The Piano And The Gym

The topic has already been discussed, you can search the forum to see other opinions as well.

In short, I'll tell you my take: everything that contracts the muscle comes at the expense of fluidity. Doing sports is fine; doing weightlifting aimed at bodybuilding should be banned for a pianist.

Ouch, then I think I have a serious problem regarding my profession. To tattoo, you have to use quite a bit of force, both to "stretch" the skin so that it always remains taut, and to counteract the vibrations of the machine (which tend to cause wavy lines). I wouldn't want to discover that my pathetic attempts to play decently are being annihilated every time I work. Anyway, with my research I haven't found the previous discussions; I must certainly be using the wrong keywords. Can you provide a link?

zadra wrote:

Anyway, with the search I couldn't find the previous discussions, I must be using the wrong keywords. Can you post a link?

I didn't find anything either, I'm curious. In my youth, I lifted weights and played piano... it's not that I had these major problems. Actually, I did ask myself some questions; in the end, the exams went smoothly... perhaps for a concert pianist it is different.

Links appreciated, thanks.

I had also participated in this discussion but unfortunately I cannot find it. I am sorry even if it is strange... I will check better.

zadra wrote:

Ouch, then I think I have a serious problem regarding my profession. To tattoo, you have to use quite a bit of force, both to "pull" the skin so that it always remains taut, and to counteract the vibrations of the machine (which tend to cause wavy lines). I wouldn't want to discover that my pathetic attempts to play decently are annihilated every time I work.

But why should developing strength be a limitation for a pianist? I don't think the piano is an exclusive for "weak" arms... in short, there are those who are naturally endowed with a certain physical structure, I doubt they can't play the piano.

Who knows what PianoExpert thinks about it

More than with the arms, in my work a lot of strength is exercised specifically with the fingers. Counteracting the vibrations - which, I assure you, are quite energetic - forces the fingers of the right hand to stiffen. So far I have escaped tendonitis and other physical problems, but I am equally perplexed.

Here is the link...

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/topic/500-troppo-avanti-negli-anni/page__hl__palestra#entry2677

zadra wrote:

More than with the arms, in my work a lot of strength is exercised specifically with the fingers. Counteracting the vibrations - which, I assure you, are quite energetic - forces the fingers of the right hand to stiffen. So far I have avoided tendonitis and other physical problems, but I am equally perplexed.

Sandor's book, "How to Play the Piano", explains well what the causes of tendonitis or other problems can be... strength certainly isn't the cause, but rather how the muscles are coordinated. Ergo: it is more likely that tendonitis derives from an 'incorrect posture during piano studies ... than from gym exercises"

As a (amateur) bodybuilder, I feel like giving you some advice. I have been practicing bodybuilding since I was 16 years old.

I disagree with Simon on the issue of looseness.

I would say to focus attention on three fundamental elements useful for a pianist of any level.

1) Stretching (not the Anderson method) but above all the promising PNF (Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation)

You can find the main characteristics in the excellent work of Rolf Wirhead, ANATOMY OF MOVEMENT AND ATHLETIC ABILITY, with wonderful pencil drawings by this physiologist.

2) Posture and GRIP. Carlo Lonati (teacher of Vidusso and Pollini) recommended pull-ups on a bar (with full extension for a few seconds, both in supinated and pronated grip) in addition to clearly swimming. Extra-rotations and intra-rotations are FUN-DA-MEN-TAL both for general shoulder stability and to improve the fatigue resistance of the pianist's prolonged posture.

I also recommend the Arlaud movement with a maximum of 2 kg per hand, to ensure formidable lumbar and posterior deltoid functionality!

The levator scapulae and the supraspinatus must be treated with extreme seriousness (the entire rotator cuff is fundamental for the pianist/vibraphonist/guitarist/violinist and whoever else).

Other muscles that can create posture problems are the lower back, the abdominals (which should always be kept under training), and the cervical muscles. I recommend that what was said in point 1 applies here as well!

The grip is extremely important! It is precisely that which can ruin our piano skills. I absolutely advise against proceeding with push-ups using the palms of the hands.

One should plan to purchase a pair of handles (perhaps even the rotating ones, which are more physiological). Alternatively, use fists with appropriate cushions underneath to avoid bruising.

I recommend using good bodybuilding gloves. NEVER use a false grip or one without the thumb in opposition.

3) Rely on fundamental exercises with free weights, and rarely with machines. In fact, in the long run, machines can cause repetitive stress trauma much more frequently. Furthermore, if we want to create muscle hypertrophy, I remind you that bodyweight/free weight exercises are much more effective if associated with correct execution, good nutrition, a minimum of 8 hours of sleep, and correct recovery times (to be evaluated SUBJECTIVELY).

One last thing, I advise against using the flat bench, which can lead to non-physiological shoulder movements. Personally, I train at home and have not used a bench for at least 5 years, without having problems with results in terms of hypertrophy and elasticity.

I am a firm supporter of old-school Natural Bodybuilding (J. Vigna is the authority here). Valid advice can also be found in Tozzi's "Science of Natural Bodybuilding."

Before a concert, I recommend performing general stretching sessions with arm rotations (perhaps some light swimming motions). For me, it is a panacea.

Yes....

...Rereading my response, I spontaneously ask myself "How many Chopin Bodybuilders prizes exist in the world??"

Oh well, mine is just an opinion. In my view, if managed well, bodybuilding is a very effective weapon even for pianists.

It's a pity that when one thinks of bodybuilders, one can only think of Arnold... Who was nonetheless a witness to an ethical and cultural decay even in sports.

Very enlightening interventions, thanks for now.

foster12 wrote:

Yes....

...Rereading my response, I spontaneously ask myself "How many Chopin Bodybuilders exist in the world??"

Oh well, mine is just an opinion. In my view, if managed well, bodybuilding is a very effective weapon even for pianists.

It's a pity that when one thinks of bodybuilders, Arnold is the only one who comes to mind... Who was nonetheless a witness to an ethical and cultural decay even in sports.

Honestly, I didn't base myself on these considerations, and from the way you speak about it, you seem very well-prepared on the subject, certainly much more than me. I spoke more so based on my personal experience where, during 5 years of Kickboxing, I had to alternate with the weight room three times a week. It was a period when I didn't yet have clear ideas about whether to pursue piano studies professionally or as a hobby; consequently, I didn't deprive myself of the gym, just as I didn't deprive myself of other activities that are, let's say, "risky" for a pianist. However, I remember well that especially when I left the weight room during training periods, I was very sore. Once, I couldn't even take off my t-shirt after doing arms. In terms of piano playing, instead, when I sat at the piano, I felt great tension in my forearms, especially in fast pieces, and great difficulty making my fingers run to the point that I had to stop shortly after because I began to feel strong pain; yet, above all during Kickboxing training, the coach would make us stay for 30 minutes of stretching at the end of the workout, where we practically stretched all the muscles. Moreover, it is a sport in which muscular elasticity is fundamental: speed and control.

It's not that I don't trust what you say, but I am interested in getting more clarification from a friend of mine who is a physiotherapist and from a friend of mine who is a doctor... The subject is very delicate and perhaps requires a specific type of training that not all instructors are able to provide, or it could be your genetic predisposition, which allows you to have very elastic muscle tissue even after heavy strain, but perhaps for someone else it could cause the problems that I also encountered. I was saying that the subject is delicate and one should consult doctors and physiatrists precisely because some people might read an encouraging post and take up bodybuilding, which could bring them results in terms of muscle mass but, as in my case, serious problems in piano playing.

In short, I think it is appropriate, on this particular subject, to give the floor to specialists...

It is a continuous research that one conducts. Unfortunately, 99% of personal trainers are not prepared at all regarding this issue.

As you were saying, it is better to speak with a doctor (even a good osteopath) and a physiotherapist. Perhaps even those who play music too.

In this field, it is very easy to make a mess and worsen the situation. The idea is to train not just to improve aesthetics (which goes against the seriousness and longevity of training), but rather by thinking about muscular functionality and sporting purposes (eh eh... maybe in our case Xenakis).

One thing is certain: postural vices of any kind certainly do not favor the pianist's longevity.

I believe that Bodybuilding (now improperly called Body Building) exposes one—if followed by serious people (and not by the "average square" personal trainer, Virgin/20hour model and other "airport types")—to fewer injury risks compared to other sporting disciplines.

In my case, it was my mathematics professor (now a dear friend and amateur astronomer) who introduced me to the J. Vigna method of 1955. To be clear, it is a valid method but outdated in several respects.

Back then I was 1.87m tall, typical ectomorph structure (slender with a tendency toward kyphosis and a weight of about 76kg). Playing the piano for hours caused a "worsening" of my postural habits. It was then that my doctor definitively advised me to start physical activity.

Today I weigh 85 kg (10 years difference), I have resolved most of my postural problems (alas, always lurking) and others due to ligament laxity in the left shoulder.

I have never claimed to lift 100kg barbells, and I have never even filled a concert hall.

Mine is just one experience among many.

Well, perhaps we had different training methods in mind even though we were both talking about weightlifting. The bodybuilding I practiced was aimed at developing muscle mass. I remember that my gym trainer would have me do very few repetitions with an enormous weight. To give you an idea, I remember 50 kg plus the 7 kg curved barbell for bicep curls, or 110 kg on the bench press. I often reached the fourth repetition exhausted, and he would help me with the last two. This was the method for building muscle mass; I didn't do any definition work at all since the work in the kickboxing room was very aerobic. From what I understand, your type of training seems to be more aimed at physical well-being than at muscle growth within a certain timeframe.

Initially, you left me a bit perplexed, I must say the truth, because I heard you play Etude Op. 10 No. 1 and your pianistic gestures were anything but tense. When you then told me that you did bodybuilding, my eyes widened and I wondered why I, unlike you, was all stiff despite doing a lot of stretching (we are talking about about 12 years ago); that's why I had thought of something of a genetic nature.

Eh eh... Thanks Simone! I can't deny that I really gave it my all to record that study.

I didn't train with weights for about a week before recording it. When I have to perform in public, at most I go for a little run.

That method you are talking about is forced repetitions. Necessary to recruit certain types of muscle fibers specific to strength and hypertrophy.

PUnfortunately, it is an unfortunate choice for the joints and is only used for short periods. At least I got the best results this way.

I cannot deny that one of my goals is also hypertrophy. I reiterate my opinion that hypertrophy, if well-considered, can really be good for a musician.

Oliver Sacks, the famous neurologist and great storyteller (whose masterpieces "Musicophilia" 2012 by Adelphi and "The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat" by Adelphi I remember) defines us as "athletes of small muscles."

Regarding the use of the barbell in a musical context, an enormous discussion opens up. Personally, I don't use it and I don't like using it because it often leads us to non-physiological movements.

On the contrary, dumbbells and resistance bands, or pull-up bars (to hang from), allow for movements much more similar to us "primates."

Have you ever tried Arlaud's movement, Simone? And PNF (essentially a type of stretching associated with contractions to facilitate tendon lengthening)?

In the case of the forearms, shoulder, and calves, PNF has yielded remarkable results. With the pectorals a bit less so, but unfortunately my bodybuilding genetics leave a little to be desired...

My teacher Tino turned 87 a few months ago. He has lived his whole life working for music.

Melodic notes.

Simplicity.

And thanks to his way of playing, he has managed to live well until today. He always played for people. The most prestigious venues in Milan.

Other hobbies?

The garden.

More than once before going to work in the evening, he would hoe all day and move the earth.

On those evenings, his hands (and body) were stiff, imprecise, heavy.

Not infrequently during the evening, a client would approach saying "compliments maestro for your extraordinary touch..."

There.

Therefore, I conclude with an idea from Horowitz. The audience is divided into 3 categories.

1) those who come to see how you are dressed or to show off their corporate status;

2) colleagues, who in many cases are a pain in the ass even if your name is Horowitz

3) the people who have come to listen to you and believe in your music and your way of playing.

Gym or no gym, I don't think that the first and second categories, nor even that client of Maestro Tino, care if we worked on our deltoids and triceps the previous afternoon. :D

This was just a "parlor" observation of mine.

I thank you as always for the excellent insights and for the opportunity you give me to debate with you; if I may, I feel compelled to dissent on just one particular point...

foster12 wrote:

Therefore, I conclude with an idea from Horowitz. The audience is divided into 3 categories.

1) those who come to see how you are dressed or to show off their social standing;

2) colleagues, who in many cases drive us crazy even if your name is Horowitz

3) the people who have come to listen to you and believe in your music and your way of playing.

What Horowitz says, he says while addressing the audience. Here it is important to understand whether one plays for the audience, whether one plays for oneself, or whether one plays for the composers.

I believe the answer is a mix of all three, and although we have spoken specifically about the audience here, I am certain that Horowitz thought the same way. On the contrary, I would not think so regarding Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli, who instead wanted the audience's applause to be directed not at him, as a mere performer of the piece, but at the composer.

A performance certainly cannot exist without an audience, but we are the ones who provide the added value, not the degree of sensitivity or culture of the audience. For me, a performance is aimed at expressing what the composer wanted to communicate and convey by exploiting our ability to translate the musical text into music. Bringing even a small hint of the aesthetics hidden behind the piece to an audience—the traits of which Horowitz has described well—is already a great achievement.

Personally, I play for myself and I try to do so, as much as possible, by knowing and analyzing all the various aspects of the piece. The beautiful thing is that one never stops discovering new things. Some things are understood by studying the lives of the composers, and I have found it very productive for interpretative as well as cultural purposes to read the composers' correspondence. In a letter, the true character of the composer is present—one who confides in a loved one, expressing their true self, and which is therefore of great importance in determining their character and trying to make it one's own. For this reason, reading must not be distant; one must empathize with the composer who writes in order to understand them; only in this way can we approach their thoughts on life, on love, and thus on music. It is also very important to know when a work was written, at what point in the composer's life, and in what emotional situation. All of this cannot be ignored for the purposes of a good interpretation. Thus, the discussion expands to something more personal than the audience listening to us.

In reality, I believe (or at least this is what happens to me) that, for a pianist, the audience exists for the first 2 minutes of the concert...

What do you think?

Good music!

Thank you Simone for your opinion on the matter.

I mean, after two minutes are you completely alienated?

In my opinion, that is right for classical music.

In my case, however, it would become counterproductive. Even just to say "Good evening" to the guests when they enter and greet me or smile at me.

The great lesson I learned from my teacher lies in the way you read the audience listening to you. In never isolating yourself, but "chatting" with the audience (metaphorically speaking).

Also a good presence - the image - unfortunately plays its part. Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli and Michael Petrucciani are two examples.

For the genre I play, seeing a pianist hunched over the keyboard, absolutely focused on his musical abstractions, is not necessarily appreciated by the audience. Rather, a pianist who almost never looks at the keyboard, who can execute a "remote" pianissimo when a customer calls on the phone, in my experience, is greatly appreciated.

Returning to the subject of the gym, it is truly a shame that among the specializations of personal trainers there are Formula 1 and Golf, and not training for Musicians.

On the other hand, of all the PTs I have met, at least 80% of them could only advise you on what kind of tattoo to get or which martial arts move to do.

Bah... surely that will be a form of culture too...

Well, I only play classical music. For me, the audience is a distraction. Sheet music or no sheet music, there are so many things to remember during the performance; if I think about the audience, I lose focus on my musical goals and I can't "enter" the music. I know I am playing well when I feel emotion and when, at the end of a piece, I realize I have conveyed something to the audience. So, for me, the audience comes last.

They are certainly two different intentions and two different mindsets. In your case, as you rightly say, the pianist adapts to the client who calls; in my case, if a phone were to ring in the hall, it would be sacrilege—in fact, before the concert, people are always asked to turn off their cell phones.

Recently, I heard Jerome Rosé in concert in Todi. All Brahms music; as soon as the concert had started, let's say after 5 minutes, a member of the staff approached him and took a photo. Rosé stopped playing, said: "No photo, please!" and started again from the beginning.

They are very different fields. In your case, it seems to me I have understood that music serves as an accompaniment to the audience's evening; in the second case, the audience moves specifically to listen to the music.