Voicing Chords

I have been working on the the raindrop prelude lately, which I have polished to a descent degree, and my teacher has recently given me Rachmaninoff's op.32 no.10. During our last lesson during the middle section of the Chopin prelude my teacher wanted to hear the top note in the left hand more as this forms that ominous sounding melody we all love. For example in the first measure of the second section the left had plays C#-G#, D#-G#, E-C#, and D#-B#. She wants to hear the second note of each group voiced above the first note. This is proving easier said than done. When I practice chords usually I play each note of the chord Forte/Mez. Fort./Piano/staccato/legato... every possible way with single fingers. Then I do the same with each group of two fingers combined, then three finger groups until I have built the cord up from every single subgroup in as many different sounding/feeling ways as possible. This has helped my structure greatly and helped me to to cultivate a feeling where when I play a chord it is as if each finger is playing (reaching out and grabbing is a better description) each note of the chord; rather than as playing it as a single block with the arm simply "smashing" the hand as a single unit in to the keys. Like you said Alan, the arm comes in behind and supports the busy work of the fingers but does not play for them, and I think this can even be applied to chords. While I feel I am now in control of articulating each note of the chord they all seem to be at the same relative level of volume. If I do a "semi-roll" on the top not I can voice it and the roll is not very noticeable but I would also like to have the ability to take all the notes at the same time and articulate the top note above the bass notes. I think this ability will really make or break the Rachmaninoff prelude so any advice is appreciated. Thanks.

Simply practise playing everything pizicatto except the note you want to bring out. Once you train your hand to rest ALL of the arm's weight upon the note which you want to voice (with nothing weighing down elsewhere), it becomes easier to vary the degree of weight applied through different fingers when you go back to normal holding. Personally, I really can't follow why you would want to voice the G sharp over the bass line though. Myself, I'd definitely want to establish the root note in the bass, and show how it moves, while the G sharp merely repeats. I think the movement in the bass is vastly more interesting than the static G sharps. Similarly, the E is an important note because it establishes the fact that the key has modulated to the minor, after the ambiguity of the open fifth.

You might want to see this article by the russian pianist "Vladimir Horowitz", his advice isn't that divirgent from cziffra's though ..

To be honest, (while he is undisputably the master of putting these skills into practise) Horowitz's advice is actually pretty ordinary at best. The problem is that (although he refers to it as a starting point) he is really doing nothing more describing the end product- as a pianist who already has the ability to voice staggeringly well. Having been told similar things years back, I made virtually zero progress through trying that method. Sometimes the tone was far too hard due to uncontrolled tension, sometimes the notes didn't sound together, sometimes the weaker fingers failed to sound. While I have a rather unspectacular technique, voicing inner parts is something I have since acquired a pretty decent ability at. The end process does feel very much as Horowitz describes it. Unfortunately, however, simply beginning with the idea of one finger being firmer offers zero guidance regarding complex internal requirements of how to balance the necessary levels of tension. It's far better to learn what will be required from the finger in the actual context, (by standing up on that finger with an exaggerated pressure, while the other fingers bear little arm-weight at all, thanks to the brevity of their contact with the keys) than to try and 'guess' what firmness is likely to be required in mid-air, before dropping. Similarly, starting with the finger closer would be very risky! The combination of the greater hammer speed and the simple fact that the key is reached sooner, will lead to the sound occuring far earlier than the other fingers. The great thing about the practise method of instantly releasing all other fingers (but feeling tremendous weight and structure within the finger that is to be voiced) is that it teaches the sensation that is required within the finger. Playing other voices staccatto can sometimes lead to the fingers losing their structural integrity and becoming too flaccid, however. In order to avoid this, I recently discovered that it's important to alternate with exercises that involve fully standing up on EVERY finger of the chord, with totally equal balance. While it seems contrary to achieving extremity of differentiation, I've found that this has added more consistency to the extremes that I've picked up through the staccato exercise (I found Alan's suggestion of standing up more on 1 and 2 for op. 10 no. 2 to be tremendously helpful, even though it initially seemed totally the opposite of what would be required- this got me thinking about the similarly apparent contradiction of using it to aid heavy contrasts within single chords). Eventually, alternating between the two outer extremes of approach should should help things to converge on the point where all the fingers can maintain a proper structure, without being stuck with having to channel equal weight.

voice differentiation, Horowitz, 1&2 in Chopin Op 10 #2, etc Overholding and standing up on your entire structure (all 4 or 5 fingers) provides you with the kinesthetic information of your entire hand structure, the integrity of which is going to support the finger individuation needed to bring whatever voice out you please. However, later on you will do exactly the opposite to achieve that effect - loosening everything so that the finger wanting to voice more has the freedom to do so with a vigourous movement while the others cool out and move minimally - WHILE MAINTAINING THEIR SPATIAL CONFIGURATION. This second process will be successful IF the first template has been properly recorded in the brain. Horowitz only describes a part of the whole learning process that brings one to the state of being able to do this with freedom and command, because he learned the first part so long ago that it was a taken for granted. By the way, as for bringing out the alto chords in Op 10 #2, Kemal recently told me that in one edition those chords were notated as quarter notes rather than the present day 8th note plus 8th note rest, and he actually holds them their full quarter note length in the recapitulation of his most recent performances - very interesting effect! All the best, AFF

Something I find helpful when playing chords and bringing out certain notes, other than the touch and what I hear is to simply look at the hammers as they fall back to rest. If they are all at the same place, then I've given each note equal weight, and likewise if I'm bringing out one note more than the other, that hammer will be lower after the chord is played. When playing pp, the hammers will not fall down but be very close to the strings--half voice. In one piece, play mf or lower, I had some problems in making sure every note was equally weighted. Then, it began to feel right. Taking the music desk off while I played, showed that the hammers were all in line when they came back from striking the strings--a definite sign of the weight that being given to each note, was the same. Bob in Provo

Hi Bob! I tried the same thing, it's not easy, but as I understand there are only two levels when you play pp the hammer stops close to the string and >pp the hammer stops further down. Don't have acess to my piano right now.Please develop... Besides does the hammer stopping close to the string have any implications on the sound I think "cziffra" asked in another post if it even maybe could increase the sound? This is a great exercise! Eric

Actually Eric, that's not quite right. In a well regulated action, the hammers will come to rest at various points--on what's called the backchecks. But once you play louder than a p or so, almost all hammers will "check" (be caught on the return from the string) at a certain height. Most pianos are set at 5/8". for proper backchecking on a medium blow. When playing softly, the backcheck doesn't have to stop the hammer from going all the way down, so it is caught higher. And since regulations makes each key catch in the same place, you can see when playing a chord, if they are all at the same place, then you've played with equal force. If you want to play one note of the chord with more force than another, you will see that hammer comes to rest, lower, than the others. If you just barely press the key down, so the hammer escapes into the let-off, the hammer will check high--usually 1/16 to 1/8" from the string. If you play at a p, it will be a bit lower than this--and you will be playing, "half-voice" mezzo voce. It takes a lot of control--especially, since while playing and holding down a note, you release the pressure just a little (you might not even notice), the action is so sensitive to that slightest release, that the hammer will bounce up. Try it. Play a note. Look at where the hammer is, then just think about releasing it--you'll see it pop up. this is what's great about a grand piano, that popping up, lets the part of the action (jack) that pushes the hammer to the strings, slip back under, so it is ready to go again, with the slightest amount of release. You don't have to wait for the key to come back up to the top, before you can play the not again--thus fast repetition. This isn't possible on an upright. Nor on a grand that isn't regulated to be able to do it. But it is essential to be able to play repeated notes, and being able to see, where the hammer is and what it does while you play, will give you a better idea of what you do to control its action. As far as the distance the hammer is from the string and the loudness--the farther the hammer has to travel, the louder you can play (that may preclue though, being able to play softly--so everything has to be within tolerance to get it to work properly). If the hammer is close to the string when the key is depressed, the sound will be less. Just like in baseball or hockey -- if you want to get a lot of the ball or puck to go far, you have to take a good swing at it--from a distance. If you want it to just barely move (piano sound), then you strike it very closely, just a little tap, from up close to it. There is one other aspect though for playing softly & that is velocity. Although, the blow is light, it has to be with enough velocity (quickness) to get the hammer or ball or puck, to move. If I put my bat next to the ball and tap it slowly, it may not even move. But if I put the bat next to it and not hit it with any more force, just faster, it will move. Inertia of standing still is broken. When we play, we can feel that point as we depress the key. when you press the key down, about 1/8 " from the bottom of the key stroke, you will feel a give, and then it will travel on down to the end of the stroke. If you try to play softly, but push through this area without enough speed, nothing is going to happen and the hammer won't be propelled to the string. Catastrophic failure. But if you go with the same force, through that area, but with more speed, at some point the hammer will move to the string. As pianist, we really need to know the piano and how slowly the key can be depressed and still make a sound. Beyond that point, there is catostrophic failure and no sound will be made. We can learn lots by watching the hammer and how it reacts to differnce force used and also to using the same force, but playing at a different speed. In a well regulated piano, we should be able to go from a ppp to an fff, with control. By watching the hammer and being sensitive to the feel of the key, especially about 1/8 " above the bottom of the key stroke, lots can be learned. Sorry about rambling. I know this is clear as mud. Just remember, the closer the hammer is to the string the smaller the dynamic range. The further away it is, the greater the range. The secret comes in being able to have control and know what the key is doing with that particular pressure (force applied) and the speed with which the force is applied. We should be able to feel as well as hear it & if the piano is open, we can see it. Bob

When playing softly, the backcheck doesn't have to stop the hammer from going all the way down, so it is caught higher. And since regulations makes each key catch in the same place, you can see when playing a chord, if they are all at the same place, then you've played with equal force. Bob I don't quite follow the point here, in honesty. How frequently is it desirable to voice a chord with perfect equality? If a sound is going to be appropriate, surely assessment of the sound itself is the best way to judge? I have sometimes been interested to note whether hammers are striking exactly together or not (although I do not personally regard togetherness of striking as an inherent positive- frequently it helps to play the most important note slightly late, in order to give it distinction from competing tones). However, I really do struggle to see how looking at the hammers should give much more feedback on performance than simply listening to the balance. I appreciate that starting from the sound need not lead to the means of attaining an ideal sound (the idea that thinking of a sound will lead to it being produced is certainly one of the stupidest fallacies of conventional teaching), but this does sound like a tremendously indirect manner of taking feedback on something that can more easily be assessed through that which counts- the sound itself. If a problem cannot be detected via the sound alone- does that not suggest that it may not neccesarily be a problem that needs a fix? If a chord is ludicrously imbalanced, that is clearly going to be a problem. However, isn't the ear the best judge of that? I wouldn't personally want to start from flawlessly equal chords, any more than I would want to begin a Chopin Mazurka with flawlessly literal metre. I really doubt whether there are many situations where looking at the position of a hammer would be provide better information than stopping to listen to each note (coupled with sensory awareness of whether the fingers are properly resting against the key bed). PS. Doesn't good hockey technique demand a push? I don't believe that swinging from a distance (as in a golf swing) would ever be recommended by a hockey coach. Certainly in standard hockey, that would be regarded as poor technique. I suspect the same would almost certainly apply in ice hockey. Similarly, if you move a bat 'faster' in your example you ARE applying more force. It's just feels smoother because the ball accelerates in tandem with the bat- and not suddenly at the point of contact. That doesn't mean that less force is applied, as far as the laws of physics define 'force'. For a pianistic equivalent, look at Nyiregyhazi on youtube. He shows that a run up does not have to offer more sound. Starting from close pressure really does enable more energy to be applied, once the technique is mastered. When pushing a puck, I have little doubt that you can apply far more energy by maximising the duration of contact with that puck. Hit from a big backswing and you minimise the duration of contact, which also reduces the energy that can be applied to it. Imagine pushing a supermarket trolley into motion or hitting it with a baseball bat. Pushing it will obviously will be far more productive. As far as the piano goes, I'm a firm believer in the fact that starting from contact provides the best control- regardless of whether playing loud or soft. As far as I am aware, hockey is taught along exactly the same principles.

Aha! Andrew, now you've chosen to grapple with a CANADIAN on hockey issues! BIG mistake!! As it turns out, one of the revolutions in hockey occurred in the 60's when Bobby Hull of the Chicago Black Hawks introduced the slap shot. And one of the skills today's players develop is being able to bring as much control to bear on the puck in the instant of contact in a slap shot as one would have in the more traditional wrist shot. In terms of piano, beware of being a 'firm believer' in anything, because if that limits you from having as wide a variety of tone as possible then it turns into dogma, no? The same for voicing chords - I want to be able to voice them with perfect equality - i.e. I want to be CAPABLE. Much of my "method" (if we can call it that) stems from increasing awareness of physical sensation in order to finally be more capable of controlling aural sensation. The ear is always the most precise instrument, but we can stimulate its development to finer levels of control and perception through introducing increased awareness of other modes of sensation - kinesthetic or in Bob's case, visual (his technique is something I have used to positive effect as well). These other modes aim to enhance the aural not supplant it. Thanks for a thoughtful and thought-provoking post! AFF