Question about acquiring the goods

Dear Esc, I sympathize with you. 1) Yes everybody got off topic very quickly. 2) It's amazing that when they did at least try to stay on topic they didn't really approach the answer I would give you. 3) It is a real and difficult problem you address. It is the problem that motivated me to do everything I've done in the past 35 years. I would say the one prime thing that separates a good technique from a world class technique is the presence of a healthy lumbrical action. I mean an action that doesn't save the hand from collapse but which happens a split second earlier in time so it serves to actually move the key. All your studied should be oriented towards this, but it's not so easy to achieve. Go back and take another look at all the pianists you cite - they are not all equal in the amount of lumbrical they use. Pogorelich for instance looks like he employs it but it's a false impression, he's actually doing a form of arm weight technique and using the lumbricals to save his hand from collapse instead of using it to move the key. Lang Lang does not use the lumbrical in any way near to the way Horowitz uses it for instance. Clifford Curzon uses it well (see the post in Master Videos). Rubinstein as well. Michelengeli and Argerich as well. They are pretty well at the top of the list. Even Ashkenazy is not 100%, he's got some sort of arm weight thing mixed in a bit. Gavrilov is all wrong, at least the old Gavrilov - the new one I don't know... Must stop here but please do think seriously about this. AFF

Hi Yes forgetting the obvious in a discussion like this is typical you come to think about pretty much everything except for the real sine qua non. So in a way this speaks for the benefits of the hard way Lhevinnes and Rachmanninovs commonsense method. Will save you great time in the end.

I think there is some ambiguity here in the term "world-class technique." If by world class technique you mean the ability to tackle certain portions of the piano repertoire, to have freedom to express one's musical thought and to execute flawlessly, then the answer would have to be different from Prof. Fraser's. Marc Andre Hamelin for one does not play with very active lumbricals and this may limit his musical communication. (I think his skeleton is almost perfectly aligned but not fully activated.) But he clearly possesses a world class technique. Hamelin says that scale practice is unneccesary and that exercises should make your where you play with both hands moving in opposite directions. On the other hand if "world class technique" means a superior capacity for color and orchestration then Prof Fraser's reply does directly address the original question. But then someone like Nyieregyhazi later in life would have to be a world-class technician in spite of his wrong notes and slow tempos and flubs. First you have to distinguish between having a basic command of the piano's space and sonic capabilities and having a precise and flawless execution of whole pieces. The latter is more a question of discipline and patience than anything else. Rachmaninoff and Heifetz were paradigmatic examples of these qualities. They used to work on pieces they had played countless times before at such a slow pace that people who overheard them couldn't even recognize what they were playing at first. However this basic command of the keyboard, something that Rubinstein relied on, is much more of movement is what really counts. The movement of your skeleton has to reflect the hierarchy of patterns in the music or for that matter in the technical exercise. This is why you should try to boil things down to the simplest gesture and work on getting the right feel and movement for that first. Your understanding of the construction and ordering of a passage is very important not just for your musical communication but for your being able to play it effortlessly at all.

I would never underestimate the "mental" part many incredibly good pianists plays miracously well without strong lumbricals Hamelin is one and Sebok another. Obviously you need both to reach the ideal of Alan and more "russianoriented" artists. Especially in very big halls and with eg an all Liszt-program. By me Hamelin does loose it momentarily like in the Chopin Sonata #3 last movement but all he does is still very beautiful. I think lumbricals is definitely something that does need maintainance at least I lost it while I quit playing for a very long time.The mental part didn't disappear I could pretty easily recapture patterns and play my old pieces but I didn't have the strength to keep the dynamic level as I wanted.It took my like two years to regain strength and I still lack some endurance. I don't think playing scales etc is the only way to get strength but if you have limited time it's rather effecient. Then you can spend more time learning the scores in a café or whatever. Nyieregyhazi did hold his hand in a "potent" position but if you ask me he had lost his strength it just looked "potent". With his never-practise and boosing attitudes he probably was living entirely on his musicality and mental capacity.

Some interesting points. I agree with you about scales. The point is not to fall into a mechanical routine and to expect whatever exercise it is you are doing to have an effect. If it doesn't educate you and sharpen your awareness it is probably not helpful. Many great pianists swore by scales. Yet it seems that the ones who practiced scales a lot tended to have long gruelling practice routines. I am thinking of Serkin and Rachmaninoff. Hamelin and Gould could get amazing results very efficiently without lots of scale practice. Do you really think that Sebok did not have strong lumbricals? His grasping motion looks pretty strong in the slow movement of the Bach Busoni. I think he had one of the most perfect and efficient skeletal alignments and his demonstration of whole body involvement in piano playing is one of the most informative lessons on piano technique out there.

After some thought I really don't know. But his Liszt sonata does sound dynamically soft like Edwin Fisher.But I guess strong lumbricals is not about volume (the stronger they are the softer you can play) it's about differentiation With Sebok it's just impossible he (like all from his environnement) had extensive "mecanical" training so I guess he just does what he wants.His masterclasses are just wonderful and he has the ability to change the whole concept of his students on the spot (like with the orange). It's all really individual like Serkin having this big problem of not being able to play between the black keys. Or Rachmaninoff who might have had problems with artritis. Or Hoffman who thought building up strength was useless it only lead to more work to keep those muscles functioning at all.

I think there is some ambiguity here in the term "world-class technique." If by world class technique you mean the ability to tackle certain portions of the piano repertoire, to have freedom to express one's musical thought and to execute flawlessly, then the answer would have to be different from Prof. Fraser's. Marc Andre Hamelin for one does not play with very active lumbricals and this may limit his musical communication. (I think his skeleton is almost perfectly aligned but not fully activated.) But he clearly possesses a world class technique. On the other hand if "world class technique" means a superior capacity for color and orchestration then Prof Fraser's reply does directly address the original question. But then someone like Nyieregyhazi later in life would have to be a world-class technician in spite of his wrong notes and slow tempos and flubs... Valid points, Kannan, thank you. To clarify, by "world class technique" I clearly mean the second category. Hamelin is great but to my mind lacks certain elements in his sound that would indicate a world class technique. And to me these missing components are clearly related to a less than optimal lumbrical use. Nyieregyhazi on the other hand clearly possessed that lumbrical potency and used it to amazing musical effect. By the way, I would agree with you that w.r.t. the lumbricals Szebok was pretty darn good as well. Thanks to both of you for your contributions! AFF

When looking at videos of pianists, what is the best way to determine if someone is employing arm weight or lumbrical action? Does lumbrical action simply involve much smaller and more efficient movements of the arm and hand (at least in terms of appearance)? Sometimes, I see pianists who use a lot of seemingly superfluous arm motions, perhaps for the purpose of relaxation. Hofmann may be an example of that, if you look at the way he moves his arms so profusely during chords and cantabile passages. Is that an example of what would be considered arm weight technique- relying on the so-called release of weight into the keys, instead of using the skeletal structure?

Hofmann's arm-movement might be superfluous but it doesn't present the same problems for him as it does for many other pianists because he has a very strong lumbrical activity. Just notice how independent and movable his fingers are. His arm-movement also is not just a matter of dropping weight into the piano but one of aligning the finger with the rest of the body. In order for the finger to have the freedom to manipulate the key it must be aligned with the rest of the system. Hofmann also repeatedly warns against relying on the weight of the arm instead of the activity of the fingers in his book. No doubt his tremendous colour and sonority and tonal differentition came from his very articulate fingers (and pedaling). I think the whole purpose of the Craft of Piano is to move some of these old and boring debates through the concept of skeletality. The skeleton is a fully integrated system so that every local arrangement of bones affects every other local arrangement. The fingers need freedom and movability to manipulate each tone while the arms shape the overall phrase gesture and set up the dropping of the fingers. That seems like a decent summary of what goes on. Any real expert has a superior ability to percieve details and the big picture. Just think of a conductor that works to perfect every detail of balance, articulation, color while still shaping the music into a coherent gesture. This approach to piano technique helps with the same thing. You should be able to articulate each tone with more precision while shaping the overall gesture. John Ogdon was another very good practitioner of arm-weight.

Hofmann's arm-movement might be superfluous but it doesn't present the same problems for him as it does for many other pianists because he has a very strong lumbrical activity. Just notice how independent and movable his fingers are. Indeed. I was watching Hofmann's video of the "Emperor" Concerto, and he may have the best scales I have ever heard. I remember we were talking about how Horowitz's mechanics are sometimes overrated, and I think I see exactly what you mean. There is also a recording of Horowitz playing the "Emperor" Concerto, and if you compare his scales to those of Hofmann, it's clear that Hofmann had better scale technique. Hofmann's scales were faster, more even and more accurate. However, even Hofmann's scales weren't perfect. Occassionally, I heard a few notes that were a little out of the keys, such as during the second set of scales that begin around 1:28 and toward the end of the first octave of the run at 4:01. If you watch the scales, his fingers are indeed incredibly agile and independent, his hands look so graceful and at ease with a solid arch and a level wrist, and his arms look perfectly free. However, it does look like the fingers aren't doing all of the work. The forearm looks like it is clearly following the motion of the fingers, but that may be a passive response to vigorous finger activity, as Mr. Fraser has talked about. I wonder if some disagreements about piano technique are merely down to semantics. I've been reading Hofmann's book, and he did say that you should always play with the fingers and avoid using too much of the arm. I suppose that doesn't contradict the way that he plays in the video, as he never said that the arms don't move at all, only that their motion should be minimal. That might actually be the same way that Taubman views the role of the forearm, even if they explain things different. Taubman has insisted that the forearm is always involved in piano playing, but its motions simply become minimized at a fast tempo. Perhaps that minimization is exaactly what Hofmann did, even if he describes the end result very differently than Taubman would. Taubman would never suggest playing mainly from the fingers, as she insists that type of mentality leads to injury. That may be true for a pianist with a lot of tension in the forearm, but that view may be totally off-base when dealing with healthy pianists who don't have any excessive tension. I'm always fascinated by what great pianists have to say about technique, but I wonder if I should even trust them. It's been said that many great pianists don't truly understand their own technique. What they actually do when they play may be very different than what they say they do. I don't know if that's the case with Hofmann, but I still think that his book can be a rich learning experience. I completely agree. I think that the focus on skeletality has provided the missing link in the debate over finger independence vs. arm weight.