body to work together. There is a type of "eliminating control from the fingers" (in a sense) in piano too.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,577
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,577 |
@EM Deeka, I'm not sure what your level of understanding is, but let me break this down for you.
1. Composers compose whatever they want. 2. Theorists then come along--after the fact--and try to figure out ways to explain and organize different musical ideas, from different composers, throughout time.
Theory is not a set of rules used by composers; music theory is NOT this grand unifying concept that then allows you to understand music. In fact, if you study western music and theory in France, Germany, Japan, and the US, there will be slight differences in the thought process--which is somewhat based on their own composers and their contributions. Nonetheless, this is all based on keyboard so that musicians have a common vocabulary.
From an ethnomusicological standpoint, western theory--which is keyboard based--doesn't apply...so other approaches for understanding are developed.
I didn't say that violin theory is different than piano theory: I said that violinist are taught to understand music in terms of piano theory--there is a substantial difference.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,577
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,577 |
You ever wonder about carpal tunnel syndrome in people typing? It is overuse injury. They aren't typing wrong. It's overuse. They need compensatory movements to overcome that. They just keep doing the same thing all the time. It leads to injury. Your statement is incorrect. People get injured by expecting the wrong parts of their body to do the wrong kinds of movement, and THAT is exactly what leads to injury. Our bodies are, in fact, designed to do the same movement repetitively all the time--as long as it is in the direction of how they are intended to function/move. This is how the bodybuilder analogy can/could apply to a new pianist that has perhaps never made those movements before. In typing, people get injured by turning/twisting their wrist to the right/left and stretch-out in the wrong direction with, for example, their pinky. Don't do that, and you can type all day without any pain. Just as pianists--who really know what they are doing--can practice all day without any tension or pain. In terms of running, perhaps we should all take more time to just watch people do it: MOST people have no idea how to walk, let alone run! So, yeah, they are going to inure themselves easily: stupidity runneth over.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,565
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,565 |
This is definitely a great read. I'm sure there are parts that could be debated but I think the general point is quite helpful in conveying that piano playing is a marathon and it's about the journey, not the destination. The last time I tried to make myself awesome in 24 hours I just got myself hurt. The article also seems aimed at the typically neurotic adult learner and the misconception that there are hard rules on age and practice time that must be followed.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,577
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,577 |
@EM Deeka, I'd like to share another aspect of music theory.
If we were to develop a music theory for violinists--for example--there would be significant emphasis/analysis of how/when notes are raise/lowered to fit their implied harmonic or melodic function. This is something that string players need to be aware of all the time and make adjustment for (i.e., string players have a different sense of just and dissonant intervals that differs from piano). This is not analysed in typical theory classes or analyses--because music theory is keyboard based and doesn't have that ability.
I think I've gone way beyond the scope of the topic, so I'll digress...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 19,678
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 19,678 |
@\ From an ethnomusicological standpoint, western theory--which is keyboard based--doesn't apply...so other approaches for understanding are developed. I do not believe that western theory is "keyboard-based". Keyboards got their configuration because of how western music had already developed - which btw was done mostly along voice. A keyboard is very handy for exploring theory or sounding things out, though these days programs such as Finale can allow us to do the same thing, but it is possible to study theory without a keyboard. The keyboard reflects theory - it did not create it. I didn't say that violin theory is different than piano theory: I said that violinist are taught to understand music in terms of piano theory--there is a substantial difference. There is no such thing as "piano theory" or "violin theory". When violin students study theory, they learn such things as rudiments and harmony theory. Each instrument gives us a unique angle to music, however. Wind instruments will create a keen awareness of the harmonic series, and if you play a transposing instrument you have that to work with. Violin involves fifths everywhere. I think that what is taught as "piano theory" is actually ordinary theory which is geared toward piano students.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,577
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,577 |
LOL...having studied and researched this (i.e., violin performance, musicology, ethnomusicology, theory, piano etc.) for over a decade at the university level, I was attempting to explain how and why the currently used western system of theory is--in fact--keyboard based.
Prior to keyboard theory, as keystring alludes to, there was a different system that was--in fact--based more on voice! It's called now called counterpoint or species theory. It's primarily a voice leading theory to understand horizontal note movement and direction. Just as there are many ways of thinking about music, there are also many kinds of theoretical analyses. Schenkerian analysis--another music theory people study in school--is more paper-based (i.e., not exactly keyboard based).
You have to understand: "music theory" is simply a method of recognizing and organizing musical patterns.
Music theory for traditional Chinese instruments is not understood in terms of western theory, because western theory is keyboard based, their evolution is not; their origin and musical history is completely different. Trying to use western theory--or a keyboard understanding--makes no sense at all.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 19,678
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 19,678 |
The keyboard reflects the structure of Western music. But that music is not based on the keyboard. The "LOL" makes no sense. Additionally, quite a few people on this board have extensive studies in music. It's called counterpoint or species theory. It's primarily a voice leading theory to understand note movement and direction. At best, calling counterpoint "voice leading theory" would be confusing to anyone who is unfamiliar with it. Anyway, Western music is not based on a single musical instrument.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,577
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,577 |
Anyway, Western music is not based on a single musical instrument. That statement is why there is confusion on this discussion. No one said that western music is based on the piano/keyboard. If that is what you heard in your head when reading these posts, then that is why there was a misunderstanding on this point. Let me say it another way: we use the keyboard as a tool in which to understand the harmonic motion of western music. If you want to better understand an orchestra piece, you can use harmonic analysis (i.e., to think of it in terms of the keyboard)--which is common practice when taking conducting courses. But, that is only one piece of the puzzle. Again, this is another reason why "music theory" [or more correctly: harmonic analysis] is a keyboard based understanding...or, a way of thinking about music. The LOL was literal: I laughed-out-loud. If you don't think harmonic analysis (aka music theory) is keyboard based, then explain why, and we can discuss. Besides, when is it, exactly, that you think "music theory/harmonic analysis" came into existence? I'll give you a hint: it was LONG after most of the music was written! Harmonic analysis is essentially a mid-19th century study. This approach to the study of music uses the keyboard as a tool to explain what is going on in music.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 19,678
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 19,678 |
Let me say it another way: we use the keyboard as a tool in which to understand the harmonic motion of western music.
That is what I said in the first place, to which you responded with a misplaced LOL. The real problem is in your wording, which caused confusion even before I entered this discussion.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,577
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,577 |
@keystring, please accept my sincerest apologies for my confusing words.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 19,678
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 19,678 |
@keystring, please accept my sincerest apologies for my confusing words. I'm not so sure that I was that clear myself. Tbh, I popped in mid-thread and also missed your earlier posts on other aspects, which were clearly written.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 19,678
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 19,678 |
Upon reflection, A443, what you wrote caused a flashback to an incident about 5 years ago which I associated with it, and has shed new light on it - so a somewhat serendipitous coincident.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,048
4000 Post Club Member
|
4000 Post Club Member
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,048 |
I've enjoyed this thread and clarified some things in my head from it. A double benefit. My thanks to the participants.
Richard
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,654
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,654 |
Interesting and good list of myths. I agree with everything except this -
“Children learn faster than adults. Realty: There is no difference."
Actually, there is quite a lot of differences from watching my own children. He does go on to put a lot of caveats on why he thinks there is no difference, which come down to the adult have greater desire and is willing to work harder. That I do agree.
Bottom line, adults do have to work much harder, and that basically says children learn faster. It's all right because adults could still get there, but don't be sucked into the illusion that there is no difference. After a few years, children play more smoothly and have much fewer memory lapses than those who start piano as adults. Adults can overcome this, but it take a lot of work.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 125
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 125 |
@rnaple, actually, if any pianist/instrumentalist is experiencing any pain whatsoever, then they are doing it wrong. I personally believe this is another myth. You can constantly hear, read everywhere that if you feel pain, then it is something wrong with the technique. Not necessary. I do agree that people have many times problems with hands because they play with too much tension. Tendinistis is one the most common result. However, there are many people who use the right technique and they still develop injury. I had no idea how different each hand is (genetically speaking). I was speaking many times with one of the best hand surgeon (family friend), he explained me how can genetic effect all the result. There are people who suffer carpal tunnel syndrome without having overuse or doing any repetitive movements. For this kind of people playing piano to much can easily cause severe problems (even with right technique). With other words, some people might use bad technique and they won’t suffer any serious injury, some people can have the best technique in the world and they will have pain if the play 3 hours each day – simply because their hands are not genetically the best for this sort of repetitive movement. People always mention famous pianists who play every day for decades and they are injury-free, problem is we only see this pianists who have good genetic hand predisposition. Pianist who injured themselves couldn’t become famous, because they had to quit before reaching fame, therefore it looks like injured pianists don’t exist but I believe there are many of them, even when using correct technique – “tension-free”. Many people think that it is just misuse, but this is not always the case. You have to understand that overuse DOES exist. It means that even if you repeat “ergonomic” movements you can still develop injuries, because this kind of movements are NOT natural. Evolution didn’t predict this lifestyle that we have now. Human species exist for about 4 million years and they never did this kind of repetitive finger movements like we use in the last few decades (typing) or in the last 300 years (playing piano). This means that in 99,99 % of our evolution this repetitive movements (piano, typing, using mouse) was never present – we were not evolved for this. This is something new, so I can easily say that typing or playing piano is not natural (from evolutionary point of view) for human being. And you mentioned “correct” typing. I know well respected psychotherapist. He said he never met a person who would type 8 hours a day for 30 years without some sort of problems - most often tendinosis (chronic tendinitis) or carpal tunnel syndrome. Problem is too much typing is unnatural for our species, no matter how “correct” you type. My point is: there is nothing wrong if you are cautious and play “only” 5 times a week or skip one day a week. Chances of developing injury will be smaller.
Last edited by ZBGM0; 04/21/14 05:22 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 14
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 14 |
Interesting and good list of myths. I agree with everything except this -
“Children learn faster than adults. Realty: There is no difference."
Actually, there is quite a lot of differences from watching my own children. He does go on to put a lot of caveats on why he thinks there is no difference, which come down to the adult have greater desire and is willing to work harder. That I do agree.
Bottom line, adults do have to work much harder, and that basically says children learn faster. It's all right because adults could still get there, but don't be sucked into the illusion that there is no difference. After a few years, children play more smoothly and have much fewer memory lapses than those who start piano as adults. Adults can overcome this, but it take a lot of work. I don't agree that children play smoother. IMO it is far harder teaching children to play smoothly and shape/phrase things in a musical way. I'd guess that this is due to an adult having far more experience listening to music throughout their life. They already have a mental image of how things should sound. Also children are held to a FAR lower standard. How many times have we all seen a child "prodigy" playing advanced pieces on TV - and the playing is just utterly terrible if you judge it by the standards that you would for an adult. Mechanical playing, devoid of emotion, sloppy technique, etc. You've certainly got a point about the memory lapses though. Susan Tomes (Florestan Trio) has some interesting thoughts about that: http://www.theguardian.com/music/2007/apr/20/classicalmusicandopera1
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 25
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 25 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 19,678
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 19,678 |
In regards to the practice vs. bodybuilding thing: It is unfortunate that he added bodybuilding. In general practice should be daily, but it can also happen that if you take a day off or "let go" then sometimes things fall into place because of too much conscious control.
But in general: In practising, a skill develops gradually over days. It is cumulative and it "comes into focus" as the body, mind, and senses do their learning together. For it to work, it should be regular. It must be focused deliberate practice toward good goals, and learning what that means is a trick unto itself. Many teachers don't do enough about that.
I had music lessons first, and joined a gym later, getting weight training from a personal trainer. I had to learn that weight training is NOT done like music practise, and that you do NOT go every day - in fact that it should be every 3 days because of the muscle tear-down / build-up thing; or focus on different muscle groups each day.
One thing is the same however: in weight training you want to get the correct form and motions. My trainer gave me this feedback: "You made sure you have the correct form, and started slowly rather than rushing into it. You worked consistently. That is why you have made such good progress." In fact, everything that he listed are principles of good music practice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:34 PM
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:23 PM
|
|
Forums43
Topics223,408
Posts3,349,457
Members111,637
|
Most Online15,252 Mar 21st, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|