The art of playing the piano (big question!)

The choice of a Teacher, of a Mentor, is strictly personal. If you get positive feelings from these teachers, try working with them. Regarding the Classical path, I can only agree with what you are saying. Classical training enriches any musician. For a Jazz musician it can be precious, even if not indispensable. Then we have great extreme examples like Jacques Loussier or Keith Jarrett... or the great Friedrich Gulda who even had "parallel musical lives."

The point you are focusing on: concepts cannot be learned on YouTube... I agree. I believe, in my opinion, that the "visual" is even harmful. What we see almost never corresponds to what we have to do. Music must be listened to with more attention. Only a good Teacher who constantly accompanies the student can suggest what is right for them, beyond, understandably, the basic concepts that may be the same or similar for many or for all.

Then... naturally... talent... is no small thing! (there would be much more to debate on the subject...)

First of all, thank you for the response and I agree with what you said, but to go into a bit more detail, I am referring to an approach to technique in the style of Dorothy Taubman (which in turn seems to come from Ortmann); and if you find it useful, a debate on the subject can be opened to hear the opinions of various students and professionals.

"It is true that there is not only one technical 'way' and to achieve a result" and "everyone finds their own way and path":
I agree, although for me it is not entirely true. Let me explain better.

We are all human and therefore we all have the same anatomy; this means that natural and optimal movements (to be performed with or without an instrument) are the same for 95% of people, and there is no escaping that.
So, from my very modest point of view, the fact that articulation, high fingers, lateral wrist torsion (and not rotation), a wide hand, finger movements that do not sound, and all the defects/bad habits that even great professionals have are taught (or even worse, exacerbated), I believe this leads sooner or later to technical problems, fatigue, and even worse, physical issues.

The thing I like least (especially in the jazz world) is that many great Italian professionals and teachers I know do not dedicate sufficient time to teaching true piano technique which, in my opinion, is the foundation; this does not mean how to play or improvise at 300 bpm, but rather what are the correct and optimal movements that the body (and not the hand) can or cannot do on the instrument... even if everything is possible but, as I was saying before, anatomically I think there is only one correct way, and only one, which everyone can then slightly adapt to their own body.

For teaching (I am referring to standard methods), it is enough that you don't make glaring technical errors, that you use arm weight, and that the piece sounds good, which means you have no technical problems; if you cannot execute certain trills or passages, it means you have not yet sufficiently trained your articulation, when instead there should be no trace of articulation left, since it is not a natural movement of the body, especially at high speeds for long durations.

I conclude this note (which is also somewhat polemical due to my musical experiences) by saying that in my opinion, the Taubman approach is what currently comes closest to using the piano in the most anatomical (and therefore natural) way possible... But I also ask for your expert opinion and view on teaching (especially Italian)... because if what I have said is partly true, why don't many teachers of a certain caliber bother the student about playing the instrument the right way by caring for the details? I think this reflection should be made on every musical language approached—classical, jazz, latin, etc.—because the instrument is always the same: body and piano.

Thank you and forgive my lack of ability to summarize (under a small example)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=47w_6IKHA1M

Open content (youtube)

Dear Arcatoio, The discussion would be long and the path is long. The most natural approach possible is the right one! ..However, everyone opens their own shop. Understand me. In my life, when I was younger, I thought that things should be taught as I used to say... precisely because, as you say, I was convinced ...that we are ...almost.. all equal. I had to change my mind and I even had to earn the "patience" to correct only what is not right!. If you tell the student what is wrong and only that, you manage to leave the part of him that belongs to his musical personality....even if it does not necessarily correspond to yours. Everyone will play according to their own personality, naturally within certain canons of behavior. Those which I call the "fundamental basic gestures" are precisely the main gestures that are performed and which are used to achieve technique, which is nothing other than "the way of doing things". We will expand on the discussion; in fact, I leave the debate open.

arcatoto wrote:

In the meantime, thank you for the response and I share what you said, but to go into a bit more detail, I am referring to an approach to technique in the style of Dorothy Taubman (who in turn seems to come from Ortmann); and if you find it useful, a debate could be opened on the subject to hear the opinions of various students and professionals as well.

"It is true that there is not only one technical 'way' to achieve a result and everyone finds their own way and path":

I agree, even if for me it is not entirely true. Let me explain better.

We are all human and therefore we all have the same anatomy; this implies that natural and optimal movements (to be performed with or without an instrument) are the same for 95% of people, and there is no escaping that.

So, from my very modest point of view, the fact that articulation, high fingers, lateral wrist torsion (and not rotation), a wide hand, finger movements that do not sound, and all the defects/bad habits that even great professionals have are taught (or worse yet, exacerbated), I believe this leads sooner or later to technical problems, fatigue, and even worse, physical ones.

The thing I like least (especially in the jazz world) is that many great Italian professionals and teachers I know do not dedicate sufficient time to teaching true pianistic technique which, in my opinion, is the foundation; this does not mean how to play or improvise at 300 bpm, but rather what are the correct and optimal movements that the body (and not the hand) can or cannot do on the instrument... even if everything is possible but, as I was saying before, anatomically I think there is only one correct way, and only one, which everyone can then slightly adapt to their own body.

To teach (I am referring to standard methods), it is enough that you do not make glaring technical errors, that you use arm weight, and that the piece sounds good, which means you have no technical problems; if you cannot execute certain trills or passages, it means you have not yet sufficiently trained your articulation, whereas by now there should be no trace of articulation left, since it is not a natural movement of the body, especially at high speeds for long durations.

I conclude this note (which is also somewhat polemical due to my musical experiences) by saying that in my opinion, the Taubman approach is what currently comes closest to using the piano in the most anatomical (therefore natural) way possible... But I also ask for your expert opinion and view on pedagogy (especially Italian)... because if what I have said is partly true, why do many teachers of a certain caliber not nag the student about playing the instrument the right way by caring for the details? I think this reflection should be made on every musical language approached—classical, jazz, latin, etc.—because the instrument is always the same: body and piano.

Thank you and forgive my lack of summarizing ability (below a small example)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=47w_6IKHA1M

Hi Arcatoto, being human and having the same anatomy is not quite 100% correct. Certainly, we all have the same muscles, the same joints, the same skeletal system, therefore it is clear that everyone's hand is composed of 5 fingers, but we cannot look at things so macroscopically when talking about pianistic technique. It would be like saying that since we all have two legs, we could all go to the Olympics. Obviously, that is not the case. First of all, there are genetic "talents." There are those who have a fast hand by nature because evidently their white muscle fiber is more developed, which means the muscle reaction is faster compared to someone who is not genetically gifted in that way. Those with a large hand and those with a small hand. Those with greater coordination and those with less, those with excellent equality between hands, etc... In short, sensations, despite anatomy in the literal sense of the term, change from individual to individual.

As Paolo says, there are different schools of pianistic technique that were born from more or less established pianists. There is no technical school par excellence; there is a technical mix of various schools that suits the individual. What works for someone might not work "anatomically speaking" for someone else. So where is the right balance point? It is found when the pianist manages to express the right sense of the musical phrase in the release (fuori tensione) and thus with maximum naturalness, without tiring themselves out and without useless mechanisms. Often, incorrect pianistic gestures can be found in the sound. A musical phrase played with muscular tension assumes a harsh and pungent sound.

I will never tire of recalling a famous phrase by Horowitz when in an interview"

To RAI, they were asked what the most difficult thing to do on the piano was. He said that the most difficult thing is to make it "sing". I can only find myself in agreement. Making a musical instrument that we can define as percussion, such as the piano, sing, hides within itself many other concepts. The word "sing" in this context implies achieving such a technique that one no longer thinks about technical gestures but about the sound. It is therefore assumed that all gestures (or technical rudiments) have been so thoroughly assimilated as to become automatic in the musical context, and this links back to the idea that we have repeatedly tried to emphasize in this forum: namely, that technique is in the music and not vice versa.

Regarding teaching methods... There are many people who do not know how to look beyond their own nose, and these people SHOULD NOT TEACH because they cause more harm than benefit to the student.

Good music.

Open content (youtube)

Brief comment regarding Alan Fraser... some time ago I purchased his book "the craft of piano playing", finding it full of interesting ideas and observations, including techniques I was not aware of, such as "tapping". So I went online to look for his performances, and to my surprise I found very little, which reveals a performer who is, in my opinion, absolutely mediocre... even uncertain, rhythmically shaky. Now the question is... is it possible that a pianist can convey correct information, rich in content, to students even if he is not much of an performer? Or perhaps there are recordings of Fraser that demonstrate his value?

Crisantemi wrote:

Brief comment regarding Alan Fraser... some time ago I purchased his book "the craft of piano playing", finding it full of interesting ideas and observations, including techniques I was not aware of, such as "tapping". So I went online to look for his performances, and to my surprise I found very little, which reveals a performer who is, in my opinion, absolutely mediocre... even uncertain, rhythmically shaky. Now the question is... is it possible that a pianist knows how to convey correct information, rich in content, to students even if he is not great as a performer? Or perhaps there are recordings of Fraser that demonstrate his value?

It is not certain that the composer is the best performer of what they have written, and with this analogy I think one can say that it is not certain that whoever has the best observations is the best at putting them into practice. There are those who are good at teaching, those at practicing, and those who do both. Now, I do not know this pianist, so I am keeping my remarks general!