How Many Hours A Day......

I read very beautiful and poetic considerations. Everything, in my opinion, starts from understanding. There is a cognitive path that leads towards speed and ease of execution. Consider that the understanding of the piece always leads us to a greater ease of approach and therefore, progressively, to accelerating the execution processes. Try it with a piece of andante tempo... we would never think of playing it allegro, right? And yet, just for fun, once brought to execution with the correct tempo, let's try playing it with "many more metronome clicks"... we will be surprised to be able to do it. Why is that?

Great Paolo! It is very true. One thing I always do is play pieces that usually run quite fast, but slowly, trying to give them an andante character... it doesn't turn out badly and, moreover, it's fun. I think that enjoyment is at the heart of learning, and even with technical exercises we must have fun; otherwise, technique becomes a burden. Renoir, the famous French painter, used to say: "If I weren't having fun, I wouldn't do it" and... how right he was. Additionally, I also think that our brain has incredible possibilities. Think about how when the piano is out of tune in certain arpeggiated passages or similar, some notes sound muddy, precisely because the detuning is sensed by the brain and compensated for with a very slight movement of the fingers, always performed by it (the brain), and the beautiful thing is that we don't even notice it much anymore. Has this ever happened to you? Anyway, thanks to all of you! It is truly beautiful to be able to discuss these aspects with people like you. See you soon!

I had never thought about this thing regarding detuning shifting our position. However, this means that you listen to yourself a lot, more than what the brain has to "imagine". Have you ever tried playing on a digital piano or with a silent keyboard without hearing the sound.... Well, believe me, after a short while of decoding the score and translating it by playing the right "keys"..... you hear the sound!!!!! Try playing a piece like this. Two things can happen:

1) you hear the sound just as if the piano were producing it.

2) you cannot play.

In the second case, perhaps you would discover that your memory or your reading was predominantly auditory, meaning that listening served as TOO MUCH of a "guide"

The best knowledge comes from playing "silent" from memory and with hands separate. One can reach the inner sound (without being.. Beethoven) Too much torture? Try it!!!

P.S. I agree... then you need to have the piano tuned.... imagine if, as a Tuner, I could argue the contrary!!! As a pianist I also agree, especially because "detuning" could inhibit pedaling choices.

Thanks Paolo! I will certainly try the experiment you suggested.

Regarding piano technique, I have learned firsthand that Hanon and various books solely on technique are practically useless: in fact, from my point of view, they are harmful because they stem from a reasoning process that the intuitive method performs. Let me explain: I know that for some this might be obvious, but I only knew 20% of what needs to be done in a practice session (even though I studied very little as a teenager). (I learned this by reading a book that deals with piano technique and musical study: if you want, I will give you the name and the link with some parts in downloadable free PDFs from the edition prior to mine. I am not citing the link because I don't know if doing so would introduce spam, since it is a site intended for selling a book).

Many students use a more or less standard procedure such as:

1 - Studying scales mechanically and Hanon-type exercises

2 - Picking up a new piece, reading it slowly hands together while trying to increase the execution speed

3 - At the end of the practice session, playing at sustained speeds to enjoy the piece

4 - Once successful, memorizing it and more or less mastering it

Without claiming to be a prodigy, if someone, for example, studies Bach's Two-Part Inventions, they will find themselves experiencing mental setbacks because the method does not teach how, first of all, to reconcile the two hands playing distinct parts that create seemingly insurmountable walls.

Technique is only a means: it must be acquired through music. Quoting Bach, in my opinion, in one of the phrases that struck me most for its deep meaning: "All musical instruments are easy to play... you just have to press the right key at the right time, and the instrument will play itself."

To me, it made me understand that music, before being a series of emotions, is a combination of sounds with more or less nuances within a unit of time: if one wants to make music, one must learn how to bring it out by slowing down, performing and repeating or breaking certain passages, and digging into oneself step by step, cultivating a study method that leads to a goal. If one proceeds by rationally analyzing what they want to do, then they will be able to make music by acquiring the technique accordingly. If one uses an intuitive, little-rational study method, it is very unlikely they will manage to play decently.

This is my opinion from the height of my incompetence! 😆

Hi Camy, I think it is obvious to everyone that the criticism Paolo and I raise regarding standard piano technique is separate from judging basic piano technique... If you don't study scales, Mozart, just to name one among many, you can even forget about him. All piano technique exercises for hand independence are also associated with this. In essence, we are not saying that piano technique should not exist, but having reached a certain technical level, the "labor limae" should be directed more towards a mental level than a physical level. I have always been of the opinion that studying parts of a piece with different rhythmic combinations is useless (I am obviously speaking from my experience). It is clear that such reasoning must be done with a high technical base! Therefore, it is not disputed that Hanon has its utility, on the contrary, but it must not be aimed solely at simple finger gymnastics. Hand independence and a high technical level are a matter of mental independence between the two hemispheres of the brain. Potentially, for those who know scales, we are all capable of playing a scale performing duplets in the left hand and triplets in the right or vice versa, but those who have not adopted this mental technique will never be able to do it. Execution speed is a different matter, which requires physical as well as mental exercise. Like athletes who must run 100m, it is unthinkable to win a race against those giants if one has never trained. Therefore, every technical approach has its own development and its own reason; the important thing is thus never to lose sight of the objective one sets for oneself: "I do this type of technique because I need to reach speed", or "I play scales with oblique motion because I need rhythmic independence between the two hands". In one case, one focuses on finger gymnastics, in the other on the gymnastics of mental independence. However, what serves as a motive in this type of piano technique study is always the performance of the piece. We are studying "Les Jardins sous la pluie from Debussy's Estampes", we must aim for touch and speed, therefore our technical study will focus on these two objectives...

Regarding the book you read, you can certainly cite it without problems; obviously, do not post links to pirate copies. Citing a book that struck you is certainly not spam; spam is primarily the advertising of other sites or portals on our site, or the blatant advertising of products unrelated to the standards of the site—for example, we are talking about music and you recommend buying a box of tomatoes. 😃

Talk to you later.

The book is called "Fundamentals of Piano Study" by Chuan C. Chang. The link is this. It deals with piano study, piano mechanics, and technique, explaining chordal attack, parallel motion, etc. I recommend it, it is truly well-made: the only flaw is that there are no illustrations. However, it is full of references and provides a good overview of what a pianist should be.

I agree with everything you said, Simone. I would add one more thing: improvisation can be an aid. I realize that perhaps not everyone is capable of improvising depending on their level and predisposition, but perhaps occasionally stepping away from the sheet music and trying to go in different directions can lead to searching for melodies and/or harmonies that we might never have imagined doing with the sheet music in front of us while acquiring technique. A prime example could be changing the scale one is improvising on, with a frequency of about one or two measures, over a more or less complicated chord structure, trying to provide different colors.

Dear Camy 86,

It is not easy to communicate with a few words what opinions and convictions I have regarding the study of piano technique. I anticipate that some tutorials on the subject will be released in Autumn, particularly regarding our "bodily approach" to the instrument. I want to preemptively state that I am opposed to any form of "bodybuilding" that tends, as they say, to develop "finger independence" or "the strengthening of limbs and/or muscles." Everything that insists on making the fingers "independent" and "apparently strong" very often sacrifices "interdependence." The participation of the wrist, forearm, arm, and shoulder are essential to the development of all—I say all—piano technique. The "fixity" of one of these body parts and the lack of interdependent participation never allows one to reach definitive goals and, above all, "clear" goals in our minds. Even equality and independence, part of these goals, cannot be achieved without understanding that the fingers are only the terminal part of the forearm muscles. Sometimes we insist, as many piano schools impose, on "training" and "exercising" with difficulty and constraint the small muscles, without resorting to the large ones. Energy conservation and coordination are necessary for us. No development of "strength" should be pursued. "Building muscle" is not necessary; in fact, it could "kill" the proprioceptive sensitivity of our fingers—the final "terminal" parts of our nerve impulses, vigilant and sensitive "guardians" of sound, attentive and instantaneous "messengers" of the brain, our "headquarters" of sensations. We will discover that great energy comes from "de-tensioning" some of our muscles... at the beginning of "understanding," even excessively, only to then recover the participation of those that are useful to us and do not fatigue us at all.

When we see a pianist playing with great energy and it seems to us that they are making no effort, then that artist certainly has a good understanding of how to use the parts of their own body. (I do not use the word "Technique"... which I think is a much broader and more "musical" term)

It sounds like a strange discourse, far from technique books like Hanon or Roslavets and very far from the approach of some "eminent" piano schools. But I think it is so. Thank goodness I am not the only one who thinks this. Over the years, I have observed that quite contradictory schools of thought have formed regarding the development of piano technique. One must choose, and one must, however, verify the effects of the principles stated.

I will soon attempt to make these convictions of mine more explicit with some videos.

In the meantime, if I may offer an invitation: always analyze the text, even just a few bars, and from there derive the "technical" formulas necessary for realization. This presupposes knowledge of certain "structures" that we will talk about before exemplifying this path.

Thank you and warm regards

Paolo

Paolo, I agree with you 100%. In the first twenty years of my life, relaxation was never taught to me: when I finally understood what "technique" should be, I was amazed at what I could do (even within my limits). Unfortunately, I had to learn it on my own, and as a teenager, I would never have thought that playing relaxed by involving the whole body was the way to play musically.

Talk to you later.

P.S. Not to be a suck-up, but the forum is truly well-made: from the graphics to the competence of those who write. Compliments!

Thank you. And I am glad that you feel you are on the right track.

P.S. The suck-up made me laugh 😆

Yes, in effect... musical pieces are paths in the end, and being different paths, they must also be approached differently, right? "To climb a scale, I will lift one leg first and then another, and the higher leg will always be the one further ahead" in memory of Dante Alighieri, but I won't do the same for walking uphill. This is, ultimately, technique. Specializing in a way of proceeding to move within that context.

P.S. An observation of mine that turns out to be very useful. While studying Chopin (the preludes), I was doing a study on the piano, fast, and not being able to achieve the desired result, I was quite distressed... one beautiful sunny day, I saw a lizard running extremely fast in front of me and... I assure you that everything became clear in my head. To run extremely fast, these small reptiles lift their bellies off the ground, staying very light without putting all their weight toward the soil. This made me understand perfectly that to execute rapid passages of scales etc., the hand had to be supported by the forearm to be able to graze the keys and not be blocked by its weight. Furthermore, it is a beautiful exercise to do on the keyboard: going from low to high with the hand without pressing any key (caressing the keys) to properly feel the sensation of the weight of the hand and how its condition will then be during fast piano execution. What can I say in the end. Thank you, lizard! Hello everyone and thank you very much for all the precious advice.

That lizard analogy is excellent! Indeed, when playing at speed on the piano, you have to forget about putting weight. On scales or fast arpeggios on the piano, it is very useful to use the fall of the fingers, which in my mind always creates a light rain effect. In Beethoven's Op. 110, which I am preparing for my diploma, there are divided arpeggios between the two hands in the first movement. Using this technique, the result is very beautiful. To legato slightly, it is also useful to use the sustain pedal, but without lifting the dampers completely, just enough to produce a timid legato that accompanies in an elusive way—I would dare say almost ephemeral—the harmony of those arpeggios. I am posting Beethoven's Op. 110 performed by Arrau, truly remarkable!

Beethoven - Sonata Op. 110 - 1st Movement

Beethoven - Sonata Op. 110 - 2nd Movement

Beethoven - Sonata Op. 110 - 3rd Movement

Beethoven - Sonata Op. 110 - 4th Movement

Open content (youtube)

Open content (youtube)

Open content (youtube)

Open content (youtube)

Thanks Simone! Arrau then......is without a shadow of a doubt the pianist closest to me, so to speak. And his Mozart interpretations? Truly unique. Just yesterday I was listening to the 331 and......I really don't know how to define such depth.

Back when I was studying, I did a master's with Rattalino in which he spoke a lot about this sonata and reprimanded a boy....anyway, the same Rattalino had his own ideas on the execution of chords and legato in certain passages of other Beethoven sonatas, and I didn't quite agree. Great choice anyway! And good luck with your work.

P.S. Even the 'little rain' one isn't bad at all, is it? Thanks.

I agree with you!!!! This research and these similarities are top-notch. Congratulations. We will talk about it in more detail. Simone's example of the passage in the first movement of the 110 is exactly right!!!! The hand, there, must be "weightless" and the fingers........as Cortot said...."like the wings of a bird".

Thank you Paolo. The similarities are very useful for understanding the mental attitude towards the performance of a passage. See you soon.