The piano as two different instruments/Note attack and decay

I'm going to repeat the questions I asked few days ago which have not answered by anyone:

My hypotheses is that there is only one variable: speed of the hammer. So you disagree with Bob t that weight can also be varied. Your hypothesis is consistent with my experience that I reported above. However, our ear seems to be more sensitive to timbral variations than to loudness variations. What is the basis of your claim? It is only a hypothesis based on my experience. I know of no experimental substantiation. ocd I don't think this means very much in isolation though, because it's all relative- and there is no kind of way of drawing equivalence in differences. It's probably far easier for someone without training to distinguish a brass instrument from a piano, than to recognise a few decibels difference in a computer generated pair of sounds that retains the same timbre, sure. However, I wouldn't believe that the human ear distinguishes the (smaller) difference in timbre between soft and loud piano notes in a concert hall, more than their absolute volume. It's interesting to test the idea on youtube. I've often found that despite dynamic levelling, I can still get a good feeling for whether the pianist uses a lot of dynamic range or not. However, it can sometimes be surprising to hear the difference, if you can hear a better audio recording of the same thing afterwards. Soft notes can genuinely sound loud. Having said that, you can often get a sense of big fortissimos when listening with the volume turned down far lower than what would have been heard live, so there's certainly something to be said for the idea that even small differences in timbre are very important to what he perceive. Still, you can't really put one up against the other in a fruitful way. A five percent increase in volume, say, wouldn't particularly have any parallel in a theoretical five percent alteration in timbre. Timbre is a factor that encompasses huge numbers of variables, rather than a single quantifiable figure.

I'm going to repeat the questions I asked few days ago which have not answered by anyone: I got a friend to listen to some of my Beethoven the other day. After I'd played, she was talking about depressing the keys more with weight, rather than with speed. She actually grabbed my a fingers a couple of times and pushed them into the keys, which made for an extremely strange sensation. I could feel a huge difference. I've actually been practising doing this a lot recently, with my other hand. It gives an amazing sense of how strong a finger can be and how little effort is required from the hand that is playing. Once it's in place, I can let go with the other hand and the finger tends to maintain the structure with little continued effort. I tried the fingertapping mentioned in the book once or twice, but I'm personally finding that it's more productive if they other hand actually holds the final joint still. Anyway, this really helped to feel how much slower a key can be depressed, yet still make a big sound. See if that helps. When there is no energy being lost through sagging joints (and when you feel the armweight bearing down through the structure), the finger seems to move surprisingly slowly. Also, if you have a strong enough arch to support it, pushing down on the knuckles while should aid the feeling of weight coupled with slowness in the finger. Then try sitting at a piano and flicking your finger at the note- pulling your finger back towards you very sharply. Do it stacatto and first, but then try to stay on the key. It should still give a more pointed sound than merely pushing the key down. Volodos does amazing pizzicatto this way- which sounded pointed and sharp yet genuinely pp (in his Schuber E major sonata, you could honestly believe that you are literally hearing a cello pizzicato, rather than what we normally think of as merely being a bit like the sound). Alternatively, lift your hand a few inches above the key and tense your forearm and lock your wrist in place. Then stab at a key with as much tension as you can. Try not to feel any gravity helping. It seems a bit odd trying to give advice on how to do bad technique, but I'm sure you'll hear the difference if you do this.

You know, I am going to try this with my RH pinky. Thanks! Also, tangentially related to this - I am trying to figure out different ways to stand on a finger without any of the joints bending backwards. The first is the classic round finger with every joint bent, and then with the finger "Straight as a ramrod" which Kemal Gekic uses very often. But there seems to be another way that nobody has mentioned yet - the distal/middle joint is straight, but the middle/proximal joint is bent. So that the last two bones act as one, and the finger becomes two bones instead of 3. I see this last variant used very often with people who have smalllish hands, or people with larger hands reaching biggish chords. Any thoughts on this?

But there seems to be another way that nobody has mentioned yet - the distal/middle joint is straight, but the middle/proximal joint is bent. So that the last two bones act as one, and the finger becomes two bones instead of 3. I see this last variant used very often with people who have smalllish hands, or people with larger hands reaching biggish chords. Any thoughts on this? This is the basic position recommended by my teachers (members of the Golandsky Institute faculty). The proximal/medial joint is the most prominent – even more prominent than the knuckles. (The knuckles are not depressed, just less prominent.) ocd

This is how Gould played - watch the video of his Bach D minor concerto for instance. There is a danger in it because with this you almost entirely eliminate the work of the powerhouse lumbricals and interosseous, and instead rely almost entirely on the deep and superficial flexors. Bach is said to have played like this, and it is logical for Gould to use this because it cultivates clarity and precision (great for polyphony) at the expense of power and expansive tone (better for the Romantics). I am puzzled however that the Taubman people would recommend this - aren't they the ones so set on avoiding tendonitis? This would increase your chances of aggravating it or bringing it on. I don't use it myself, but like I've said many times, the more ways you have to skin a cat, the more dishes you can offer in your restaurant. AFF

...skewered cat, fried cat, boiled cat, blackened cat, sweet and sour cat, and so forth.

exactly! welcome to southeast asia!

Hi, Interesting thread. Alan Where do you have that discussion with kemal G about Horowitz playing soft? My mother heard him some times (befor his long abscence) and did the same observation.That's why his >mf are so efficient he keeps his cool and doesn't waste them as easily as I do. Johnlink speed/weight: Maybe I misunderstand your question but here is what I think, when playing pp if the tempo allows it my hand are like "steel" and I push the key down slowly like if I played with a pen.Thats weight.With this heavy hand I can also scratch the key very fast with one finger on the surface still pp and get another sound.This is I guess what Sunslight explained in detail.When playing faster there is more speed a feeling of weightlessness but even then one can freeze the whole mecanism for a microsecond and get weight. I have a friend who is an amateur classical guitarist and he's become very curious about the book and DVD and according to him a lot of this stuff goes for the guitar as well. Eric

This is how Gould played - watch the video of his Bach D minor concerto for instance. There is a danger in it because with this you almost entirely eliminate the work of the powerhouse lumbricals and interosseous, and instead rely almost entirely on the deep and superficial flexors. Bach is said to have played like this, and it is logical for Gould to use this because it cultivates clarity and precision (great for polyphony) at the expense of power and expansive tone (better for the Romantics). I am puzzled however that the Taubman people would recommend this - aren't they the ones so set on avoiding tendonitis? This would increase your chances of aggravating it or bringing it on. I don't use it myself, but like I've said many times, the more ways you have to skin a cat, the more dishes you can offer in your restaurant. AFF It seems that you are assuming that this position goes with the scratching motion from the proximal/medial joint. (As in Forkel's description of Bach technique.) The motion suggested by Taubman (on top of the rotation, in-and-out, shaping, etc.) is finger motion from the main knuckles which should involve the lumbricals, etc., as much as any other position. ocd