The Neuhaus Arch

The Polish pianist (a very serious pianist if you ask me) posted an exercise on YouTube that is meant to obtain the so-called Neuhaus arch (A.W. calls it "bridge"): He says that the exercise does not create "strength" or anything but is just meant to open the arms and make the whole "machinery" available, so we stop playing "from the elbows" as Chopin wrote about young Leskiewicz. What do you think about this idea? P.S.: Aleksander Woronicki also has other quite interesting stuff on his channel: Paul

(a very serious pianist if you ask me) posted an exercise on YouTube that is meant to obtain the so-called Neuhaus arch (A.W. calls it "bridge"): He says that the exercise does not create "strength" or anything but is just meant to open the arms and make the whole "machinery" available, so we stop playing "from the elbows" as Chopin wrote about young Leskiewicz. What do you think about this idea? P.S.: Aleksander Woronicki also has other quite interesting stuff on his channel: Paul It's interesting, but I see a big problem in his explanation. He speaks only of "resisting" with the hand while pushing with the arm. The student fails to do that and we see his hand collapsing badly on the 5th finger side under that arm shove. When at the piano, sure enough he pushes and merely tries to resist with the hand- which collapses. It's not being proactive at all, but merely acting to save the arm against the collapse that comes from arm pressure. I've recently done a post (that just needs a few added videos) with an extremely rigorous proof of why merely resisting arm pressure can never be as effective as preventing collapse with actual movement to grow out the arch. The basic principles are very much in line with what Alan has taught me, but I've added a lot of my own proofs as to why these principles are quite indispensable beyond any reasonable doubt. I think the example in there of how to use a hammer effortlessly and without straining gives a very powerful illustration of the sheer difference between the major problem with a mindset of "resisting" unwanted movements, compared to simply taking them out of the equation by moving in the opposite direction. My personal version of the exercise would involve a press-up style movement from a static wall. The hand is never merely resisting then- everything is about opening AWAY from the wall. You are never shoving against the wall and asking the hand to "resist", which is a notable mistake in my opinion. Only by making everything about intent to expand, rather than about intent to resist something, can you make the process truly efficient and optimally effective. If the student were growing away from a static wall, rather than trying to stop the teacher pushing back at him, his fifth would never collapse inwards in the way seen there. It would encourage his hand to be more proactive at the piano too, rather than resist and then go limp and droopy in the arch (which completely disconnects the "suspension bridge"). Ability to "resist" collapse just comes of its own accord when you learn to grow out and keep trying to grow out further still. But you cannot resist without severe effort if you haven't actually learned to complete and sustain the movement of expansion first.

I clearly watched and understood the clip with a different focus in mind. Notwithstanding the theoretically incorrect explanation, I understood his idea more as directly related to the Alexander Technique: the hand arch as a way to free up energy from higher up (not necessarily pushing down into the keys upon the structure) as explained in this clip by Master Teacher and Practitioner of the Alexander Technique Eileen Troberman: . Paul

I clearly watched and understood the clip with a different focus in mind. Notwithstanding the theoretically incorrect explanation, I understood his idea more as directly related to the Alexander Technique: the hand arch as a way to free up energy from higher up (not necessarily pushing down into the keys upon the structure) as explained in this clip by Master Teacher and Practitioner of the Alexander Technique Eileen Troberman: . Paul But everything about it suggests a manner of approach which is objectively flawed. In a way, the difference is very subtle. But it's a complete game changer when you look at the results that are possible. The student's fifth finger collapses really very badly, because he's trying to resist rather than trying to grow his hands. He's being actively encouraged to press with his arms and this is what squashes his hand into collapse. The pressure he is encouraged to make by his teacher pushing the door leads to him squashing his hand from both ends. At the piano, this is still in evidence. If he started against a static wall, it would much easier to learn the coordination of growing in the right direction- rather than of trying to fix his hand while squashing down against it with the arm. It's easier to learn to generate movement of your own free choice in that type of situation, than when forced to resist something under duress. Only having already mastered the act of expansion will lead to an effective way of coping under duress. A make or break situation of being forced to resist the teacher's push on the door is more likely to break than make, unless the student has first learned to truly grow his arch of his own free will. At the wall, I don't press IN to "test" the arch. I press AWAY from the wall to learn the activity that creates it. Only then do I even consider checking for raw strength by actually pressing inwards and checking that I can withstand that. Coordination must come before strength tests. At the root of it, this is the only style of activity that can resist force effectively and without major exertion. The seemingly subtle difference in his method encourages shoving inwards and stiffening to fight collapse, not growing outwards! The student doesn't succeed in passing the test, so he needs something more basic first. Strictly speaking there is no energy from higher up except where things are actually moving towards the door/keys. It's not difficult to learn to harness energy from the upper body, but what is difficult is to understand the necessity to grow the hand in the OPPOSITE direction to any arm pressure. This means that you no longer pile masses of arm energy into a collision (for relatively little in return) but can instead channel smaller amounts of energy effectively and without wastage. This is the essential link for maximum success (with or without arm pushing) but it can only come from intention not to resist movement in the unwanted direction, but to actively generate it in the opposite direction. The student is simply not feeling that in his hands when pushing the door, but only in his arms. Likewise when he comes to the piano. Whatever the goal was, it needs tweaking to work to the full.

Hi This guy really knows how to play the piano and I think much of the material he presents is quite indispensable. Nothing new but still.Unfortunately the structure and organisation is a big mess so a not so experienced pianist will have difficulties navigating in that site. On the other hand I am totally convinced that without having built up the arch and the hand nothing will work and that is the reason why the "pupil" fails to do the Neuhaus arch. W has other concepts (very useful) like shaking whip staccato etc and none of these are possible to execute without a healthy arch and a fairly strong hand. If you want to play like Martha A this is a sine qua non. Her hand is like a mechanism made of titan. I think Alan covers all these aspects the difference is maybe that he is fanatic about the arch and collapses-for very good reasons. But it is always interesting and profitable to explore all ideas. I'm really glad I focused so much on Alans stuff it took me some years to get this arch but now when it's there all is (more) possible. Happy New Year Eric

I am rather fanatic about the arch and collapses myself, but I am probably a little more concerned with the "knees" (the middle joints of the fingers) than I am with the "hips" (knuckle bridge). Actually and from my observations, I suspect that many students collapse their knuckle bridges to spare their weak "knees" (especially the pinky side). The "roof" of the dome is often already fragile as it is, but since the "legs" can't really hold the structure because of weak "knees", it's safer to just collapse the whole structure since that gives at least a feeling of more "stability" on the keyboard. In this context, I would very much welcome Alan's possible (?) fourth book: "The Bee's Knees" or something. There is very little info online on how to solve such problems. Since we all have a different focus, even when watching the same material, I'd like to mention what I see happening with the student in the clip I posted. He seems to completely misunderstand Woronicki's intention with the exercise. The single purpose of the exercise is to "open up the arms" to FEEL the bridge between shoulders and keyboard, not to create "strength" anywhere. The student, however, doesn't get it and tries to make it into a localized feat of strength he is clearly not up to. This (the student's) approach would require either a very strong hand (and fingers) or experience, awareness, and ideas of the kind Andrew writes about on his blog (in what direction does one move one's fingers to compensate for an inherently weak structure). P.S.: In the context of this clip, collapse of the hand arch could have been corrected, but it was not the focus of the clip, therefore Alexander chose not to act upon it. I am confident that he would correct that in another context if it lead to unsatisfactory sound results in a piece at the instrument. Paul

HI The pupil seems inexperienced I guess he is working on La Vallée so he will have lot's of opportunities to try out the bridge As I have the utmost respect for everything coming from Poland and Russia I read everything written in Worinickis site. The site is a mess but well worth going trough. But the mess is challenging one's patience the french version is better and the polish is probably even better. The bridge is common knowledge for most but other things he writes about I guess is not taught everywhere. Playing very fast passages brilliantly and even is what many are striving for and there is no way this is going to happened without the technique of "lightness" "hovering" etc. Mobility is very crucial in piano playing . And I think Worinicki does a good job there it's straightforward and easy to understand.That's a leitmotiv in many teachings from Lhevinne to Amy Fay when she met Deppe and discovered what Liszt "really" did. There is even a very useful clip about the way to use the "knees" if you dig really deep in the mess. I agree fully with your concerns about the "knees". It was Alan who got my attention on that with his concept of skeletallity. I use them knees when I remember it so to speak mostly in sweet passages but also in rapid scales. Every "technical concept" is of course mixed together and quite undisthinguisable in real playing so I don't really know what I do and it's probably dangerous to dig to deep if you're not specialised on teaching. Maybe. Eric

I haven't had time to look at all the clips but I am with Andrew in the idea that you can't just resist the pressure of the arm, you have to activate the fingers to move the key. Have just spent a week with Kemal in Miami where he consistently and emphatically repeated this part with me. So Woronicky may be on the right track in what he's doing, but possibly still adhering to old school explanations that don't do his ability justice. AFF