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.
Yeah, I'm sure we're not viewing it so differently. I'm looking very much from the pure mechanics point, as well as the functional side- but I don't think we're talking about huge differences in the actual movement. Would it be fair to say that the main difference is that you are talking about generally reducing weight, whereas I am talking about the importance of what is still left over after having done so (and what would happen if that, too, were removed)? From a mechanics, point of view, you could argue that it matters nothing whether you view the finger cancelling out what would have been a drop, or whether you feel weight releasing in response to the return force that occurs when a finger manipulates a key. It's just which side you look at, in one equation. However, I would say from a sensory, point of view, it's easier to maintain quality of finger action if you feel release of weight in exact proportion to the finger action- rather than finger action in response to arm release. So, I'm certainly a little more pro-finger than pro-arm, in terms of what is felt to generate the sound, but I'm still very much interested in the weight aspect.
Incidentally, I recently found that in the contrary motion chord patterns of the Waldstein first movement, my arm would bobble around a LOT (or stifften to stabilise) unless I released substantially more weight. At such a volume, the return force from the keys really is something notable here. I don't have terribly bulky forearms and I'm really thinking that this is why I really need arm-weight. f I don't use it, the response from the key is too great for me to stay in the keyboard.
The wrist weight experiment gives an overwhelmingly clear illustration of what a little extra weight does to stabilise against such a force. It's an astonishing shock-absorber. This is why I believe in monitoring and assessing the weight that is being released in response to the fingers. Simply thinking, be as heavy as possible, or try to make the arm 'float' as much as possible and I think almost any arm can err on either side. I realised today that if I purely 'rest' standing fingers on the keyboard, it really doesn't work the fingers terribly hard. For my own arm, even if I do use maximum armweight, it doesn't result in unmanagable force or great effort unless I start to beyond the weight. However, I believe that many other arms with more mass would have to withold substantially more than I would. It's all down to individual assessments about the interaction.
Ironically, I find I have the best chance of feeling 'weightless' if I feel release of weight (but in response to the intensity of finger action). If do not release in the black key etude, I am repelled far too much so, if I don't align the release of weight properly behind the fingers, I start to press, to stop my hand bouncing away- even when the fingers are working reasonably well. In this state I feel remarkably heavy. But when I feel release of effort, to allow gravty to work against that force (instead of additional muscular effort) I feel light. I think it has far more to do with quality of balance and and avoidance of unnecessary pushing- where gravity can perform the same task for free. For different sizes and proportions the amount of release required to achieve this can vary drastically.
Incidentally, what do you think:
The fingers worked well enough to execute the notes reasonably well, but I didn't actually feel pleased with the quality of movement at all. In small bursts, I can often get the floating feel for a section or two. However, there was very little of that here. The fingers and gravity didn't balance and I found myself having to push a little, to keep the hand from bouncing away. Because the fingers didn't have the right support to balance out the forces, I had to push, to create a stable position for them to work from. You could criticise in terms of 'alignment' certainly, but I feel that the reason WHY it's not a good alignment is because gravity was frequently not in any position to contribute to balancing the return force that the key exerts back on the finger. So not only was I using some muscles to hold it back almost entirely, I also had to additionally use others to press in the opposite direction, in order to prevent bouncing up and down. Would you totally disagree, or do you think that makes sense?
I think you could criticise based on failure to find an alignment where the weight would help to counter the return forces or simply in terms of alignment of the fingers. But I think that the improved alignment ought to be 100% identical, regardless of which side you approached it from. If approaching from the weight side, it would just be important to remember to use the fingers to energise more against the weight, once you have found the alignment where it is possible for them to do so. I feel that my fingers did not work as well as they could, because they were not aligned in the correct path to have something that they could confidently do so against (ie gravity). So whether you look largely at the weight or muscular action, I think it's just two different descriptions of one single product. I'm trying to use both aspects to lead towards the same thing.
Oh, and one more thing, while I do feel that some minor pressing is probably necessary even with perfect use of weight (for rapid legato fortissimo, say), I find that the optimum alignment to press a little is the same as the optimum alignment for letting gravity work in the direct path to oppose the return forces. So, from that point of view, I think that gravity is a superb point of judgement, whether you require additional forces or not. Again, it's not necessarily a different product at all that is the goal. I think it makes far more sense to start with release and see what it has to offer, before you start adding downward effort (purely in the arm now, not in the hand).
"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."
Can you explain what you mean by the percentages? A percentage of the flesh of your fingertip, you mean?
"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?"
Where is the weight? It is phenomenally present from beneath! In fact, sitting low I often feel that there is too much weight available and can get tired from having to withold it in quiet passage work. Does a man hanging beneath a chin-up bar no longer have any weight? Sorry, I'm coming strongly from a mechanics point of view, but the idea that you have to be above something to apply weight is a very big simplification. A high elbow means far less availability of weight (via release at the elbow) than even a very low one.
"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?"
What do you mean? The thing about weight is that either you are completely cancelling it out, or you are indeed using it (whether you perceive that usage or not). To completely cancel it out takes phenomenal effort- especially as not only are you holding your arm up with one muscle, but you also have to work directly against that with another, in order to put anything into the keyboard. Either you are releasing at least SOME of your arm's weight or you are permananetly working against yourself to an absurd degree. There is no possible physical alternative to that. Either you use weight, or you work it to withold it, or some combination of both. Nothing else can be done- and that holds up without drops being involved anywhere. This is the same when talking about permanent close contact.
If you want to feel how weak an isolated finger is, hold up the underside of one palm with your other hand and play FFF with fingers alone (you could even rest the whole forearm against something set up at the same height as the keyboard.. All the finger action in the world cannot make the same sound as when you stop balancing the wrist from elsewhere and allow the weight to play its part. The true FFF from contact is the result of weight aiding the finger- but without any dropping or falling bullshit. The finger perceives the work, but the arm's weight makes that level of work possible, without inducing stiffening or simply being repelled. If it's not weight, you're both holding back your arm's weight and pressing down in the opposite direction at the same time. Can there be any rational reason to do that all the time? Would you want to be in the equivalent of the position where you are entirely holding back your weight, at the palm? If not, you use gravity, whether you perceive its role or not.
"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."
But try that while supporting the underside of your palm. Whoops- where did all the sound go? So much for the finger doing it all. Some might claim that this stops the muscles working properly, but I think this is nonsense and purely a false sensation. The muscles of the hand work fine (why on earth should merely supporting your palm stop them activating to such a drastic extent?), but they are not aided by the gravity that they require to transmit maximum energy- which can create the illusion that it's the hand that no longer works properly, when the reality is that you have only changed what when you do not drop from any height.
"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. "
This doesn't follow though. The equivalent of not using any arm weight would be to attach them to a harness and constantly cancel their gravity by holding them up. All of a sudden they cannot push against the ground so much and they lose power and stability. It's not a very close comparison. With the piano, a release can perfectly work against the key when it repels you. If you don't repel that with something, you are pushed away. Gravity is basically a free force here. Why withold it 100% and have to push with your arm at the same time? Release contributes ACTIVELY to the required forces. Anyway, jogging is just too different to compare- you go sideways, not downwards- so release of gravity is not anything like as beneficial in any equations. In piano playing, it provides an exceedingly direct force in the plane of motion. What possible sense is there in leaping to the conclusion that if it does not account for 100% of moving a key, it must therefore account for 0%? That would be logically irrational to the point of absurdity.
"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."
So don't relax the hand. Problem solved. Why abandon every other aspect though at the drop of a hat, when all you have to do is fix the hand?
"I dont believe in orders such as "Niko relax".
Neither do I. I believe in forming an alignment that makes it possible to utilise relaxation positively in the arm, rather than be left with choice but to press instead. If you are genunely not using gravity, you do all the same work by pressing.
Think of it this way:
Gravity is not about moving the key- it's about allowing the finger to move the key with support. Now, the contradiction is that, from a mechanics point of view, that means it most certainly IS about gravity moving the key, as surely as it about the finger moving the key- they are two sides of one coin. But in terms of , feel gravity solely in terms of stopping yourself from getting pushed back by the key, when you feel your finger moving the key. Don't think of gravity moving the key for you, or you are almost certainly looking at collapsing- not healthy use of gravity. If you approach it that way I think you might understand what I mean rather more easily.
Think of gravity as a force that your finger to stroke the key with due support- not necessarily as a downward fall, or a downward movement. Gravity is almost invisible, when used well. What I'm talking about has nothing to do with actually falling into a key. Nothing at all. I'm talking about the role it plays in the type of actions Alan describes. It's just not the obvious type of gravity that is widely described (although, ultimately gravity is gravity, no matter how dubious some explanations of its use have been)
Can you explain what you mean by the percentages? A percentage of the flesh of your fingertip, you mean?
Imagine that the flesh of your fingertips have layers,imagine that there is the tip of the finger,the flesh,and the bones.Now while maintaining the physical natural finger position,try to touch the ivory very little like only a small layer of the tip of your flesh touches it,while on the same time you dont actively use the fingers or deform them.By doing this there will be great muscular reduction and more bone alignment.Or try this.imagine you are doing a massage to someone and you are very lightly touching him.So little like your hand will be just ready to leave the surface of the key.A better description would be "feel like your hand is floating on the keys very lightly.Of course i know that your uparm and shoulder area will play an important role in maintaining that feeling.A good solid arch will help too.
Where is the weight? It is phenomenally present from beneath! In fact, sitting low I often feel that there is too much weight available and can get tired from having to withold it in quiet passage work. Does a man hanging beneath a chin-up bar no longer have any weight? Sorry, I'm coming strongly from a mechanics point of view, but the idea that you have to be above something to apply weight is a very big simplification. A high elbow means far less availability of weight (via release at the elbow) than even a very low one.
You are right.I should explain myself more.Weight exists like you describe,but my action was to go against the general relaxization movements of the arm weight school.I didn't use the correct vocabulary.It is the way we manipulate the available weight.By sitting so low and doing some exercises i noticed that there is no need for relaxization,the fingers and forearms and uparm can be used without the need for specific relaxization movements like the arm weight school teaches.
What do you mean? The thing about weight is that either you are completely cancelling it out, or you are indeed using it (whether you perceive that usage or not). To completely cancel it out takes phenomenal effort- especially as not only are you holding your arm up with one muscle, but you also have to work directly against that with another, in order to put anything into the keyboard. Either you are releasing at least SOME of your arm's weight or you are permananetly working against yourself to an absurd degree. There is no possible physical alternative to that. Either you use weight, or you work it to withold it, or some combination of both. Nothing else can be done- and that holds up without drops being involved anywhere. This is the same when talking about permanent close contact.
I can't really understand what you mean about cancelling it out.There is no way for this to happen.For me as i see it gravity always exists,we don't live in the space area,and any object that has some weight obeys to the laws of physics.It is actually the way we manipulate weight and ourselves.Try to think this : There are contractions that hold and contractions that move.When you are using musculare effort just to sit or to mentain a position that may make you feel tension.But using contractions and muscle usage that moves your playing apparatus or accelerates your arm,hand fingers natural will make you feel like there is no tension at all and make you feel that you correctly manipulate your weight.Weight is never lost,we are not in space.
If you want to feel how weak an isolated finger is, hold up the underside of one palm with your other hand and play FFF with fingers alone (you could even rest the whole forearm against something set up at the same height as the keyboard.)
Why would someone ever want to do that?Isolated fingers is the worst thing that can happen,remember we seek not for finger independence that does not exits,but as Gyorgy Sandor is saying in his book "finger independence will never appear if there we dont have finger interdependence".
All the finger action in the world cannot make the same sound as when you stop balancing the wrist from elsewhere and allow the weight to play its part. The true FFF from contact is the result of weight aiding the finger- but without any dropping or falling bullshit.
I disagree.Maybe you can have fff without much weight by correctly accelerating your self and forearm and uparm and fingers.Very fast key movement results to a greater sound.But again you see ?I am not speaking of weight.I am speaking of uparm accelerating forearm,that then activates fingers that with the help of your whole body could produce tons of sound with little effort.
The finger perceives the work, but the arm's weight makes that level of work possible, without inducing stiffening or simply being repelled. If it's not weight, you're both holding back your arm's weight and pressing down in the opposite direction at the same time.
If i accelerate my fingers and use uparm,forearm,shoulder area and each part of the apparatus does the job then where is the weight?In that sense do you mean that a pianist that has more body mass=more weight has more sound ?No of course not.I have seen tiny pianists in the body make the most sound.I believe it is not how much weight you have but how you use it.
Can there be any rational reason to do that all the time? Would you want to be in the equivalent of the position where you are entirely holding back your weight, at the palm? If not, you use gravity, whether you perceive its role or not.
You can either fight gravity all your life or accept it and try to manipulate correctly the apparatus.I believe that as pianists we should have lots of tools and ideas regarding the use of ourself.I believe though that if one knows what he is doing he can do what he wants,and that can happen without analysis.
What do i mean?Of course one can hold back the weight or release it all if the musical requirement is as such.But the problem would be for me someone that does this all the time without knowing why he is doing it.I believe gravity is always present,no matter what there is this force that exists in our planet and the law of physics.Everything we do cannot go against those law of physics.Again it has to do with what you do,and with what musical ouput you are trying to accomlish.
Reason i tried to do a "honing of myself" was my personal pianistic problems.
"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."
But try that while supporting the underside of your palm. Whoops- where did all the sound go? So much for the finger doing it all. Some might claim that this stops the muscles working properly, but I think this is nonsense and purely a false sensation.
Again i see no practical reason to do this.Why isolate the fingers?With the movement you describe leads to finger isolation,that should never happen.Remember it is finger interdependence with the other playing apparatus that creates the sounds we want.
The muscles of the hand work fine (why on earth should merely supporting your palm stop them activating to such a drastic extent?), but they are not aided by the gravity that they require to transmit maximum energy- which can create the illusion that it's the hand that no longer works properly, when the reality is that you have only changed what when you do not drop from any height.
"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. "
This doesn't follow though. The equivalent of not using any arm weight would be to attach them to a harness and constantly cancel their gravity by holding them up. All of a sudden they cannot push against the ground so much and they lose power and stability. It's not a very close comparison. With the piano, a release can perfectly work against the key when it repels you. If you don't repel that with something, you are pushed away. Gravity is basically a free force here. Why withold it 100% and have to push with your arm at the same time? Release contributes ACTIVELY to the required forces. Anyway, jogging is just too different to compare- you go sideways, not downwards- so release of gravity is not anything like as beneficial in any equations. In piano playing, it provides an exceedingly direct force in the plane of motion. What possible sense is there in leaping to the conclusion that if it does not account for 100% of moving a key, it must therefore account for 0%? That would be logically irrational to the point of absurdity.
Muscles only know how to contract and relax or contract even more.Muscles alone do nothing.It is the combination,muscle isolation leads to disasters.Again it's not weight,but a combination of the playing apparatus.Fingers have bones,i try to think that my bones are accelerated.It's not weight alone that does it.
I am against the relaxization movements of the arm weight school.I am not against weight and gravity thought.
If we are correctly playing then there will be no need for relax.The fact that there is need for relax and large external movements or drops of the wrist etc means a lot to me about wether is right or not.
Now regarding the marathon that was just an example to prove you that we do not want to relax and sleep when playing piano,we need to use what we have in the correct way.A runner would never try to relax he wants to run at top speed always maintaining good body usage.The same i think for pianists.Those who play good are not relaxing,they are activating their playing apparatus correctly.In such way that there is no need for relaxization.You can relax when you go to sleep,or take an afternoon nap.When you play piano there is no need for sleep.
Think of it this way:
Gravity is not about moving the key- it's about allowing the finger to move the key with support. Now, the contradiction is that, from a mechanics point of view, that means it most certainly IS about gravity moving the key, as surely as it about the finger moving the key- they are two sides of one coin. But in terms of , feel gravity solely in terms of stopping yourself from getting pushed back by the key, when you feel your finger moving the key. Don't think of gravity moving the key for you, or you are almost certainly looking at collapsing- not healthy use of gravity. If you approach it that way I think you might understand what I mean rather more easily.
Gravity like i said before is something that exist in our laws of physics and in our universe.We can't go against it.Now i dont believe that gravity alone creates sound.If there was no gravity we wouldn't be able to play the way we do now on planet earth.Now regarding the finger pushing myself back,it is something that happens from the laws of physics,when you apply a force to an object you take back force too.You can take advantage of this in fast staccatos by letting the key make your fingers and hand rebound.I dont feel that gravity is stopping me from being pushed back if i want to.
Think of gravity as a force that
What allows my finger to move is the way i manipulate my playing apparatus.Gravity is there or not.I believe one can grasp even if he is on moon where there is zero gravity.Altough it would be difficult to manipulate a piano on moon.I have to agree with you in your sentece regarding the fact that it is invisible when used well.
This is really a very interesting discussion and it is a pleasure to see different opinions and to discuss them.I am looking forward for replies.
Kind regards
"By sitting so low and doing some exercises i noticed that there is no need for relaxization"
But of course there is need for relaxation. Do you lock the arm rigid? Can't we talk in functional terms, rather than in those that are so unclear? I'm trying to make this very much based on practicalities of the mechanics-not subjective impressions of highly imprecise meaning. Your arm is almost certainly neither rigid nor limp as corpse. So it's weight plays role. Whether you choose to analyse that and seek to perceive that role, or whether you simply let it happen in whatever way it happens (favouring perception that is geared more to other issues in the mix), that is down to you. But the reality is that you deploy a percentage of your arms gravity and withold some- probably in many different ways. gravity cannot be altered- but how much you release CAN. This is no mere footnote in what results- it's as worthy of attempts at analysis as any muscular action. Especially as they really are two sides of the same coin, when it comes to what defines the resultant force into the key.
"I can't really understand what you mean about cancelling it out.There is no way for this to happen."
Not true. You use your muscles to counter it or you release them for it to take effect . If the above were true, we'd be glued to the floor. A force is cancelled by an opposing force. Gravity acts down. So if you don't use it, you act up. So if you do not use it, you both push, downward while also working in the direct opposite direction. If you do use it, the force is the result of release. So a level of release can contribute a positive mechanical force, the same as a downward muscular action generates a positive force. And please don't leap to any supposition that release equals flaccid arm and hand. It's a sliding scale, not 'on' or 'off'- which is precisely why it warrants consideration, rather than being pushed under the carpet. You can ADD to the force with muscles. But you can only replace it by simulataneously pushing in two opposing directions.
"But using contractions and muscle usage that moves your playing apparatus or accelerates your arm,hand fingers natural will make you feel like there is no tension at all and make you feel that you correctly manipulate your weight."
You'll feel even less if you're not cancelling gravity where it has a positive use. Because if you are using none of it, you're working muscles against each other more than necessary.
"Again i see no practical reason to do this.Why isolate the fingers?With the movement you describe leads to finger isolation,that should never happen.Remember it is finger interdependence with the other playing apparatus that creates the sounds we want."
If you think this is my model for technique, you could not have misunderstood the purpose of the example more. It shows how destructive it is to the ability to apply force- when fingers operate without the aid of any of the arm's mass. WHY is isolation bad? Because of what you isolate the hand from- the arm's gravity. It's a truly concrete illustration of what gravity contributes. For best results, line up a table that you can put your whole forearm on. When that weight is supported elsewhere, the fingers are disempowered. They still act fine when you wave them in the air, but when they have to move something, the return force has nothing of any substance to counter it.
"I disagree.Maybe you can have fff without much weight by correctly accelerating your self and forearm and uparm and fingers.Very fast key movement results to a greater sound.But again you see ?I am not speaking of weight.I am speaking of uparm accelerating forearm,that then activates fingers that with the help of your whole body could produce tons of sound with little effort."
Once more the weight IS used or you are working against yourself. weight doesn't vanish when you push. Alan showed me how to use a finger action to make a big sound with no push. However, it requires weight. Support the underside of the palm and it doesn't work. Sure, push if you need to. But if you cannot make a big sound without doing so, how dò you know that you aren't wasting energy? If you are not using gravity you are putting a force UP that means you need to work harder downward. Are you 100% sure you're not wasting energy by pushing before you have accessed what is a free downward force? If you do not explore what gravity makes possible before adding additional downward forces (in combination with a proper hand action and with no drop or collapse), you simply cannot be sure. How much of the downward muscular force is wasted against a totally unnecessary upward one? Until you know what is possible through the combination of hand activity and a suitably released arm, you simply cannot put yourself in an optimal position to perceive what level of push is required for efficient pushing from further back.
"If i accelerate my fingers and use uparm,forearm,shoulder area and each part of the apparatus does the job then where is the weight?"
In your arm? Where do you propose it has gone? Are you exerting a force against it? If so, why? Do you want to waste a high percentage of your downward effort? Well, if you aren't using any weight, you are wasting your downward effort.
" In that sense do you mean that a pianist that has more body mass=more weight has more sound ?No of course not.I have seen tiny pianists in the body make the most sound."
Once again you are polarising to weight OR organisation. It's a totally flawed rational premise. Science will easily prove that it's harder with less mass. An arm of 1kg alone would struggle to produce true FFF without stiffening and locking. The less mass, the harder it is. That's why you can't drive a ping pong ball 300 yards on the golf course- no matter how aerodynamic. There is cast-iron physics that must be considered here. The less mass, the more you are repelled. Volodos doesn't just make it look easy. His mass is a huge aid to that ease. Science definitely backs that up. Please don' t simplify to ONLY A or ONLY B.
"You can either fight gravity all your life or accept it and try to manipulate correctly the apparatus."
Precisely. It's no footnote. It's an integral part that is no less worthy of understanding than anything else.
"Again it's not weight,but a combination of the playing apparatus.Fingers have bones,i try to think that my bones are accelerated.It's not weight alone that does it."
Indeed- could I have gone to any greater effort to make it clear that this my own point? Has one single sentence even slightly implied that I'm thinking "Nah, never mind doing anything with those muscles- just collapse onto the keyboard mate"? Sorry to be rude, but you really need to break from these constant attempts at polarisation. I can't begin to see why you feel the need to say "it's not weight alone" when I have gone to such trouble to clarify the two-sided dual nature of this equation.
"A runner would never try to relax he wants to run at top speed always maintaining good body usage."
But he isn't moving downwards. It's more like going down a building. Would you jump off and wait for the ground? No. But abseiling down would be a pretty damned easy way of using gravity to help. Now, playing the piano needs more active muscle use than that. It's not a great example either, but I cannot stress how flawed the jogging example is. If you have to move something down, gravity is a free force. to go out of your way not to exploit it would simply be absurd. Jogging is sideways. Really, there's very limited comparison..
" Now regarding the finger pushing myself back,it is something that happens from the laws of physics,when you apply a force to an object you take back force Toò .You can take advantage of this in fast staccatos by letting the key make your fingers and hand rebound."
Is that an advantage? Sometimes, but what if there's no time for it? What if you must remain still? Either you perfectly cancel the force with gravity, or you must stiffen. releasing the correct gravity to match it is far easier than pushing- a really common source of discomfort for such passages. Once you get louder, gravity may not be enough (depending on the mass of the arm) and you may have to start adding a little push. But if you don't start with gravity, you're exerting an upward force to counter gravity against a needlessly big downward one (much of which contributes nothing, due to being written off by the upward one) from your muscles. Starting to sound rather important yet?
Incidentally, for years I had occasionally tried to work my fingers in such passages. Any staccato from the finger resulted in appalling stiffening, so I went solely for arm staccato. I now realise that I can move my fingers- if I use gravity against the return force instead of fighting it with needless muscular pressure in the wrist. If you don't feel what is possible with release (where it serves a suitable function), it's really very difficult to use the muscles in a healthy way as a replacement. Feeling the role of gravity against the return force has since made it possible to work the fingers vigorously for staccato, without eithe bobbing up and down or stiffening. I may well retain a touch of muscular pressure. But it's nothing like as unhealthy as what was required before I came to feel what an easy head-start gravity provides.
I think the difference with how Alan would describe the above, would be that he would probably talk of 'muscular release' in the wrist. Personally I would be a little more specific and speak of a 'release of gravity' against a force that would otherwise push you away. I'd start from there and then try to encourage a student to firstly perceive the return force (without trying to fight it) and then perceive how allowing the gravity to act on the wrist can be used to balance it out. The product is likely the same, but I think the slightly more specific explanation as to how two perceived forces cancel out has some added value- compared to simply striving for release.
"What allows my finger to move is the way i manipulate my playing apparatus.Gravity is there or not.I believe one can grasp even if he is on moon where there is zero gravity."
Zero gravity? Are you kidding? You can grasp a key, but if it were zero gravity you would float away. There is gravity still- but It would be easy to prove with equations that playing FFF would be a lot harder there- either on one chord or in fingerwork. Volodos would have an even bigger advantage over a small pianist there.
