10 years ago by
A Pianist
Here are a couple of videos I've uploaded to illustrate the points I made in the thread about standing:
Now, as Francis Bacon said, experiments often tend to "prove" what they set out to prove. There's certainly no conscious bias behind it (after all, what's the point in trying to "prove" something that has no accurate bearing on what is possible anyway?). However, I'm well aware that there's a possibility that somebody might say I'm doing something different to what I set out to illustrate and any suggestions along those lines are more than welcome.
Anyway, the first video shows a thumb extending at rather indirect angle to the table. Because the arm starts by "hovering" and makes no release, the thumb naturally skims across the surface and does nothing productive. After that, I start with the same "hovering" feel but release the arm slightly on initiating the thumb action. As you can see, the thumb action becomes productive- and there is certainly no "falling" or "collapsing". The weight allows it to bond with the table and create some real pressure, when it raises the rest of the hand away. When doing this with a more direct thumb angle, the weight of the hand will automatically come into more (like when pushing into the ground from a rope). However, I deliberately chose a more indirect line, to illustrate what a massive difference the state of the arm makes. If you start held and stay there, a thumb motion has little hope of doing anything.
(I ought to have done those far slower, by the way- while it reflects the point, I wouldn't recommend flicking anywhere near as fast)
The second video shows something quite similar on the keys (although I'm afraid I was concentrating so much on illustrating the movement that the musical line is horrible!) At first, the arm starts by "hovering". The thumb activates into the keys with minimal intent at arm release. The sound is not totally empty, but you can see that the thumb is limited in what it can achieve. Look how fast it actually moves, yet such thin tone! It's poking down from an overly supported arm and gets little stabilisation from its weight. The second knuckle also tends to bounce up pretty quick. The movement looks "fast" but the resulting tone is thin and superficial. Look how quickly the thumb actually moves here, yet such a little sound!
After that, I release the arm slightly to correspond with each thumb activation. The thumb motion looks vastly more productive and produces a much bigger and more resonant tone (although I should stress that I am aware that there are plenty of holes and inconsistencies in the quality of movement and that the thumb tends to start a little overly collapsed! While it need to room to activate, it would ideally have started from more in the middle). Also, the 2nd knuckle doesn't bounce so quickly from reactions. It rises rather slowly and gradually on the best movements. Some notes hit the right balance better than others, but the thumb is what activates the key- and the arm clearly doesn't collapse or fall into every key. However, there's no change in my intent at movement in the thumb itself. The difference is that I released just a little more in my arm to put the thumbs same action in a situation where it is directed more productively through the key. You might say I'm just using the thumb better, but I experience the difference in the arm's release and that is what prompts the possibility of identical intentions in the thumb becoming more productive. Based on the physics, I really don't believe that's any subjective illusion.
I'd be very interested in any thoughts from Alan and anyone else- whether they are based on agreement or the suggestion that I'm actually doing something totally other than what I believe is happening.
