Hand Independence

camy86 wrote:

Well, here I am again!

I'll lay down a basis for discussion: what do you do or recommend for hand independence? Bach's two-part inventions: how do you study them? Or something else? Naturally, everyone has their own method, but I feel compelled to recommend avoiding purely technical exercises that do not lead to musicality.

What do you think?

Personally, I study hands separately very slowly, without pedal (if it is to be used), then with the pedal, then I gradually increase the speed trying to push it beyond the speed indicated by the score, then I join the hands, always very slowly, with and without pedal; after a certain level of confidence, I begin with dynamics, interpretation, etc... Obviously, everything is very relative depending on the piece being studied; many times there are measures that must be "fitted together" with the hands right from the start of study, such as Debussy's 1st Arabesque, with triplets vs. quadruplets. I agree, too many technical exercises lead to nothing; technique is acquired by "swimming in the sea"; I have learned from my little experience that hours and hours of Hanon, Pischna, and company do not hold the key to technical solutions, which is absolutely false; technique is inseparable from musicality; solutions for a fingering free from rhythmic, anatomical, etc., difficulties... are only found by playing those notes. 😆

Here I am too.

So, my piano teacher often spoke to me about the independence of the hands; he would say: "While it is true that each must go its own way - that is, according to its own score - it is also true that this does not mean the right hand shouldn't know what the left is doing and vice versa". In short, in my opinion, it is good to reach that point where the hands are not too "stiff" and "glued to each other", but without abusing technique... even if, in fact, it is necessary for these things. I also used Cesi-Marciano as a book and I must say that as much as I hated it, it was useful for learning hand coordination. Technique is useful, however, you cannot learn everything without making mistakes... therefore without having tried a few times "on your own" on a piano. At least, this is my opinion, I don't know if I explained myself very well... 😆

One must understand very well what the "gesture" is, i.e., the movement that the hands must perform. It may be that one hand plays falling chords and the other alternates rotating notes. Or that both must use the same fundamental basic gesture. Remember that the right bodily approach saves time in coordination. Always emphasize the interdependence of the fingers and not just independence alone. Play with the shoulder, with the arm, with the forearm, with the fingers, and entrust the effort that smaller muscles would not be able to bear to the stronger muscles. Maximum relaxation, from which energy and power derive.

Hand independence also means knowing how what one hand does respects the other. Almost always there is a logic and an "elegant" coordination. Observing the tranquility of the movements serves as our verification.

Hand independence also means knowing how one hand respects what the other is doing. There is almost always a logic and an "elegant" coordination. Observing the tranquility of the movements serves as our verification.

Exactly!! It's incredible how Paolo always manages to find the right words!... Especially interesting is the elegant logic of coordination...

I have learned from my little experience that hours and hours of Hanon, Pischna, and the like form the key to technical solutions, which is absolutely false,

I am sorry, but I absolutely disagree.

Hanon, Pischna, and what you call "the like" if done as they should be done (it's a pity, however, that a good portion of pianists do not do them as they ought to) are precisely the key to our piano technique.

If we take Hanon and play the notes at 120... it is useless. Exactly! But Hanon serves to develop:

- Finger independence

- strength

- perfect equality of the fingers

- agility

and once these 4 characteristics are developed... and first put into practice with applied technique (Czerny, Cramer, Heller, Roslavets, etc...) playing the repertoire and literature will be much less strenuous... and our attention can aim not at technical "hand" difficulties... but at something else entirely (touch, expression, phrasing, dynamics, interpretation, sound, philology).

Of course, I repeat, those characteristics are not developed by taking Hanon and doing it "like a machine".

In Bach's two-part inventions... as well as in the three-part sinfonias, there is a significant amount of work to be done on polyphony, on the phrasing of individual voices, on the baroque touch... it's a pity that most people stop, precisely, at reading the notes. And thus Bach becomes a mass of notes... perhaps even read well... but still just a mass of notes.

It is true: they are didactic works. Bach himself said so. The two-part inventions, the three-part sinfonias, the French suites, the English suites, The Well-Tempered Clavier, etc... But, for me, it is extremely fine music... truly difficult to render as it should be! I have heard many 5th-year piano exams... most of the time I was extremely disappointed by the performance of Bach. Note reading, this is what I often heard. Then they say that private students fail... that conservatory professors are stingy with grades... well... I say that everyone is at fault..........

then anyway... there are exceptions to this. But that's another story.

Regards.

compositor wrote:

I'm sorry, but I absolutely disagree.

Hanon, Pischna and what you call the "fine company," if done as they should be done (it's a pity, however, that a good portion of pianists do not do them as they should), are truly the key to our piano technique.

If we take Hanon and play the notes at 120... it is useless. Exactly! But Hanon serves to develop:

- Finger independence

- strength

- perfect equality of the fingers

- agility

and once these 4 characteristics are developed... and first put into practice with applied technique (Czerny, Cramer, Heller, Roslavets, etc...) playing the repertoire and literature will be much less tiring... and our attention can aim not at "hand" technical difficulties... but at something else entirely (touch, expression, phrasing, dynamics, interpretation, sound, philology).

I should preface that I speak from personal experience, and that technical exercises like Hanon and Czerny have always disgusted me; therefore, even if they were assigned to me, I couldn't manage to play them even with "good effort" because they bored me and I felt like a typist even though I was intending to play.

I am convinced of the opposite: in my opinion, it is much more difficult to find technique as a means to achieve musicality in other pieces through Hanon, Czerny, etc., exercises, rather than perhaps playing a Bach two-part invention, first "mechanically" (that is, overcoming the obstacles found in executing the right notes while seeking relaxation) and then trying to add interpretation.

In the end, for me, technique must always be acquired to achieve musicality as a final result: I don't see how such exercises can be useful. Finger independence, perfect equality of the fingers, agility, interdependence must be applied in any piece and then: why not use a sonata, a prelude, or whatever directly?

With this I do not mean that all studies are boring to me: Cramer and Pozzoli (not to mention Chopin's) have technical content that is relevant in my opinion, but they also bring with them the musicality that I did not find in the Hanon and Czerny exercises.

"Even a scale, if played with feeling, is music".

Quote aside.

I should preface that I am speaking from personal experience, and that technical exercises like Hanon or Czerny have always disgusted me; therefore, even when they were assigned to me, I couldn't play them even with "good effort" because they bored me, and I felt that even though I was intended to be playing music, I felt like a typist.

Just as I imagined. No one ever explained to her how to truly approach this type of technique. And, as I have already written, if done "mechanically" as if we were typists, they are indeed useless!

The same applies to all the volumes of Alessandro Longo's piano technique. They are extremely useful... if done with criteria. Cramer and Pozzoli (as well as Chopin) and Czerny are studies of applied technique.

Hanon, Pischna, Longo's technique, etc., is pure technique. Technical exercises. You will agree with me that these are different things.

composer wrote:

Hanon, Pischna, Longo's technique, etc. is pure technique. Technical exercises. You will agree with me that these are different things.

Yes, I agree with you and perhaps they were not actually taught to me in the right way: so I am asking you. What is the right way to approach them? What would you recommend to one of your students?

I hope not to be too "curious", but I have learned from my experience that playing those things never led me anywhere.

I remember that I would deliberately leave the "Czerny" at home when I went to lessons, so as not to play it!

It's a pity that we cannot just do what we like.

Premising that it is a truly long and particular discussion to address in a forum. But I will try.

At the base of everything, there is a discussion about finger articulation. My school of piano technique requires finger articulation with a steady wrist, first of all. (Because there are schools of thought that use wrist articulation). And it provides for two main types of articulation: one aimed at the ever-increasing development of independence, the other aimed at the depth of each single finger (therefore at the weight of the arm transferred to the keyboard).

This latter articulation consists of "throwing" the finger quickly onto the key (very curved and without bending the fingertips) transferring all the weight of the arm onto the keyboard (for this to happen, obviously, the position of the entire body must be correct and one must be very relaxed) .. when the weight of the arm is transferred, you will feel the need to continue on your own, "throwing" the next finger onto the next key. If the articulation is correct, when the finger is on the key, the other part of the hand (extremely relaxed) will "respond" with a movement similar to a snap (which is very natural .. the other fingers will rise and fall quickly). Obviously, the sound produced must always be the same (not one fortissimo and another that cannot be heard) for every finger .. another check to see if we are performing the exercise correctly. And between one "throw" and another .. obviously some seconds will pass. This is the 1st way to do Hanon .. which helps to develop strength and equality of sound. It will take a bit of time this way .. not 5 minutes .. but 20min/half an hour .. for 1 exercise.

Obviously, the same Hanon exercise can be transposed one semitone up and one semitone down (to benefit from other technical advantages).

The first articulation, instead, consists of: as soon as the finger sinks into the key, we lift the next one .. the one that must sound immediately after. It is lifted as much as possible .. without the hand stiffening. Obviously, this exercise will also be slow (about 30/35 sixteenth notes) .. and this is very useful for the development of independence.

Then variants are applicable .. to every exercise. We could even apply the old ways .. eheh!

And there are those who do it with hands separate and the other hand on top of the arm that is playing .. to reinforce the fingers even more. Obviously, everything must necessarily be followed. Otherwise, it could be useless and/or harmful.

Regards.

compositor wrote:

Then they say that private students fail .. that conservatory professors are stingy with grades .. well .. I say they are all wrong ..........

I am kind and dear, but I do not allow you to use certain statements in here. You can say whatever you want on this forum and people can agree or disagree with what you say about piano technique, composition, etc.; but this discrimination against private students is something that I categorically do not permit! It was a truly low statement and you have shown a lack of humility... What you wrote implies that only those who studied internally at the conservatory can be called musicians and, as a corollary, that only conservatory professors can be called Masters.

Based on my experience with piano studies, having compared myself in competitions and, why not, in exams, I believe that a pianist can be good regardless of whether they are an internal or private student. A pianist is good when they have: first and foremost talent, much dedication, and a good teacher who follows them and understands the needs, talents, and psychology of the student (whether internal or external). This discrimination against private students is something that must end!!! And particularly here, where I am the one holding the reins of the forum, I do not want to hear even allusions to this idea. This sentence of yours was an insult to all the people who with sacrifice have carried forward not only their musical studies (exactly as all internal students have done) but also their other studies, whether university or high school, and who deserve, contrary to what you have demonstrated, so much respect and esteem. As a personal note, furthermore, I do not believe that private students are penalized as such by conservatory teachers during exams, as you have expressly implied for their category, but they certainly have only one card to play at the exam. They enter as complete strangers and their evaluation is based on the few minutes of examination they have available; unlike internal students who are known by 4/5 of the examining board and if they have an off day, the effort of the entire year is still normally taken into consideration.

I hope you want to rectify what was written, at least by apologizing to the category concerned and pretending that your statement was just an oversight...

I have nothing to apologize for to anyone because I was simply misunderstood! My thought was: many private students complain that internal students are promoted without problems in all exams, while external students are often failed. And they think this is due to favoritism and bias against outsiders. I was saying: it's not that if external students fail it's because they aren't recommended or don't know the commission. It's because they are not prepared, period! I have seen many exams of private candidates... solfeggio, piano, complementary harmony, composition... and unfortunately this often happens. Just as I have seen private candidates pass excellently... with better results than internal conservatory students. So it is not a matter of recommendation, it is a matter of PREPARATION! I don't think I spoke about conservatory teachers vs non-conservatory teachers. There are many people in the conservatory who should be sent home... and many people outside who could teach without any problem!! Of course, the "conservatory" experience leaves a lot in the formation of a musician... if done in the right place... it opens many paths and allows for many types of knowledge... but... I never said that only conservatory students are "musicians".

And then... even internal students, most of the time, attend a double school...!

No, I see that you haven't understood... You MUST apologize... This second post of yours is very different from the first one in which I didn't understand, and anyway I still don't understand, even after your second intervention, the allusion to private students in that part of your speech... The question is: why mention the category of private students when the discussion concerns mediocrity? You must understand that you do not possess the essence of the truth of things, so when one writes a load of bullshit, because I believe that we all speak Italian here, the least one can do is apologize... The first post implied exactly the opposite of what you have written now and even if in the second post you diligently corrected your first statement, this air of prosopopoeia "I have nothing to apologize for to anyone" does not help much to defuse what you provoked before. Unfortunately, while camy86 and francescodiparigi are fairly calm people, I am a little less so, particularly on this topic which is often rumored about, and this must end! Since personally neither to me nor to other private students I know, has anything ever been given for free regarding exams and we sweated and highly deserved our diploma, I feel very offended by your first statement which categorizes, one of the many I have heard, Bach's performances as a mass of notes, attributing them solely to private students (and with this it is implied that if private students only limit themselves to reading notes in Bach, they are mediocre and thus so are their teachers who did not know how to correct the error), and I believe, like me, many others who read that statement but preferred not to respond or regulated their responses so as not to cause turmoil in the forum. It would therefore be desirable to apologize for having written something that could have been clearly obviously "misunderstood" and that may have offended a category of people who gave and passed the exams with merit just like internal students.

I believe I must take a position on what has been said in a more or less colorful manner.

I cannot take a position without stating, once again, what my ideas are regarding the study method.

I will try to be clear and to calmly explicate what my convictions are.

Premise: I agree in stating that there are more gifted and less gifted students.

Premise: I agree in stating that sometimes the good ones don't make it and that the idi...., sometimes have the position they do not deserve. (fortunately, sometimes the good ones do make it, thank God)

Premise: I agree in stating that then some idi.... generate their own school of other idi.., which is not guaranteed to achieve great results.

Premise: I agree that rather than studying in a wrong and especially "dangerous" way, it might be better... not to study at all.

Premise: I agree on the fact that none of us possesses the truth nor the omnipotence to lash out against this or that category, even if my life experiences have shown me quite a lot regarding power in Conservatories or "private teacher vs. non-private teacher" games.... the nerve is a bit inflamed and therefore, at the slightest provocation.... it suffers.

The law has lately put the icing on the cake: Out with the private teachers from the Conservatory. "We are the ones who do Music... you are all out, Students and Teachers". I believe this is something that cannot be commented upon. The university is free, Music is not!!! This also tends to encourage "internal forces" to pass judgment.

I don't quite understand if our registered member Compositor is a Colleague within the Conservatory..... or excuse me for calling him Colleague, I got distracted, I wouldn't want to have been disrespectful. I would like to know.

I emphasize that I am completely opposed to the described study method, but, as a Great Man said: "I disagree with your ideas, but I will defend them to the death". This naturally implies that "opposites" serve to give the rest a reason to exist.

If Hanon did not exist, we would not be here opposing our convictions.

It is not necessary for me to discourse on the more or less usefulness of the text or the described method. Other very distinguished Concert pianists and famous teachers express themselves in writing about their texts regarding this matter. I would only like to express my regret and my bitterness because when I see a conviction that does not come from comparison and experimentation, I feel the aftertaste of prejudice, which I do not like. Trying Hanon and trying other paths is fine. Claiming it is effective and nothing else is not fine.

I do not agree with methods based on motor training, although it must be recognized that by moving the same muscle for two hours, it seems like everything works better. But I haven't heard mention of "technique".

Then I heard about Bach. His music requires a deep, mental, spiritual, cerebral understanding... Perhaps the improperly training-based "technique" does not count much. The mass of notes comes precisely from the fact that the student does not learn to give meaning to the musical fabric and not because they cannot play all the notes perfectly. The fabulous recording of the French Suites played in concert in Leipzig, I believe, by Andras Schiff is going up on Sky. It almost seems as if the pianist only thinks. His movements are minimal and could be perfect without any "training". What is inside Music is above everything and only Music suggests to us how to play it. One should "raise" the student with this mentality without imposing 2 hours of Hanon or all the scales, and make them understand everything that is behind and inside Music. Too little is said about Music. Technique, that is, the way of performing it, cannot be separated from understanding and "musical maturation".

Enough. Too many words.

During my stay in this Forum, as a collaborator and Moderator, I would desire not to hear biased, allusive, categorical, or even offensive phrases. Instead, every form of confrontation, even "strong" ones regarding differences of opinion, is welcome... We are here for that.

So I would invite our Colleague...(forgive me, I can't break the habit....) our Registered Composer to review a bit the way of expressing himself towards the less fortunate students, private or not, less fortunate in talent and ...in the Teacher they have chosen...or that happened to him.

I hope to have been exhaustive and clear and above all not offensive. Thank you all

Even if I arrive late, allow me to start from the beginning.

This is a forum, and as we should all know, everyone has their own idea, which may or may not be shared. In any case, since as Simone also said no one possesses the essence of truth, we should all respect the opinions (and thus the positions) of others.

Well, one can agree more or less on a study method, on the usefulness of technique and on the type of approach to study (personally I do not share the one described above), but one cannot discriminate against a pianist just because they do not study at a conservatory.

As almost all of you know, I do not study at a conservatory, but I would have liked to take exams as an external candidate in the future. I say "would have liked" because now the law tells us that "those who are in a conservatory make music, everyone else is outside". Surely the conservatory is a school born for music, and attending it means having (usually, but here in Turin lately it's not always so) a good preparation. But nothing more.

ATTENDING THE CONSERVATORY DOES NOT MEAN HAVING THE RIGHT TO CONSIDER ALL THOSE WHO DO NOT ATTEND IT AS INFERIOR.

In Italy (but this is just my opinion and it may not be shared!!!) there are many things that are wrong. Even if "the law" tells us that external exams can no longer be taken, it doesn't mean that other equally good pianists cannot be trained "outside" the conservatory.

Personally (but as I said perhaps it depends on how things are here in Turin) I know more talented pianists who studied with a private teacher than those who studied at a conservatory.

As Simone said, one can be good only up to a certain point, but I feel compelled to declare that even I do not tolerate being able to enter a group and force one's own idea upon it.

It is not superfluous to repeat it, but discussion is always welcome here, but NOT OFFENSE.

No one here is in a position to judge someone else as inferior. We can give each other advice, exchange opinions, comment and discuss a certain topic, but no one can discriminate against another person. Not here.

We all have the RIGHT to express ourselves, but we all have the DUTY to do so without causing offense.

Furthermore, I believe it is good to consider that behind every opinion, there is always a person, and behind that person, there is always a certain situation.

In other words, if I were to say that I do not share a certain study method based only on technique, it means there is something that makes me say so.

I hope I have been clear and that I will not have to intervene again for this type of situation.

Regarding the study method, I do not agree. I believe one does not become a pianist by doing only technique. Surely Hanon, Czerny or others are useful books, which serve despite being "unmusical".

But they are not enough to be pianists. Playing the piano is like painting a canvas. It is not enough to have the colors and know how to obtain them from the primary ones. One must know the type of canvas we play on (the instrument), the type of technique to use, the nuances, the touch and the right movement of the brush on the canvas.

I don't know if I explained myself...

The discussion is extremely delicate but interesting, and it deserves to be continued without further "reckless" considerations about the preparation of other users / pianists.

As I said, I would like to intervene more, but not to have to "strike the gavel" (besides, I am nobody either to impose my idea, and I don't like doing it either) to restore respect among users.

I also hope I haven't offended anyone with these considerations, and I hope I have explained myself.

I am not making any allusions, I have not offended any category. I simply said, and I repeat in even shorter words: in the conservatory, during exams, whether students are internal or external, passing or failing their own exam is not due to a RECOMMENDATION (as many think! many outsiders think so!) but to their own PREPARATION. Then, obviously, exceptions exist... always and anyway. Children of conservatory professors who are enrolled in 4 courses and brilliantly pass the exams related to each course... and on top of that they also attend high school... classical lyceum, to boot... and even more: they are enrolled in theology at the university....... as in every field, exceptions exist!

Non ho fatto alcuna allusione, non ho offeso alcuna categoria. Ho semplicemente detto, e lo ripeto in ancor più brevi parole: in conservatorio, agli esami, interni o esterni che gli allievi siano, il superamente o non del proprio esame non è dovuto ad una RACCOMANDAZIONE (come molto pensano! molti esterni pensano ciò!) ma alla propria PREPARAZIONE. Poi, ovviamente, le eccezioni ci sono ... sempre e comunque. Figli di docenti di conservatorio che sono iscritti a 4 corsi e superano brillantemente gli esami relativi ad ogni corsi .. ed in più fanno anche una scuola superiore .. il liceo classico, per giunta ... ed ancora: sono iscritti a teologia all'università ....... come in ogni campo, le eccezioni ci sono!

one of the many I have heard, Bach's performances as a mass of notes, attributing them solely to private students

no, for heaven's sake .. I was wrong here! Those performances are also seen in internal students!

But I repeat, I have offended no one!

Private students out of the Conservatory. "We are the ones who do Music... you are all outside, Students and Teachers". I believe it is something that cannot be commented on. The university is free, Music is not!!! This also tends to encourage "internal forces" to pass judgment.

even if I am of the same opinion .... But does it seem to you that a degree in Medicine can be obtained by preparing at home and going to take exams at university? Likewise a degree in Engineering? Even perhaps by going to extremely skilled private teachers. The conservatory, with the new regulations, has become uniform in all aspects to the university.

I emphasize that I am completely opposed to the described study method, but, as a Great Man said: "I am opposed to your ideas, but I will defend them to the death". This naturally implies that the "opposites" serve to give the rest a reason to exist.

Oh well. I too respect other ways of thinking, other schools of thought. My technique comes from a school of a teacher from the glorious S. Cecilia. (now retired). However, I know many excellent teachers and concert pianists who use another type of technique: that's fine too! What I hear, in the end, is what counts. Then everyone is free to follow the school of thought they deem most suitable. As long as one does not say "this is useless", "I don't like this so I won't do it".

I would only like to express my regret and my bitterness because when I see a conviction that does not come from comparison and experimentation, I feel the aftertaste of prejudice, which I do not like. Trying Hanon and trying other paths is fine. Claiming that it is effective and that's it is not fine.

I have had the opportunity to personally verify how certain students who had followed a certain course of study played... and how other students with another course of study played.... certainly, it may not be enough.. but I cannot say that I haven't "experimented" and "compared".. I am the first to be against axioms! Just as when it is said, in complementary harmony, "one cannot move by neither straight motion nor contrary motion, by fifths and octaves",.. well.. but.. why? few explain it.

I do not agree with methods based on motor training, although it must be recognized that by moving the same muscle for two hours, everything seems to work better. But I haven't heard of "technique".

technique, for me, is a consequence of what was described above. The method I described above HELPS in the formation of technique .. in the assimilation, in another way, of technique.

I would desire, during my stay in this Forum, as a collaborator and Moderator, not to hear biased, allusive, categorical, or even offensive phrases.

There never have been.

in the Teacher that they chose... or that happened to them.

believe me .. I have had unhappy experiences too .. on this subject! I know well what it means..!

Regarding the study method, I do not agree. I believe that one does not become a pianist by doing only technique. Surely Hanon, Czerny or others are useful books, which serve no matter how "unmusical" they may be.

But they are not enough to be pianists.

Never said that! in fact!

The discussion, as it has developed, is very interesting.

I would add something specifically regarding the work of a teacher.

As a former Conservatory student, I can offer my opinion based on the experience I had, in a time that is now long past.

I have met some great musicians who were absolutely inept at teaching, and also conceited, arrogant, and completely insensitive and unwilling to question themselves as communicators or to seek "solutions" suitable for their students.

It is for no reason that these people have not formed any piano school.

Teachers—the real ones, inside and outside the Conservatories, regardless of musical ability—in my experience should be sought with a lantern; I believe there are truly few of them. Being a musician is not enough to teach music; one must have an aptitude for this discipline and the desire and ability to transmit something.

That is to say, we are facing the classic problem of the frustrated teacher that we find in all academic disciplines of every level and grade.

Now, coming to the subject of 3D [technique], I would very much like people to stop talking about piano technique as a separate subject, independent of music, as if we were merely pressing computer keys or a silent keyboard as a prerequisite for making music; but do we study typing just to apply it to music?

Independence of the hands, what is it? Piano technique?

I also studied (and how much I studied!) like all Conservatory students on Hanon, Cesi-Marciano, Longo and company (hardly) singing, but the moment you move on to the first pieces of real Music, when you read a page of Bach for the first time, gentlemen, a wonderful world opens up that those exercises, with all the variations one could invent, didn't even come close to.

Personally, I even wondered what they were doing there.

In my opinion, they are and remain pure typing, an outdated approach from an old school and nothing else, an obligation dictated by never-revised Conservatory programs, to which some teachers with no desire to question the learned "precepts" adhered "asininely".

Music is Communication.

Notes, fingering, keys, mechanics, fingers, are just a means, an "incident along the way" (I hope what I mean is understandable).

Students should be taught to give complete meaning to the page they are performing, whether it is Bach or any other Musician. A page of pure technique exercises cannot be Music and therefore, in my opinion, should always be taken with due distance; better yet, however, it should be paired with an application in the real Musical world, that is, in pages of Music.

N.B. I have purposely written Music, Musician, Musical with a capital M to distinguish it from those with a lowercase m, of which this world is full.

Probably here either we don't understand each other, or we don't want to understand each other. I am sorry too...

But in fact, what does he mean by "But does it seem to you that a degree in Medicine can be obtained by preparing at home and going to take the exams at university? The same for an Engineering degree? Even if perhaps going to extremely capable private teachers. The conservatory, with the new regulations, has become uniform in all aspects to the university"?

@tgdigit ... Thank you, someone needed to ease the tension of the misunderstandings a bit... 😳

I fully agree, there would always be a need for teachers willing not only to teach, but to transmit that extra passion...

I mean that the conservatory has institutionally aligned itself with what the other faculties in any other university are like, where private students are not admitted. There are faculties without mandatory attendance, yes... but you still have to be enrolled.

@tgdigit

I never said that the piano course should be done solely through Hanon, Czerny, Cramer, Pozzoli, Longo and the like... But that these tools are useful for the assimilation of a technique APPLICABLE without any problem to piano literature, to the repertoire... in which... one will not have to spend so much time solving "hand" problems... specifically technical problems... but one can almost immediately, after a couple of readings, move on to studying sound, touch, phrasing, interpretation, and analysis...

compositor wrote:

I mean that the conservatory has institutionally aligned itself with what the other faculties were in any other university where private students are not admitted. There are faculties without mandatory attendance, yes... but you still have to be enrolled.

@tgdigit

I never said that the piano course should be done only with Hanon, Czerny, Cramer, Pozzoli, Longo and the like... But that these tools are useful for the assimilation of a technique APPLICABLE without any problem to piano literature, to the repertoire... in which... one will not have to spend so much time solving "hand" problems... precisely technical problems... but one can almost immediately, after a couple of readings, move on to a study of sound, touch, phrasing, interpretation, analysis...

However, I believe that the discussion for music is a bit different. In other words, do you believe that one cannot learn piano well outside of the conservatory? Perhaps the conservatory has standardized itself to universities, but I believe it is not necessarily required to attend the conservatory to become good pianists.