Vibrations At The Keybed

Although I'm extremely interested in the objective issues that make sense of how and why certain things work, the other day I stumbled on an ultra-subjective idea that I believe provides a fantastically simple point of focus, with which to trigger the right balance of activations. I was recently reading "the Inner Game", which contains a rather interesting mix of ideas. I personally suspect that a great deal of the ideas would be terrible for many pupils. In order to improve by not caring, first you have to truly the intention. Those who simply do not think things through properly and who regularly "guess" (which is the majority, in my experience!) could be ruined by some of the oversimplistic ideas. However, one thing that stood out was the idea of trying to notice tensions (but ONLY notice- without intent) while playing. I was a little skeptical here too, but then I realised it was actually making a big difference with releasing them. I don't believe for a moment that this is enough to develop a polished technique, but it made me realise that once you basically know how to do something, the right mental approach can serve as a trigger for what you already know the feel of. Along these lines, I discovered the other day that striving to perceive the vibrations coming up through the keybeds (and imagining the whole arm trying to feel them) is a fantastically simple way of creating this kind of point of focus. I can't remember if I'd perhaps encountered this idea before somewhere (but been unable to get anything from it in the context of how I moved before) or whether it's my own idea. Anyway, I had a student who was doing the usual thing of moving too fast- and not spending any time balancing properly or noticing the fingers at the keybeds between sounds. I've often said things like to "feel" every finger or to "listen" to every sound- rather than merely "go slower". However, some students never really seem to get it. The idea of trying to physically perceive the vibrations seemed to work extremely well. Having something to look for seems to engage the intentions in a completely different way- compared to if I just say "feel the keys". Later in the day, I find this useful for all kinds of things. It was extremely good for a grade 5 piece that features repeated tenuto chords, much in the style of Chopin's E minor prelude. Suddenly the student stopped the chopiness and started feeling the control over every individual chord- not by trying to stay longer at the keybed but simply by looking for something while there, with the indirect result of maintaining more contact. Another student who struggles to get into Bach completely transformed his sound by thinking this way. By getting the right physical feel first, he seemed to start getting something out of the music. I've been finding that it provides exceptional focus in my own playing at a whole range of dynamics. In intense playing, being in touch with the sound often triggers needless pressure against the keybed. If you try to perceive the vibrations carrying all the way up the arm, it's necessary to let go in the forearm, or nothing can be felt. Equally, the hand must maintain good enough contact though- so it can prevent overrelaxation. Particularly in quieter playing, you need to activate the hand enough- if you are to be able to feel the vibrations travelling up and through the forearm. It seems to provide the perfect focus point for everything to activate enough for quality of contact, while discouraging needless clenching. I'm even starting to understand how people come to like those metaphors about imaginary "energy" travelling down the whole arm, or perhaps even flowing from the keys and back up to the shoulder. Does this make sense to anyone else? I think I'm going to use this trigger as my long-term goal- to get to the stage where all I have to do is "feel" the vibrations coming up from the piano, in order to trigger the right alignments and organisations between keys. Incidentally, while it doesn't work so well on a digital, to a large extent simply "looking" for vibrations can be almost as good as when they are real. Arguably, it scarcely matters whether the vibrations literally travel up the forearm or not.

Yes, the vibrations are one of the things I monitor whilst playing. I find them easier to perceive at the bass end of the piano, partly due to the greater mass of the strings and also because I'm right handed, so the my left side is freer. I was reading part of Craft yesterday and spotted a quote from Artur Rubinstein. It says that one of the prerequisites for him playing well is that he can feel the vibrations coming to him through the instrument (pg 224 of the first edition). What you say about noticing tensions is also significant. In the Alexander Technique we're allowing such tensions into our awareness, as it's that awareness that allows us to let go. After a while we notice such tensions as they start to happen, then later on we can notice them before they happen and inhibit them.

Yeah, I think with a loud bass, it's possible to literally perceive the vibrations going up through the forearms, if the hand contacts well enough and the arm is free enough. I find that trying to look for the same effect is useful, even when practising on my digital (where it definitely doesn't happen for real). It's a strange thing though, because I do find that ONLY trying to notice it is often more effective than thinking about relaxing at the points I notice. Later it's not really inhibition- or at least not a conscious kind. I don't think "don't stiffen the wrist in this bit" before it happens. It just doesn't happen. Similarly, when looking for vibrations, there's no sense of inhibition. The mere process of looking for them defines the state the muscles go into. It's not about avoiding something, but having a simple positive intention.

It's a strange thing though, because I do find that ONLY trying to notice it is often more effective than thinking about relaxing at the points I notice. Later it's not really inhibition- or at least not a conscious kind. I don't think "don't stiffen the wrist in this bit" before it happens. It just doesn't happen. Similarly, when looking for vibrations, there's no sense of inhibition. The mere process of looking for them defines the state the muscles go into. It's not about avoiding something, but having a simple positive intention. Intention is the important word there. That's effectively what Alexandrian inhibition is - the ability to say no to a habitual response to a stimulus seems to trigger the stretch reflexes and anti-gravity reflexes in the muscles which allows the letting go - it's just the intent to allow oneself choice rather than fall prey to one's habits. I think due to Freud the word 'inhibition' has rather negative connotations. In the Alexander Technique it is entirely positive - the freedom to choose. We're all inhibiting all the time - it's just the quality of this inhibition that defines us, and the Alexander Technique aims to allow us to improve this quality by bringing the process under conscious control. Of course, if someone has pre-conceived ideas about it they tend to become overly analytical of every movement, hence the term Alexandroid. I think we're working along similar principles, just from different directions. I agree about actively thinking about relaxing - it's quite ineffectual for me. I either approach things indirectly through inhibition, or directly through activation of the correct parts of the mechanism (although, this can be quite a challenge if one does not know what needs to be working).

It's a strange thing though, because I do find that ONLY trying to notice it is often more effective than thinking about relaxing at the points I notice. Later it's not really inhibition- or at least not a conscious kind. I don't think "don't stiffen the wrist in this bit" before it happens. It just doesn't happen. Similarly, when looking for vibrations, there's no sense of inhibition. The mere process of looking for them defines the state the muscles go into. It's not about avoiding something, but having a simple positive intention. Intention is the important word there. That's effectively what Alexandrian inhibition is - the ability to say no to a habitual response to a stimulus seems to trigger the stretch reflexes and anti-gravity reflexes in the muscles which allows the letting go - it's just the intent to allow oneself choice rather than fall prey to one's habits. I think due to Freud the word 'inhibition' has rather negative connotations. In the Alexander Technique it is entirely positive - the freedom to choose. We're all inhibiting all the time - it's just the quality of this inhibition that defines us, and the Alexander Technique aims to allow us to improve this quality by bringing the process under conscious control. Of course, if someone has pre-conceived ideas about it they tend to become overly analytical of every movement, hence the term Alexandroid. I think we're working along similar principles, just from different directions. I agree about actively thinking about relaxing - it's quite ineffectual for me. I either approach things indirectly through inhibition, or directly through activation of the correct parts of the mechanism (although, this can be quite a challenge if one does not know what needs to be working). I think I see what you mean- but I do find it surprising that they include the term at all. In the mind, there's no such thing as a negative- which is why thinking "don't do x" often CAUSES doing x. The brain can only visualise doing it. The only way to avoid something is to be thinking of or doing something else altogether. I prefer the idea of going slowly enough to think about what you wish to do, than reminding yourself what you are going to try not to do. I think this is why feeling the vibrations is helping me so much. I don't have to think about what I'm not supposed to do. I just think about the positive intention of striving to perceive. The fact that this makes my hand activate well, while my forearm releases happens as if by accident. I'm not thinking about any of the things I need to avoid. It's actually pretty bizarre just how well this has been working today. A lot of things suddenly seem extremely simple and when I notice holes, I know that I have a style of focus that I can use to deal with things in slow practise. Rather than look at problems, I can look at a simple positive intent for solving them.

There are several interesting and very useful ideas in this thread, and I will start with the feeling of vibration from the piano. I tried it out, but was not able to perceive any vibration. But the perception of sound and touch became much clearer and more focused. So that is how the idea has become useful for me. Subjective ideas and imagination definitely works. and in this case there is a very good scientific explanation of why and how it works. The sensori-motor system is a very complex system of feedback loops, and the motor cortex is only one part of it. So the focus on vibration, or in my case, touch and hearing, has obviously created new connections and feedback loops in the form of new neuronal pathways in the brain. Objective and subjective are concepts that are much misunderstood and misused, and the discussion has been going on for thousands of years between the different schools of thought. At present there is a dangerous tendency to have too much focus on the objective side, and to objectify everything. Rational thinking and science are very useful, but can only cover a very limited part of reality. It seems to be a well known fact that consciously trying to relax and reduce tension is not very effective, and it has been known for a very long time that the method used in Alexander Technique, just being aware of the tensions, is much more effective. In all major Buddhist schools this method of awareness, mindfulness, is the central method, and it always begins with awareness of the body and how it moves. Awareness of the breath is an important part. At present this method is used by many people outside the Buddhist traditions. And then you have the Feldenkreis and Alexander methods. I have used the method for a long time, and in my experience, and according to my observations of how it works for other people, the worst tensions, and those you are least aware of, and least willing to work with, can be very difficult to handle. So I try to use as many approaches as possible.

Objective and subjective are concepts that are much misunderstood and misused, and the discussion has been going on for thousands of years between the different schools of thought. At present there is a dangerous tendency to have too much focus on the objective side, and to objectify everything. Rational thinking and science are very useful, but can only cover a very limited part of reality. "Very limited"? Of course, everything has limits. But what tells us that those who speak of "energy" coming from the strong upper body muscles in fast finger work is nonsense? Or that the idea that the fingers are the least important part is nonsense? Personally, I think most popular approaches of today are flawed chiefly in their deficient objectivity- which is why they pay so little attention to the hand, and why so many claim it's all about the arm. Only objective and rational thought can lead to something resembling all encompassing approaches, that are in tune with physical possibility- rather than tailor-made for helping only those in specific situations. If we left it to pure subjectivity, we'd still be in the dark ages and nobody would agree on anything at all! What is needed is a synergy between objectivity and approaches to aid sensory learning. That which is truly objective will naturally encompass aspects of the latter- it will not pretend that all it takes is a rational description and suddenly everything works. If objectivity is not used to fuel sensory learning, it scarcely counts as an objective approach at all. It takes a combination of knowing about what is rationally needed and knowing how to train the senses to do that, when simply knowing is not enough to make it happen. I'm using this subjective issue as a trigger for what I've learned from things that are deeply rooted in objective concepts- not as a replacement. By the way, I'd start with a loud chord in the bass. The vibrations ought to be easy to feel from that situation. I'm convinced that I can literally feel vibrations going right down the forearm, in many situations.

By the way, Cziffra, I would start with a solid dose of Awareness training. That might clarify the important distinction between objectivity and objectification.

Yes, I've been doing various Feldenkrais exercises, via podcasts. Personally, I don't believe there's any danger in objectivity- as long as it's used to guide awareness training. It's no use being aware, if your fingers droop with every note you play and waste all of the energy. You could notice that as much as you like, but without an understanding of the basic intentions that will produce an efficient and direct key movement, it won't lead to any significant changes. Although Alan's approach is based on sensory learning, there are many objective principles that run beneath the surface. By exploring these objective issues in greater detail, I've found it even easier to realise what is missing and what it is that defines the holes. In particular, an objective understanding of how it's possible to minimise impact at the keybed has been overwhelmingly important for me, recently. I couldn't "feel" what I didn't understand how to do, but lately it's been extremely clear both what is required and what it feels like to play with extreme activation but without impact or straining. Personally, I honestly feel that a lack of objectivity is one of the greatest deficiencies in the majority of pianistic approaches. Fine details will always be down the mystery of the senses, but there are far too many needless mysteries, regarding things that are actually very simple to understand. Have you read my post about efficiency? It's about why relaxation collapse is so wasteful (and actually conducive to impact) but also about why fixation is not efficient either. The post is written as an introduction to the ideas- rather to demonstrate how to go about applying the concept. However, I'm going to come back to this objective distinction between positive and negative movements in future awareness exercises and use it as means of understanding where holes lie. This concept has been spectacularly useful as a guide for practising basic movements and students seem to pick it up very easily. As far as I can tell, while everyone speaks of efficiency in piano playing, virtually nobody explains how to perceive or improve it. Although Alan brings in the concept of collapse as something that kills efficiency and talk about generating movement from the hand, I needed to go a little deeper beneath that still, in order get a clear concept of how I can move the keys with maximum efficiency. From there- the whole thing goes on to pure awareness training.

Just to add to that, one of the most useful things I've had from Alan (among countless others, of course) is the idea of practising with a finger of the other hand lightly touching beneath the knuckles of the hand- to check that there is never any downward pressure. You could say that this is an awareness exercise- but objectively it ensures that none of the negative movements (that destroy efficiency and promote impact) are being brought in. Understanding that this goes beyond exploring something has made me realise just how vital this exercise is for me to spend major time on- and that it's not just a feeling that's interesting to try out for a little while. It's so effective, because of the objectively bad habit that it exposes and helps my senses to remove. I could do 100 other awareness exercises, but I might not gain half as much as I do from that specific one- because it objectively trains a missing link in efficiency of the fundamental pianistic action. Even randomly selected awareness exercises will doubtless provide something of use, but I believe than the ability to apply those that improve upon an objectively definable deficiency is the secret to the fastest learning. If awareness were enough, all of those with Feldenkrais training could easily become self-taught virtuosos. However, what heightened awareness does not necessarily provide is an understanding of what specific requirements lead to high efficiency and open up the door to high speeds etc.