Depression of Key

But I see what you mean. I just watched Volodos in Vienna (what a terrible audience) on a plasma and to me he is working with his bodyweight a lot precisely what you say "pushing away from the piano". This is exactly as you describe my "robot" where "joints had to be rigidly fixed..". Ah, not really what I mean in fixing. There's a big difference between what a light robot would have to do and what Volodos does. By fixing, I mean if basically tense a joint from all directions to hold it still (or even remove the joint and replace it with solid matter). It would be VERY hard to create a robot with the sheer number of joints that the human body has and make anything balance. I doubt if the technology is even faintly close. And if it was lighter it would be harder still. So in the case of robotics, it would almost certainly involve having to create a spatially fixed point (almost certainly simplifying by using considerably less joints and holding those that are included far more firmly than a human needs to), if you wanted to resist the return force and generate power with a light simulated arm. In Volodos' case, he can generate all the stability of that fixed structure, but with a very careful use of alignments and muscular activities- coupled with the resistance that comes from the mass of his arm. It's the unstable equilibrium that Alan talks about. In the split second it's stable, but the slightest change could throw the whole balance. It's just that the physics would suggest that Volodos's mass gives him a far easier ride in creating that balanced state- without the force that comes back at him throwing the whole thing off or reducing the force that makes it into the key. When some people seize up, they are emulating the excessively fixed structure that I was referring to, in a bid to stop this return force from reducing the transmission of energy, as it responds to the motion into the key. It certainly prevents the sound from thinning out, but it is neither healthy nor pleasant to listen to. Good balance, with a little give in many joints is better- to absorb the shock. True, but consider the fixing issue. If you don't have to fix the arm hard, you almost certainly make a better tone. In a big sound, the less energy is lost to the return action of the key (without resorting to fixing rigidly), the less you have to force through. Tiger Woods strokes a golf ball further than many people can contemplate, without even beginning to push his limits. It's a similar issue. Volodos's big sound still feels as if he's not even trying, much of the time. It's not merely about trying to sometimes play a notch louder, but not wasting energy as you contact the keyboard in general. Anyway, I thought of another example that gives a very strong illustration of how intrinsically linked the muscular action is with the use of mass and gravity: Imagine if a person were poised over a platform that requires a level of force to be depressed, ready to do a pressup on it. But he is wearing a theoretical anti-gravity device. Initially, he could be Chuck Norris, but the moment he exerts any force, he will be pushed away. No amount of strong can generate a productive force or motion. But now the gravity device slowly releases the equivalent his mass as he does a press-up. What is responsible for moving the platform? The muscles or gravity? The only scientifically rational answer is both. The muscles CANNOT do what they unless the gravity is released to match what they do. If the gravity is released too fast, he will collapse. But if you release at the right rate, he just feels the same action as any regular press-up. Once Chuck has had his whole body weight released, he can generate even more force against the platform by strapping weights against his back. Would it make any sense to say only the weight moves the platform? Not if he has to push up with his muscles. But it would make no more sense to say that the mass plays no role? Definitely not, as Chuck would have floated away ages ago, if he had his anti-gravity machine working. The two are absolutely intrinsically linked. To downplay either would not make any rational sense as they are totally interdependent upon one another. The weight is not only to stabilise, but is a determinant of what action Chuck's muscles are able to deploy. To talk of 'only stabilising' would be very misleading here. It shows just how important the stabilisation is, in terms of what reaches at the very end. The thing about playing the piano is that you cannot change the mass or make it non-existant. But you can regulate how much of the arm's weight is deployed in any instant- as if controlling the anti-gravity device in that example. This why I think it's so important not to pretend that weight and gravity are not an issue but to actively the levels to which it is either deployed or witheld in the most sophisticated and conscious way possible. It's a similar situation- where the occurence of the muscular actions is at least partially dependent on what weight is behind it. Sometimes you may take that level to almost nothing. But it's still faintly involved in what the hand can achieve. Then when you start to play louder, the mass begins to play a bigger role. The action which occurs in the hand is absolutely inseperable from the weight behind it. Although all the feeling may still be in the hand, what permits that action to enter the keys unimpeded lies in stabilisation. Both must be playing a role. It's just like Chuck doing his press-up. He'll feel a harder press-up but he still feels the press-up (and he has to do a damn good quality press-up, if he wants to exert a good force). But what enables the muscles to reach the level of force in the press-up the force behind him. Does that make sense? I think this is the best possible explanation I can give of just how intrinsically linked the action in the hand and weight issues are. I know the piano is much lighter than Chuck Norris doing press-ups with a sack of bricks on his back, but it serves to illustrate how you cannot apply forces without being repelled, unless you have a corresponding force behind them. One cannot exist without the other. The more mass you have behind something, the more it helps stop the force you apply being repelled- creating the possibility of the hand transmitting substantially more energy. This is certainly what occurs when I strap on a kg. My hand works better because it has more to push against. It's an amazingly clear feeling of how easily the return force is absorbed- instantly making a bigger sound with little loss in transmission. The quality and speed of the shock absorption, in response to a firm finger action, is absolutely phenomenal. I'm almost tempted to see if I could get used to it and start wearing the weights for performance! The fingers work harder, but only because they have something push harder . The instant the weight is removed, the sound becomes as thin as anything from the same muscular actions- until your brain registers the missing weight and starts adapting. Without that kilogram, the equations are all different and no longer add up. That single kilogram changes EVERYTHING! The first time I took it off, I was in utter dissarray for a good few minutes. However, I think that after the practise of working harder, the quality of finger action certainly carries across. But it's only when I allow my arm to deploy a touch more weight (instead of floating up at the wrist in expectation of the added mass) that I can start to play normally again. Above all, I believe that the most important learning experience is in the fact that it forces me to perceive the interaction between differing degrees of released weight and the finger activity- and how the different aspects must properly correspond for balance to occur.

The robot would need schockabsorbing devices for sure. What you say is that a heavy body/arm is better of to resist the return force or in other words it absorbes the counterforce relatively more efficiently to a lighter body/arm? That makes sence haven't heard Volodos yet live but Berman and that sound was unforgettable. I beleive Oscar Peterson belongs to that category. The thickness of your fingerpads I beleive is also important. There is another schock-absorber. I've been to driving-competitions and that confirms your theory a lot of proos participate with eminent technique but there is more than often a big guy who gets a lucky shot and win. And you're right Tiger was one of the first golfers who went to the gym. But.. I don't think it's necessarily easier to play if you have a large body mass it has disadvantages and to struggle to get the sound of Berman if you have a thin and light constitution is not a good thing. Probably some kind of physical training is excellent for pianoplaying a really strong back won't do any harm. Thank's for sharing this I will have this conversation in mind at the bord for along time.

"The robot would need schockabsorbing devices for sure." What I mean though, is that if it were a good simulation of a real arm, the shock absorbency would be integrally linked to the mass. So, if you start reducing the mass, not only do you risk being repelled too easily when you try to move the key, but you also remove the level of shock absorbency. So the joints would have to work a lot harder, both to stop those return forces reducing the quality of energy transfer, but also to stop the whole mechanism wobbling around all over the place. Reduced mass could cause an absolute wealth of problems. If a scientist wanted to make the perfect synthetic arm for piano playing, I really can't see why they might want to start by reducing it to a flimsier mass. It wouldn't need special shock absorbers. It would just need to have a reasonable mass and accurately simulated joints. "What you say is that a heavy body/arm is better of to resist the return force or in other words it absorbes the counterforce relatively more efficiently to a lighter body/arm?" Yeah, absolutely. I hadn't really thought this aspect through until this discussion, but I'm now absolutely certain of it. I should stress that certain aspects of what I say about the mechanics are best regarded as relatively well informed (I hope) theories- without a better physicist than myself to confirm some of the more elaborate issues. However, I'm absolutely 100% sure of this one. Even if starting in effectively 'weightless' balance, it's mass would be be certain to start absorbing that counterforce as surely as when you try to start pushing a wrecking ball (hopefully offering a little more give, of course, while still damping that force quickly- let's say more like a moderately firm spring). "The thickness of your fingerpads I beleive is also important. There is another schock-absorber." Absolutely. "I don't think it's necessarily easier to play if you have a large body mass it has disadvantages and to struggle to get the sound of Berman if you have a thin and light constitution is not a good thing." Yeah, I'd definitely agree. Kissin and Ashkenazy are often painful for me to watch, when you see them trying to force out the big sound that was just second nature to a Richter or Gilels. I'm not saying that a smaller guy could never make that sound or that a big guy will always find the organisation for a good big sound. But you can see why smaller physiques are often more likely to lead to a pianist who has to force and seize up, if he wants to make a big tone. Dealing with the force that the keyboard returns to you really IS more difficult- hence a smaller person is that much more likely to end up resorting to seizures in a bit to compensate, unless they have a very sophisticated understanding of how to move and align. And, yeah, thanks for your thoughts. It's a strange thing, because I am reducing the more obvious transmission of gravity more and more. However, the more I reduce it, the more I'm feeling that what is left (no matter how small) is of phenomenal importance, and needs to be judged and assessed, if I want to keep progressing. The more I consider the gravity issues, the more I am continuing to succeed in lightening up- not in weighing myself down. Equally, the more I think about the mechanics, the more convinced I am that not only does the role of mass and gravity make complete rational sense, but that it would even be virtually impossible to come even close to negating its role over a prolonged period of time. You can simulate weightless for a time, but the mass will always play a role when moderately big forces are applied- due to the bigger forces that the piano also sends back at you.

It's late but I came to think of the part in Alans DVD/book where you throw away your arm after a big strike and then "trick" your mind to have the same feeling while you kill the movement. I've used it a lot lately and I get really juicy sounds from that even on pp-levels. (It's even annoying as the options start to increase to a level where you never get satisfied!) This is probably a good example of what we were discussing? In other words duck-soap for Volodos.

It's late but I came to think of the part in Alans DVD/book where you throw away your arm after a big strike and then "trick" your mind to have the same feeling while you kill the movement. I've used it a lot lately and I get really juicy sounds from that even on pp-levels. (It's even annoying as the options start to increase to a level where you never get satisfied!) This is probably a good example of what we were discussing? In other words duck-soap for Volodos. Ah, yeah. I wasn't sure what you mean't at first, but I think that's a very good example. It certainly needs the hand to work well, but I think that killing the stopping point softly (having applied a generous action in the first place) is exactly the type of thing that is notably easier with a little more mass. I hadn't consciously noticed this specific element much until today, but upon looking at it, I've been amazed at how much more easily the hand settles, with the extra kilogram on. Trying to get that quality of stabilisation when the weights come off is one of my big priorities, at the moment.

Again I am really tied up now and cannot comment a length on this fascinating series of posts, but let me ask you this: how would you fit Nikodr's new series of posts into your experiences? He has gone in completely the opposite direction from you, with great successes which he describes with wonderful clarity. Take a look at them and let me know what you think. AFF

Nikodr's post is a joy to read."Honing..." is detailed but sharing the implementation experience of skilled pianists is in a sense more rewarding. To have the sensation of always manipulating the keys with the finger and the feeling that you rather leave the keys than go in to them are maybe the two most important thoughts I've catched up here. It's I guess impossible without a healthy arch. This thread is in a quite opposite direction but not necessarily in contradiction. Before leaving the key there is some kind of "take off" where mass posture bodyweight schockabsorbing etc is in play on some level. Like a force and a counterforce. Maybe I'm wrong here but I feel strongly that often what is working on a lesser piano does not work at all on a perfectly balanced grand and vice versa. And that must be a problem when dealing with technique. Best regards

Again I am really tied up now and cannot comment a length on this fascinating series of posts, but let me ask you this: how would you fit Nikodr's new series of posts into your experiences? He has gone in completely the opposite direction from you, with great successes which he describes with wonderful clarity. Take a look at them and let me know what you think. AFF To be honest, I don't think he's gone the opposite direction at all. It's actually very similar to what I've been doing, in very many ways. The thing about the wrist weights is that, while the example gives a clear illustration of what increased gravitational forces do (particular in terms of absorbing the return force of the key and in giving the fingers extra ballast to work harder against) the primary effect is to leave me with more of a floating feeling, rather than a weighted one. So, on the whole I've been lightening my arm, more than anything, when I return to playing normally. However, I've recently found a couple of places where my hand was bobbling around far too much- no matter how much finger action I seek to use. In some places I'm now having to weight down a little more heavily at the wrist, by releasing more at the elbow. There may be a touch of added muscular push, but I'm striving to avoid pressing as much as possible. I'm seeking to find just the right amount of release to match with what the fingers need to do- but not to replace it! This varies with how hard the fingers need to work. The harder they work, the more my arm is repelled by the return force and the more release is needed to counter that. So, while in some senses what Nikodr is doing is a little different, I would say that what we are both doing is trying to perfectly balance the role of the fingers against the amount of weight that is required for them to work. In his case, perhaps he needs to lighten the release of weight a lot more. However, I think we are both striving to find a balance in which the release of gravity is just right. Sometimes I find myself needing to release more weight (especially in louder passages) for the fingers to work against, to prevent excess pressing in the arm. So, while I'm sometimes using more gravity and sometimes less, the real issue is the interaction. It's a hell of a lot easier to progress when I consider how much of a role the degree to which I release gravity plays here (and I should stress that this is all from contact- no dropping and no collapsing is involved here). The main benefit of the weights was not necessarily to make things heavier or lighter, but to awaken awareness of how much of an effect both sides of the interaction play in what reaches the key- and allow me to start perceiving it better. When I simulate what it would be like to change the strength of gravity, via wrist-weights, it totally reawakens sensations that were formerly taken for granted. In nikodr's case, even if he is currently reducing gravity (or rather how much of that he releases), I still don't see this fitting in with any kind of 'gravity-denial' theory (any more than I would go with the arm-weight and no fingers theory). What is very interesting is the release of the shoulder. How does a shoulder both release and withold it's gravitational weight? It simply makes no sense. Either a shoulder is held in position or it is deploying a proportion of its weight (some of which may be balanced and cancelled further down, rather than at the shoulder itself). How can a joint release more but deploy less gravity? The same goes for the elbow. While he may feel weightless, that speaks to me of a good balance between forces, not of magically defying gravity. He may be thinking in a very different way, but I doubt very much that he is using a contrary muscular effort that perfectly cancels out forces of gravity- particularly if he is talking about using less effort. In fact, what he speaks of suggest far more that he stopped undue pressing (which should no more be associated with true use of armweight, than finger action should be associated with a tight wrist)- rather than that he has thrown gravity out of the window altogether. I believe pressing was specifically mentioned at one point. If he is releasing more, he may even be deploying more gravity from some areas, but balancing that out in a more comfortable way- hence the weightless impression. Surely he can progress further still by monitoring differing degrees of weight release to correspond with differing hand actions (sometimes heavier, sometimes perhaps even lighter)- rather than by pretending that gravity really is disappearing and leaving him weightless? While I have tremendous respect for the quality of the functions you describe. I'm increasingly inclined to think that the explanation as being separate from gravity is incomplete. In the same way that Arrau felt the weight of the arm and not consciously the finger, is it not possible that you are feeling primarily the finger- but leaving the interaction between finger and gravitational releases to the subconcious? Certainly, a solely arm-weight explanation is less likely to lead to a subconscious filling in of the gaps, than your own explanation is to lead to a subconsious ability to match the levels of gravitational release in accordance with the fingers. I suspect very strongly that a lot of what you describe as 'alignment' or 'release' is simply an alternate description for what mechanics would describe as using gravity as a notable part of the equations- just not in the transparent sense of falling or collapsing. I'm all for talking about release and alignment, but I really don't see the reason for leaving gravity as a kind of footnote- rather than acknowledging it as a key part of what defines good alignment and why particular releases play a role in more than merely comfort (after all, even if you view release primarily in terms of reducing stress and effort you release something without releasing its gravity- how can that not be of significance?). Also, when you say talk of 'internalizing' movements, I suspect that in some cases (especially with exaggerated finger stands becoming internalized to a stable hand), added release of gravity to counter the movement, while retaining the initial finger action, is what would primarily explain this process of internalization, via a mechnical equation. In situations where release of gravity is reduced, I think it is even MORE important to try to perceive what role it still plays- rather than pretend it doesn't play any role. I find that easily leads to stiffening, due to diminished sensitivity to the return force from the key. The less gravity is used, the more sensitivity I believe is required to judge the interaction between the finger and a proportion of the arm's weight. If that doesn't fall into place subconsciously, I see no less reason to explore the gravity than to explore how to energise a hand. At the moment, I believe that continuing to experiment and perceive these interactions is the single biggest issue, if I am to continue developing my hand. Sometimes I weigh down too much and become too tired and other times I realise that I'm am not giving my fingers enough gravity to operate against (especially my fifth). What you showed me has provided the foundations for the hand, but to develop it further I am certain that I need to explore the interaction with gravity more. I am equally certain that the role I am trying to perceive is consistent with fundamentals of mechanics and is not a false sensation. I think the only bad aspect of weight is when the two sides fail to balance. When the finger collapses, the two did not match. However, it's equally true that when an arm's weight is exactly witheld, in all but the quietest dynamics, a finger action must lead to either a stiff arm or one that bounces upwards. I don't think either statement should suggest that finger work is bad or that weight is bad. Put the two together and the negative aspects cancel each other out. The finger no longer collapses, and the perfectly judged release of weight counters the return force, rather than causing stiffening or the arm being repelled. I think the best use of weight is when the finger perfectly provides precisely what is required to prevent the fall/collapse that have happened, but is not permitted to occur at all. When the fingers use less force, the release of weight must also be less. It's a constant cancelling out between two aspects, that has nothing do with flopping, sagging, or dropping. Blindly seeking to release 100% of the weight 100% of the time would be absurd, but to deny the role of gravity (instead of seeking to achieve a finely cultivated ability to deploy a whole wealth of different levels of gravitational witholding/release) strikes me very much as throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I think it's far better to be clear on what is positive and what is negative, than to tar weight itself- simply because of aspects that are frequently done incorrectly.

YES! I asked the right question, got the right answer - I think we are really starting to get some clarity here. Wonderful! You recall my question... While reading through your perceptive and precisely evocative answer, it's getting clearer and clearer to me that when you say "weight," you are talking about what I call "skeletal connection" and vice versa. The way you describe the positive benefits of what you are doing aligns completely with what I expect from an intelligent cultivation of skeletal connection. And when you describe the flaws of arm weight misinterpreted ("no dropping and no collapsing is involved here"), you describe exactly what what we also try to avoid when we are "connecting skeletally." Passages such as ...but I'm striving to avoid pressing as much as possible. I'm seeking to find just the right amount of release to match with what the fingers need to do- but not to replace it! This varies with how hard the fingers need to work. The harder they work, the more my arm is repelled by the return force and the more release is needed to counter that. exactly describes the supple, alive kind of sinuous connection that I feel gives the most scope for real artistic expression, variety of tone, control of line. That's what makes them connect perfectly. Beautifully said! Not really. When I experienced that most dramatic of all "shoulders sliding/dropping forward" as I played the Horowitz Steinway, it was a very easy matter for my forearm to lift or draw back that little bit more that neutralized the increased "presence of my upper arm and shoulder. Point taken, although I still think we could say it's a question of semantics... weightless? Fair enough! Yep! Your eloquence and persistence are slowly but surely winning me over. I can see clearly that your process is rich, productive and entirely valid - thanks for taking the trouble to voice your experience in such clear terms... I hope our two ways of describing the same phenomenon continue to become increasingly mutually inclusive rather than the mutual exclusivity that characterized them at the beginning of this exchange. Anyone else care to chime in? Niko? AFF

Hello people! Nice to read through this interesting thread.Let me point what i tried to accomplish through the method i used. I was looking for clarity and speed.I noticed that when i was playing my hands were somewhat glued to the keyboard and not functioning correctly. I then assumed percentages of touch and how much my flesh could feel. For me now there is 5%,10%,20%,30% or more of how much my finger should touch the keys.I noticed that there are different contractions and different usage of the uparm when you try to feel the keys that way.In my way i can personally think that i actually lowered muscle usage. By playing that trick in my mind of "let's try to touch the keys and feel with the flesh with only 10% feel" i may have helped my forearm and uparm have softer muscle tonus. I then experimented with the bone alignment,when i am playing a series of notes how much does this maintain or change my default finger natural pylon structure?If i use parts of the tip of the finger how is the weight of the finger balanced on the key ? Can i have too much or too less of the finger tip or pad touching the keys?From what angle am i hitting the notes?What does the use of rotation in fast scale do in order to change the angle from which the fingers attack or "sting" the keys ? This is an interesting set of excerises one that one should do slowly at first.That made me have have further softer muscle tonus.I noticed that fast playing need not be strenus.Actually i am doing something differently now. I am studying with me sitting literaly on the floor and playing from that way down sitting like a budha.I noticed some interesting effects regarding weight and some fallacies of it.I noticed that the lower i sit and play the more speed i can have.That's what the videos i am preparing are about.Regarding height and the question if weight technique really is needed?If i am sitting so low where is the weight and what need do i have for it?If i can play cascades of fast notes that way then why when i sit on a normal bench would i have to use arm weight relaxization techniques? But sadly no matter what one tries to do,if the arch is not solid and the lumbricals and interroseus are not supporting it you will have hard time letting the fingers hover on the keyboard.Pianists that only curl their fingers when they play and they have not used actively the lumbricals and interroseus may feel a bit strange. I believe that the arch is responsible for the correct manipulation of the keys,a misaligned arch or collapsed means tension in forearm or elsewhere. Regarding my experiments now,i sit much lower than Horowitz or anyone else,i noticed that if i mainten my back and torso anatomically correct like when i am walking everything is ok.The feel is different,part of my shoulder area in the up area of the upper arm is like a brick stone and the shoulders are working much heavier now,but i dont feel any tension in the wrist,forearm,or back which must be good.And when i sit normally on the bench i feel like i am taller!I noticed that i was slouching a bit,and by experimenting with that lower sitting when i sit correctly my torso is far more aligned. Regarding the shoulder area i believe i was suffering from a displaced shoulder one that was so active and tense trying to mentain hand position and forearm.When muscle tension was reduced i noticed that my shoulder area was lowered and that different movements where now available to manipulate the forearms,and of course different wrist usage and approach to the keyboard. Regarding pressing i no longer do it.For me pressing is something 2 dimensional,pressing does not have to do with speed.You can create magnificent fortisimos without deforming the natural finger shape only if you know how to accelerate the fingers or arm.The same bones if are accelerated they can hit the key and the key descends faster now i believe most of us strive and feel tension and press hard because we have an inner insecurity and we fear we might collapse,so the pressing actually helps maintain the arch ? Right now i am in the chapter that experiments the forte sound with no need for press.The feel to play loudly with no pressure only by accelerating fingers.I can say that this is something VERY different from what someone may be doing in his whole life.Stronger muscular contraction does not mean for me faster key pressure or release,finger manipulation on the other hand teaches one how to speed up the key faster with no strong contractions. And some interesting things happen with octaves now,i noticed my whole arm and hand is much closer to the keyboard with more minimal movements and that i am playing more near the neutral area zone of the wrist (that means i dont always play with a higher or lower wrist but i balance somewhere between those 2),and of course i noticed much faster movements if i want them to happen! Right now i dont believe in the arm weight relaxization school.I believe that there is no need for it.If you want to run like the athletes do you can't do it and be relaxing the same way.But by knowing how to use your body,arm,legs and how to accelerate and run you can reach top speed,i believe muscles need to know how to work and by using the antagonistic sets like nature designed them you can work normally. But running top speed like a runner and in the middle of the marathon to stop and do relaxization while other runners are around that could bypass you is a big no no for me.And again what is really tension?Is it only when we feel bad ?Couldn't it be a different usage for that word ?One that defines good muscle usage that creates an inner energy feeling on that shows us that our system is working ok and that muscles are accelerating our skeleton fingers or self? That is the bad thing regarding arm weight and relaxization,instead of teaching us function and a way to direct our muscles and playing aparatus to accelerate the bones,they speak about relaxization and feel the hand relaxed and empty. None of the weight teachers i had ever spoke regarding the skeleton fingers or the bones of the forearm or uparm.They spoke regarding muscular usage and relaxization.And i believe the wrist staccato usage they teach regarding octave passages is a manifold.One that does not know how to grasp cannot play fast octaves no matter how hard he/she tries.One that cannot control and cannot rotate his torso how would he relax ?One that cannot feel the transfer of energy from varius points of the apparatus to another how can he simply "relax".And for god's sake,while my teachers had a beautiful arch (really!one that one could watch and feel beautiful),they never actively spoke regarding relaxization and the use of the arch,or how to use the advantage of the arch when one "relaxes" I dont believe in orders such as "Niko relax".I believe in orders such as "play",and "play something well".We want to play piano,we don't want to relax or make love when we are at the piano,we want to create sounds.If the music demands something like relaxization then i believe again that our playing system has to be active. I wish i could post more but i have some exams tomorrow and i have to study all night.But when i finish i will post more of my thoughts and some videos. Kind regards