Thanks for the thoughtful replies.
You are welcome
In the past it happened numerous times that i played some scales; when i reached the 3-5 fingers it became somehow uneven.
The way to deal with technical problems is not to dive head first on some exercise book.
You must investigate.
Why is the scale uneven when you reach 3-4-5?
Simple: you are using a single motion to bring all fingers down on the keys. Finger 3 plays fine, but the motion that brought finger 3 down will be the same motion that will bring finger 4 down, but now finger 4 is quite near the key, so its down motion is much faster than the down motion of finger 3 (it is closer to the key, so it travels a smaller distance), finger 5 will be even closer, if you are sort of either “rolling” your hand or moving the fingers down one after the other.
In order to correct this sort of unevenness, you must start again with each finger, that is, each finger must have a complete motion and start to press the key from the same distance to the key. So you press the 3, and this requires a downward motion. Now you must not take advantage of this downward motion to press the 4 and 5. You must – so to speak – “reset” the hand so that finger 4 is on the same height from the key as finger 3 was, and the same applies to finger 5. Each finger must be “reset”.
Now, there are two main ways to reset a finger. One is to lift by using the finger extensors located in the forearm and the back of the hand. The other is to rotate the forearm in order to lift the finger.
Using the finger extensors (“lift the fingers high without moving anything except the fingers” – as Hanon and Cortot encourage us to do) is anatomically awkward and if insisted on for several hours a day, will lead to injury. Most importantly, resetting the fingers this way will cause agonists and antagonists muscles to work against each other: you will feel your forearm “burn” if you keep doing it.
Practise in this way for a couple of months and you will find that the burn subsides, and now you can do it with a certain facility. You will think that the exercises are working! Look, no pain anymore! My muscles have developped (at this point most people will think that their “finger” muscles have become stronger – but there are no muscles in the fingers – they are all in the hand/forearm).
In fact, none of this happened. What happened is that insisting on a painful action caused your brain to block out the pain. The pain is there, you have just learned to ignore it. You have become
dessensitised to it. Keep going for another couple of years and a nasty injury will suddenly and (apparently) out of the blue cripple you.
Rotating the arm to lift the fingers, on the other hand is a very natural motion (it must be, otherwise, why would Hanon caution us against doing it? Why put coins on the back of the hands to make sure that no rotation is taking place? You see, the body has its own wisdom, and it knows that the best way to lift the fingers is not by using the finger extensors, but the forearm rotators). It will not cause injuries, it is not tiring – you can do it literally for hours without burning, and it will allow you far more control over the finger´s motions. But you must resist the temptation of “rolling”, that is, using a single rotation to play several notes in succession. You must have an individual rotation for every single individual finger motion. As you get good at it, the rotations become so small (the secret of speed is not moving fast, but moving small) that you will not be able to see it. It looks like the fingers are moving up and down like little hammers (Hanon´s misguided ideal), but they are actually
being moved by micro rotations . As an onlooker you will not see it. As a player, you will feel it – if you are not deluding yourself that you are doing something other that you are actually doing.
So, as you can see, there is a simple cause, but two very different solutions.
As a matter of fact, after having done one or two Pischna exercises (now you will become upset) that focus on these fingers, it was always a lot easier. Why that ? The majority of the movement patterns offered in his book seem not have something to do with movements in scales. I always have the impression that they help to develop control !?
No, I will not become upset. You must understand that everything that I say is for people who are
dissatisfied, or who do not know better. If someone is completely satisfied with Hanon, Pischna, Cortot et al. I wish them luck and success. Why should I mind? As far as I am concerned they can paly them until their fingers fall (not long ago someone was telling of playing Hanon 3 hours a day). The fact that I am bored to tears with football, does not mean that I am about to initiate a movement to ban football. As long as I don´t have to play it or watch it, then I am perfectly happy. But I believe that his same freedom should be extended to everyone else. If someone does not like football, they should not be made to play it (e.g in PE classes) or watch it. Likewise, with technical exercises. Although I encourage anyone that enjoys doing them to keep doing them, I will provide arguments for those who perceive that there is something wrong with the supposed wisdom their teachers are transmitting. So my posts are not meant for those who are happy doing their Hanon. My posts are for those who are very unhappy about it, and for those who do not know enough to be able to decide.
Now, back to Pischna. The main problem with all these exercises, is that they insist on the myth of finger lifting. You can use them for rotation, and everything will be fine. So why am I against them? Why don´t I just modify them, pay no attention to the author´s directives and use them for practicing the proper anatomical motion?
Now, pay a lot of attention because this has to blow your mind (if it doesn´t then nothing will).
You said that you experienced improvement when doing them. This is true. Some improvement of sorts does take place if you start lifting your fingers. However, because the motion is anatomically inefficient, this improvement will only last
if you keep doing the exercises consistently on a daily basis for the rest of your life. Cortot, Hanon, Dohananyi, all make it perfectly clear that this is so. Therefore, it would appear to make sense to buy the books: you will be using them for life. It is a lifelong investment.
Besides, lifting fingers high is a simple motion. There is little to learn or investigate. Just lift the fingers high and you can dive on the exercises.
Now, the rotation alternative is a very different kind of animal. To start with it is a far more complex motion. You will have several decisions to make when playing a passage: How much should I rotate? What sequence of double/single rotations should I use? You cannot simply dive on the book. You will have to spend literally hours trying different combinations of the rotational parameters until you hit on the perfect combination. And now comes the puchline: Once you hit on the perfect combination,
you will never need to practise it again. So “practice” takes on a whole different meaning now. Instead of mind numbing repetition of an anatomically awkward motion in the hope of make it less awkward, you have, intelligent investigation of a comfortable movement that once found will not need to be repeated.
And because this complex movement can only be defined by the sequence of notes to which it is addressed, it will not be transferable. All you will learn by applying the correct motion to Pischna is… Pishcna! Mozart will require a different pattern that will have to be paisntakingly investigated. Chopin will need its own pattern. And so on and so forth. Hence, unless you want to perform Pischna, don´t waste your time with it.
So what I am saying is that there are two (I am simplifying here) very different ways to play a piece: by using awkward motions and by using comfortable motions. You will be able to play the most virtuosistic repertory by using the awkward motions. But to do so you will be forever enslaved to methods like Pichna, Cortot and Hanon. And your piano life will be short lived: it will be curtailed by injury (as happened to Leon Fleischer, Gary Graffman, Glenn Gould – to name a few) or by old age – when your muscles cannot respond anymore to the effort required by them (Cramer, Clementi, Brendel). Like an Olympic Athlete, you will have your 4 minutes of fame and then you will be crippled for life by the injuries caused by the training, or you will simply not be able to do what you once did.
By using comfortable motions, on the other hand, you will never need to “practise” (in the sense of hours of repetition). Most of your practice will be investigative, and directed by the musical ideas you wish to bring forth. You will be able to paly the most difficult pieces well into your old age, and they will sound even better as you age (Rubinstein, Arrau, Horowitz, Earl Wilde, Tureck). The downside of this alternative is that it demands much mental effort, and we would all rather do Hanon while reading a novel.
Another effect that I always realize is that stretching exercises (done by Godowsky, Rachmaninov, Lhevinne and strongly favoured by for example Adele Marcus) also help a lot in getting control - and this is not only my imagination. Since i have done them on a regular basis several things have become a lot easier (even the first Chopin study).
My only comment here is that stretching exercises should not be piano based. Learn and do them within other activities (e.g. aikido for wrist and finger stretches will be far superior to anything devised by Godowsky et. al.)
One more point with regard to Cortot: I think his technique was "amazing" (at least not worse than Richter's or Arrau's or even Freire's). If you only listen to the second Chopin study - he does it much cleaner and with more control than Richter and Freire. That says a lot. I think Marik, who seems to know a lot about piano playing and who knows a number of famous pianists personally, once pointed out that even experienced pianists have to polish this piece for years !
You may well think that, but the fact remains that Cortot´s
musicality was amazing and his technique often failed him when he needed it the most. Then again, neither Richter nor Arrau or Freire strike me as role models in regards to what I am talking about. Most of them developed their techniques at a very young age, and all of them had Hanonites as teachers. These pianists do not impress me for their “technique”, or if you prefer to use a less debatable term, their “mechanism” (Ahinton has suggested that in another thread and it may be a good idea). They impress me for their musicality. Richter in particular, had terrible posture at the piano.
And if you have been following my line of thought, you will see that there are two ways to regard Chopin 2nd etude. Some pianists learn it very quickly using an awkward mechanism (they learn it quick because they do not want to waste time investigating the optimum motions – or even because no one ever mention this alternative to them), and then they spend the rest of their lives “polishing” it. And many never have the nerve to perform it, because it is not polished enough – and possibly will never be. Then other pianists take the time to figure out to the utmost detail which sequence of motion patterns will best serve their particular musical idea. This may take a long time, but once figured out, there will be no need for polishing. So, as you see, a pianist can spend years on a piece, but not necessarily “polishing it”.
Best wishes,
Bernhard.
Topic: Cortot's rational principles of technique