Staccato vs. legato

Leave your arm loose and do a scratching motion with one finger in mid-air. Does your arm move? You may well be able to detect some movement visually but not feel anything kinesthetically. This is why Hoffman said just scratch with your finger. For sure he did not create tension in his arm when he did that type of staccato. But he may not have noticed the little bits of responsive, adaptive movement that happen naturally in the arm (if you let it) when you do the cat scratch staccato. That makes sense. If the arm is incredibly free, it may automatically move, but move so minimally and freely that you don't even notice the movement at all. Taking that into consideration, would you say that the best way to practice a finger staccato (or any other type of finger individuation) is to focus on the finger action and merely allow the forearm to passively and automatically respond? That method should work- assuming the forearm is incredibly loose to begin with. I imagine that pianists who are already carrying excess tension in the forearm may get into trouble by trying that approach because the inherent tension of the forearm would prevent it from naturally responding to the finger movement, and you would simply have finger isolation and a tremendous amount of tension, as opposed to finger independence and freedom. If you are tight in the forearm, maybe you would need to focus on freeing that tension before you attempt to cultivate finger staccati or any other type of finger independence. Also, do you think that it would be wiser to focus less on the physical motions and to practice instead for a specific sound- as Hoffman probably did- and simply arrive at the correct physical motion through trial and error? Some people would argue that that approach is too risky and potentially injurious, as you may practice physical motions (in the process of trial and error) that are completely wrong and become habitual. Maybe some people are lucky enough to arrive at the correct physical motions through trial and error- due to talent, coincidence, a lack of bad physical organization, or what have you- but everyone else needs to consciously cultivate correct physical habits instead of merely focusing on the mental concept of a sound. Especially if you have bad physical habits to begin with, practicing only with a certain sound in mind- without any comprehension of how to physically achieve that sound- may simply serve to reinforce those bad habits.

Are you saying that the arm I'm not saying that the literal scratch is "wrong" or that he never used it. There are many places where it's very useful, if you allow the forearm to respond naturally. However, I'd never try to keep the arm still, when doing this. I'm also very doubtful as to whether it's what he did when he played fast. If you already know the extension style of action, it tends to come very easily of its own accord (even when you intend to scratch) allowing the arm to remain still yet loose. However, if you literally try to scratch (in high speed movements), the only possible way to maintain a still arm against the barrage of reaction forces is to brace it. You can see the effect on a desk. Rest your fingers VERY lightly on a surface then flick them back. Your hand will be displaced enormously, if you are loose. Even if you have a stiff arm, it will be very likely to move.

I agree that this is the case, but I'd also add that the finger has to act in a very specific way for this to occur. With the scratch, it's very unlikely that the arm movement will be small, unless you are fighting against such movements- especially at high speeds. If you aim forward slightly, it's much easier to let the arm respond passively without that response bouncing it around- because nothing is pulling the arm forwards. This was certainly the case with me. If you have associated a style of sound with a style of movement through experience, your brain has a feedback loop. If you don't have prior experience, thinking of the sound just triggers experimentation that may not necessarily lead to anything useful.

Yes, I observed exactly that effect. However, I wonder if when playing the piano (especially if it has heavy action), it may be difficult for some people to allow the arm to passively respond to the finger activity (even if the fingers are very light and free). They may try to allow the arm to freely follow the finger, but it might not happen because of unnecessary arm tension. Instead, it may feel like finger isolation and a stiff arm. If that happens, you may need to give the arm some active directions to move and to loosen up. I have noticed that when pianists try to play very lightly with the fingers, sometimes everything sounds on the surface of the keys, and they don't produce any sound. The question is how to get the arm to passively respond to light and free finger action (without actively controlling the arm movement). Perhaps the ideal situation is what Hofmann was probably doing. If you use the fingers with lightness and ease and try to remain completely loose, without attempting to control the arm motion, perhaps with practice you will eventually reach the stage where you truly do have complete freedom- with the arm naturally following the fingers. The other method of consciously controlling the arm (as Taubman suggests that you do) may be counterproductive in the long run as it prevents you from having active fingers that a truly free arm can respond to. Perhaps too much conscious manipulation of the forearm cause its movements to become somewhat forced and labored. That approach may eliminate some forearm tension on a short term basis, but it may prevent you from having optimal freedom. A forearm that naturally responds to the fingers will probably be even freer than a forearm that attempts to lead the activity (as the Taubmanites advocate). If you look at Edna Golandsky's demonstration videos, she actually looked rather tight in the arms, despite the fact that she talked about playing with a free forearm. Horowitz and Rubinstein both looked much freer in the arms than she did. Yes, I suppose that is why many pianists spend a lot of time trying to produce sounds that are similar to those of the great pianists, without satisfactory results. I wonder what allowed people like Hofmann and Horowitz to arrive at the right technique simply through their quest for sound.

Yes. It is indeed best to practice for a specific sound and let your mechanism find the way. But the people who espouse this method as the be-all and end-all forget that they went through a period of physical training where they acquired the necessary physical skills. My work aims to make up for the deficiencies in this skill-acquisition process. There's another serious problem your apposite question brings up: people have stopped going for the best or most appropriate sound because they don't know it's possible. That sound does not exist in their imagination. Our physical limitations have habituated us to a piano sound that is a pale reflection (and sometimes an ugly one as well) of what the piano can do when handled by a fully capable pianist. This is why Horowitz inspired so many of us (see David Dubal's book, Remembering Horowitz): he gave us the experience of that sound, opening up to us an entire new pianistic Universe. Thus my work is not only remedial, it also aims to empower us to go further, "to boldly go where no pianist (except the old Great Ones) has gone before:" to enter that other universe! AFF

Yes, I completely agree. I think that what is novel about your approach is that it effectively synthesizes the physical and the musical aspects. Too much emaphasis on either one can cause problems. Do you believe that pianists like Horowitz and Hoffman must have underwent intense and conscious physical training when they were students, but that they probably forgot a good deal of that physical training (since it became second nature) as adults? Even under those circumstances, I suppose that it is still possible that some of their physical training relied on inaccurate and subjective perceptions, even if those faulty perceptions lead to the correct result (i.e. the objective reality). For example, Hoffman and Horowitz may have been trained from the beginning to keep the arms very loose. When given subjective instructions that were not consistent with objective reality (e.g. play staccato only with the fingertip, play octaves only with the wrist), they attempted to execute those instructions, but arrived at a desirable result (the objective reality where the arm, naturally and passively, followed the finger or the wrist) on account of their arms' inherent freedom (which of course they consciously learned). Perhaps the physical learning vs musical learning is an issue of gradient learning. When you solidify your physical control of the instrument to a good extent (as the great pianists probably did at very early ages), it allows you to focus on the musical issues while trusting your well-coordinated physical apparatus to respond accordingly. Obviously, the latter state is the more desirable of the two, as it allows you to create music, and not just mechanics. Nonetheless, it may be necessary to toil over the former state before reaching the transcendence of the latter.

Exactly.

I finally had an opportunity to look into using Andrew's suggestion of an extension action for play staccato. I've experienced some improvement but I've still got a long road ahead of me (one that I look forward to, though). I was wondering, though, is there a tempo beyond which staccato is no longer perceived? I'll acknowledge that I'm nowhere near that tempo, if it exists, but maybe someone could recommend a piece to listen to that features rapid staccato passage work so that I can get an aural image of what it will sound like. Actually, any example of good single note staccato playing would be appreciated.