Discussion:
Best way to play a trill (shake?)
(too old to reply)
Tjako van Schie
2003-10-15 01:23:12 UTC
Permalink
The trill is learned most quickly note-by-note. The most important notes
are
the first 2; if you can't start them at the right speed for that trill,
you
can't do the rest.
Start first by practicing only the first 2 notes, playing them very fast,
in
one down motion of hand. It might help to practice them as "chords" at
first
and then gradually delay the 2nd note. Make sure all the fingers, hands,
arms,
body, etc., are completely relaxed. Tho hands, etc., are important, don't
incorporate them at first, just decouple them from fingers completely;
later,
when you start trilling long trills, you will know what motions to
incorporate.
Once the 2 notes can be played at ANY SPEED, comfortably, learn notes 2
and 3.
So for 131313 . . . trill, first learn 13, then 31; once both are
comfortable, and almost infinitely fast, learn 131, still with one down
motion
of hand. Anyone should be able to do up to this point. Most people should
get
this finished in 5 minutes; at most during one practice session.
Next comes a hard part: 1313. This might take a few practice sessions. If
you
have difficulty, try playing 13 "chords" in succession. If you find you
can't
do this fast (at rate of trill or faster), that is what you need to
develop.
First learn to "bounce" two chords, really fast, and without tension. Then
try
three. Usually, by the time you can repeat 4 very quickly, you can do a
lot
more. If not, do groups of 4. Don't practice just one hand; change hands
every 10 to 20 seconds of practice, so choose one thing for each hand to
practice. Rule is, change BEFORE the hand feels any fatigue. Practice ONLY
when
hand is completely rested, BUT NOT COOLED OFF.
Now, instead of bouncing chords, delay the second note, first, 2 bounces
only,
so it sounds like you are playing two grace notes in succession. This is
not
yet a trill, but as you delay the 2nd note more and more, it becomes a
short
trill. Do it as fast as you can (even faster than the trill you had in
mind)
as long as you don't develop stress. At this point, you may need to start
shakes or rotations, etc., that might help the trill. Try the curled
finger
position as well as the various flat finger positions depending on your
skill
level and the particular notes (white only, or black only, etc.). The
flat
positions generally work better because they make better use of extensor
muscles which are absolutely necessary for a good trill.
When you can do 4 trills (13131313) rapidly, you are basically done. You
may
need to practice groups of 4 trills with a slight pause between each one,
before you can do long continuous ones. The group of 4 trills can be done
in
one down motion of the hand; for continuous trills, you need a steady
downward
pressure, but first see if you can you just use the weight of your arm,
and add
only the necessary downward pressure; don't "force" the speed by too much
down
force. Remember the importance of the first 2 notes.
For further details, see link below.
C. C. Chang; more on piano practice at
http://members.aol.com/chang8828/contents.htm
A trill is more than a mere speedy repetition of 2 fingers!
It is an ornament, and always should be thought of that way; as an integral
part of the melody.
A mere technically/motorically played trill usually is a dead machine, and
sounds as awful as an electrical door bell.
A good resonant trill has life inside, organised around the musical concept
of the context.
Some trills should be performed quite fast, yes, but usually pianists tend
to play their trills TOO fast. Slower trills can be followed by listeners
more easy.
Also within a trill there can exist internal fluctuation, e.g.
cresc/decresc, and/or accelerando/rall, and/or color shifts, etc. The best
way to practise a trill is to see it as a melodically and rhytmically part
of the melody it belongs to.
The same applies for most of the tremolo's.
I would suggest that people FIRST play ther trills very slow and
melodically, before speeding up to any high-end tempo.
Also, there is no instant recipy for playing trills within "x minutes". Good
trills take a lifetime practise, like the rest of good piano playing. :)

Regards,
Tjako van Schie, pianist
http://www.tjakovanschie.com
Edward
2003-10-15 06:54:06 UTC
Permalink
<A great deal of most useful discussion snipped>
As Dorothy Delay said: The goal of the virtuoso is COMFORT
I was watching Angela Hewitt play Bach last night (on video) and was
completely baffled by how she could make such an excellent sound with
apparently no movement at all! She looked completely comfortable, and
that is what I am going to strive for now.

Edward
--
The reading group's reading group:
http://www.bookgroup.org.uk
gregpresley
2003-10-15 08:54:15 UTC
Permalink
Edward, the thumb should NOT be flexed.
This statement proves you haven't a clue. Better learn a little before
giving advice. As with the fingers, the thumb flexes at three joints.
flex:1. v. to bend, as the arm.
This is the sense in which I was using this word.
Then you should have been more precise.
getreal, when I post here, I'm writing for people who do not use scientific
terms for the muscles, tendons, etc. (The vast majority of posters and
readers at rmmp). As someone who worked with dancers at a very high level
(the Martha Graham Company, The Alvin Ailey Company) for many years, I never
witnessed a teacher effect a significant change in students' movements by
describing the movements in scientific terms. There is NO area of the brain
that directs nerve signals to muscle groups using the verbal cue "contract
the lumbicals". We have to use images and desired "looks" "actions" to get
our bodies to move in desirable ways. When Nelita True, who teaches at
Eastman, directs us (or students) to "throw" the thumb to its next position
in an arpeggio, rather than put the thumb under and swivel our wrists, there
is an immediate correct motion - one that could NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS be
accomplished by breaking down that movement into all the complex description
of the muscle groups involved -which ones flex at what time and which ones
relax. It is tedious, no doubt, to the scientifically-oriented mind, but it
is absolutely true to the way that humans learn new movements. It is my
experience that telling students to actively curve their fingers and thumbs
leads the majority into wrong habits of action - pinkies which curl into
tight balls whenever other fingers are working, thumbs which are "locked
out" and held stiffly unconciously, fingers which are unable to flatten into
a soft curve or relax when not in use, etc etc etc.
Many great pianists have BAD physical habits - and some have paid a
terrible price - Leon Fleisher and Gary Graffman are only two of the more
famous ones willing to come forward. Longevity of playing is the goal, not
imitating Horowitz or Adele Marcus, who, incidentally, in my time at
Juilliard was notorious for producing students with injuries! Freedom and
ease of movement are goals, not speed with tension. I use the terminology
which I think is the simplest to make necessary changes rather than precise
scientific terminology which doesn't translate into a correct motion.
Millions of different finger and hand motions are possible - but when we are
talking about motions that will be repeated (in advanced repetoire) hundreds
of thousands of times, we need to be careful that those movements are
"sustainable" - movements that will not lead to cramping or injuries to
muscles, tendons, nerves or joints.
get real
2003-10-15 12:45:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by gregpresley
Edward, the thumb should NOT be flexed.
This statement proves you haven't a clue. Better learn a little before
giving advice. As with the fingers, the thumb flexes at three joints.
flex:1. v. to bend, as the arm.
This is the sense in which I was using this word.
Then you should have been more precise.
getreal, when I post here, I'm writing for people who do not use scientific
terms for the muscles, tendons, etc. (The vast majority of posters and
readers at rmmp).
Man, you just don't get it. You are giving advice to someone who may
be led down a wrong path due to your ignorance. Telling someone to
play without flexing the thumb is madness and irresponsible.
Post by gregpresley
As someone who worked with dancers at a very high level
(the Martha Graham Company, The Alvin Ailey Company) for many years, I never
witnessed a teacher effect a significant change in students' movements by
describing the movements in scientific terms.
The stay away from "scientific" terms like "flexion".
Post by gregpresley
There is NO area of the brain
that directs nerve signals to muscle groups using the verbal cue "contract
the lumbicals". We have to use images and desired "looks" "actions" to get
our bodies to move in desirable ways. When Nelita True, who teaches at
Eastman, directs us (or students) to "throw" the thumb to its next position
in an arpeggio, rather than put the thumb under and swivel our wrists, there
is an immediate correct motion - one that could NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS be
accomplished by breaking down that movement into all the complex description
of the muscle groups involved -which ones flex at what time and which ones
relax. It is tedious, no doubt, to the scientifically-oriented mind, but it
is absolutely true to the way that humans learn new movements. It is my
experience that telling students to actively curve their fingers and thumbs
leads the majority into wrong habits of action - pinkies which curl into
tight balls whenever other fingers are working, thumbs which are "locked
out" and held stiffly unconciously, fingers which are unable to flatten into
a soft curve or relax when not in use, etc etc etc.
THis is all very nice blahblah, but the simple fact is that YOU
directed someone to play the thumb without flexion. Why are you
babbling about martha graham? You gave bad advice, and now want to
suggest that it is somehow related to me.
Post by gregpresley
Many great pianists have BAD physical habits - and some have paid a
terrible price - Leon Fleisher and Gary Graffman are only two of the more
famous ones willing to come forward. Longevity of playing is the goal, not
imitating Horowitz or Adele Marcus, who, incidentally, in my time at
Juilliard was notorious for producing students with injuries!
That is because she was neurotic and made her students neurotic. My
closest friend studied with her, plays as I described, and is a
magnificent pianist. I was the assistant to one of the most
sought-after teachers in the country for many years who employs the
same technique and is a world-class pianist still going very strong at
80. I have attempted to help someone with Fleischer's syndrome so I
think I understand it a bit, and it is not directly relevant to this
technique.
Post by gregpresley
Freedom and
ease of movement are goals, not speed with tension. I use the terminology
which I think is the simplest to make necessary changes rather than precise
scientific terminology which doesn't translate into a correct motion.
I repeat for the third time, don't use terminology, especially when
giving advice, that you do not understand and are therefore not
comfortable with. Perhaps this tirade of yours is an attempt to
distract from this simple point.
Post by gregpresley
Millions of different finger and hand motions are possible - but when we are
talking about motions that will be repeated (in advanced repetoire) hundreds
of thousands of times, we need to be careful that those movements are
"sustainable" - movements that will not lead to cramping or injuries to
muscles, tendons, nerves or joints.
That is very nice and correct, but if you tell someone to play the
thumb without flexing it, you are causing problems. End of story.
Your whole shtick about not curving the fingers is just as much
nonsense, but I do not want to go into that now. If I have shown you
that you need to take care when advising someone, I have done my job.
Edward
2003-10-15 19:39:02 UTC
Permalink
get real <***@bev6.com> wrote in message news:<***@4ax.com>...
<snipping snipped>
Post by get real
That is very nice and correct, but if you tell someone to play the
thumb without flexing it, you are causing problems. End of story.
Your whole shtick about not curving the fingers is just as much
nonsense, but I do not want to go into that now. If I have shown you
that you need to take care when advising someone, I have done my job.
Actually, as the OP I don't really care HOW the method is described,
provided that the sense is clear. What I have found is that playing a
trill with index and middle finger my hand is quite still and the
movement is more or less from the knuckle (i.e. I am not extending or
contracting either of the two joints in these fingers) However, if I
play the trill as my teacher has requested, I DON'T move my finger or
thumb AT ALL - they are entirely unmoving (though not rigid, as that
would tend to introduce tension). All the movement is rotating the
wrist back and forth. I can now (after a few days practice) get
really quite a good, controlled and musical trill this way.

Edward
--
The reading groups' reading group
http://www.bookgroup.org.uk
get real
2003-10-15 21:02:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Edward
<snipping snipped>
Post by get real
That is very nice and correct, but if you tell someone to play the
thumb without flexing it, you are causing problems. End of story.
Your whole shtick about not curving the fingers is just as much
nonsense, but I do not want to go into that now. If I have shown you
that you need to take care when advising someone, I have done my job.
Actually, as the OP I don't really care HOW the method is described,
provided that the sense is clear. What I have found is that playing a
trill with index and middle finger my hand is quite still and the
movement is more or less from the knuckle (i.e. I am not extending or
contracting either of the two joints in these fingers) However, if I
play the trill as my teacher has requested, I DON'T move my finger or
thumb AT ALL - they are entirely unmoving (though not rigid, as that
would tend to introduce tension). All the movement is rotating the
wrist back and forth. I can now (after a few days practice) get
really quite a good, controlled and musical trill this way.
My guess is that your thumb and third finger are in fact moving
relative to the hand, but the motion is difficult to see. If you are
interested to determine this, you can do your trill, then stop on the
thumb, and notice the angle between the first phalanx (section) of the
third finger and the back of the hand. Then do your trill again and
stop on the third finger, and see if the angle is the same. I would
think your third finger would be more extended from the hand knuckle
when you are stopped on the thumb than when stopped on the third
finger. In any case, I am glad the rotation trill is working for you.
That was very quick for someone who had not used that coordination
before.
Post by Edward
Edward
Michael Sayers
2003-10-15 23:51:05 UTC
Permalink
It seems that to Greg Presley's view that trills involving the thumb
[which begs the question of why one would use a thumb during trilling
in the first place, other than at the end of the trill] must use only
rotation, or "getreal"'s view that the trill must use only the
contraction of muscles that power the thumb joints, are both extremes.

I would propose using both the rotation and flexing approach in
trills, experimenting in diverse trills and ornaments with the results
obtained by an emphasis on each.


M.S.


P.S. - This reminds me of a quarrel between the two schools of bow
handling (the Russian vs. the Franco-German).
get real
2003-10-16 00:31:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Sayers
It seems that to Greg Presley's view that trills involving the thumb
[which begs the question of why one would use a thumb during trilling
in the first place, other than at the end of the trill] must use only
rotation, or "getreal"'s view that the trill must use only the
contraction of muscles that power the thumb joints, are both extremes.
Listen, below is my quote from the beginning of the thread. Does this
equate in your "mind" to my saying that a trill involving the thumb
must use only the contraction of muscles that power the thumb joints?
Post by Michael Sayers
Rotation is of much use when trilling 1-3. Unlike that of the fingers,
the arc of the thumb's motion is not in the same plane as the keydrop,
but rather is similar to the arc of rotation of the forearm. You can
prove this by simply resting your fingers in playing position on a
table, and repeating the thumb quickly. If you are not fighting it,
the forearm will slightly rotate. However, it is a mistake to assume
that it is the forearm rotation that is causing the key to descend --
that is still done with finger flexion. The forearm rotation simply
helps it along.***
I would propose using both the rotation and flexing approach in
trills,
Very good proposition. It should be obvious to anyone but you that I
am in total agreement.
Post by Michael Sayers
experimenting in diverse trills and ornaments with the results
obtained by an emphasis on each.
M.S.
P.S. - This reminds me of a quarrel between the two schools of bow
handling (the Russian vs. the Franco-German).
Don't get reminded. Get a reading tutor.
Edvard
2003-10-16 06:53:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Sayers
P.S. - This reminds me of a quarrel between the two schools of bow
handling (the Russian vs. the Franco-German).
There never was a "Franco-German" school of string playing, bonehead. You
obviously have very little idea what you are talking about. Quit while you
are ahead and stop talking about things beyond your experience and knowledge
and using pretentious and pompous language in an obvious attempt to add
weight to your arguments. You have obviously offended many readers of this
group with your posting and not welcome here. This group is for people
interested in pianos and piano playing and not for selling instruments.
Musicians are especially allergic your brand of BS. You have already proved
that you are trying to rip off readers of this group by asking a
horrendously inflated price for your BS, which was manufactured in Korea by
Samick and not posting an original bill of sale to counter claims that is
worth much less than you say. Your attempt to write posts relating to
musical issues has failed because you write about things you don't know and
this has further damaged your credibility as a piano salesman. Please stop
the show and give it up.

Edvard
Tom Shaw
2003-10-16 16:28:27 UTC
Permalink
He cant quit while he is ahead because he has never been ahead in his life.
TS
Post by Edvard
Post by Michael Sayers
P.S. - This reminds me of a quarrel between the two schools of bow
handling (the Russian vs. the Franco-German).
There never was a "Franco-German" school of string playing, bonehead. You
obviously have very little idea what you are talking about. Quit while you
are ahead and stop talking about things beyond your experience and knowledge
and using pretentious and pompous language in an obvious attempt to add
weight to your arguments. You have obviously offended many readers of this
group with your posting and not welcome here. This group is for people
interested in pianos and piano playing and not for selling instruments.
Musicians are especially allergic your brand of BS. You have already
proved
Post by Edvard
that you are trying to rip off readers of this group by asking a
horrendously inflated price for your BS, which was manufactured in Korea by
Samick and not posting an original bill of sale to counter claims that is
worth much less than you say. Your attempt to write posts relating to
musical issues has failed because you write about things you don't know and
this has further damaged your credibility as a piano salesman. Please stop
the show and give it up.
Edvard
Edvard
2003-10-16 18:49:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Shaw
He cant quit while he is ahead because he has never been ahead in his life.
TS
How very right you are Tom. I shouldn't have said "quit while you're ahead,"
but rather "dry up".

Regards,

Edvard
H. Emmerson Meyers
2003-10-17 02:33:16 UTC
Permalink
Perhaps he got mixed up with Franco-American spaghetti.
Post by Tom Shaw
He cant quit while he is ahead because he has never been ahead in his life.
TS
Post by Edvard
Post by Michael Sayers
P.S. - This reminds me of a quarrel between the two schools of bow
handling (the Russian vs. the Franco-German).
There never was a "Franco-German" school of string playing, bonehead. You
obviously have very little idea what you are talking about. Quit while you
are ahead and stop talking about things beyond your experience and
knowledge
Post by Edvard
and using pretentious and pompous language in an obvious attempt to add
weight to your arguments. You have obviously offended many readers of this
group with your posting and not welcome here. This group is for people
interested in pianos and piano playing and not for selling instruments.
Musicians are especially allergic your brand of BS. You have already
proved
Post by Edvard
that you are trying to rip off readers of this group by asking a
horrendously inflated price for your BS, which was manufactured in Korea
by
Post by Edvard
Samick and not posting an original bill of sale to counter claims that is
worth much less than you say. Your attempt to write posts relating to
musical issues has failed because you write about things you don't know
and
Post by Edvard
this has further damaged your credibility as a piano salesman. Please stop
the show and give it up.
Edvard
Michael Sayers
2003-10-16 18:46:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Edvard
Post by Michael Sayers
P.S. - This reminds me of a quarrel between the two schools of bow
handling (the Russian vs. the Franco-German).
There never was a "Franco-German" school of string playing, bonehead. You
obviously have very little idea what you are talking about. Quit while you
are ahead and stop talking about things beyond your experience and knowledge
and using pretentious and pompous language in an obvious attempt to add
weight to your arguments. You have obviously offended many readers of this
group with your posting and not welcome here. This group is for people
interested in pianos and piano playing and not for selling instruments.
Musicians are especially allergic your brand of BS. You have already proved
that you are trying to rip off readers of this group by asking a
horrendously inflated price for your BS, which was manufactured in Korea by
Samick and not posting an original bill of sale to counter claims that is
worth much less than you say. Your attempt to write posts relating to
musical issues has failed because you write about things you don't know and
this has further damaged your credibility as a piano salesman. Please stop
the show and give it up.
Edvard
There are two distinct "schools" of violin playing, which originated
at a time before musicians had much opportunity to hear one another.
There is the Franco-German school (two exemplars of which are Kreisler
and Joachim) and the Russian school (an exemplar of which is Heifetz).
The Russian school involves holding the bow with a deep index finger,
and a better control towards the end of the bow furthest from the hand
(have you ever noticed how Heifetz's tone deteriorates when he plays
in the three or four inches of the bow nearest the hand?). The
Franco-German school is the opposite.

Even today there are strong opinions on this, and I don't wish to
quarrel with you about it (I assume that you are a violinist?). You
might use both approaches: the Russian for larger spaces, where a
bigger tone is required, and the Franco-German for a more exquisite
tone in smaller spaces.

To my view there is no one way; the violinist's goal is an individual
tone, and each of these violinists had it. Their various
student-emulators, who didn't pursue an individual tone, didn't get
far (I can't think of one famous Heifetz pupil, in spite of all his
years of teaching). Mischa Elman, when asked about how he produced
his "golden tone", said that he strove for the type of tone he had
heard his father produce on the violin. None of the Mischa Elman
pupils, for instance, acquired his golden tone in spite of emulation
attempts.

One must experiment with diverse methods, to arrive at the end that is
sought, and one must have a clearly aural perception throughout that
process of the tone that is to be achieved.


M.S.

P.S. - I am curious about what type of bow you use, because I
understand that in the case of a good French bow, the vibration of the
bow especially aids the type of tone production that evolves with
without the deep index finger position.
Edvard
2003-10-16 21:39:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Sayers
Post by Edvard
Post by Michael Sayers
P.S. - This reminds me of a quarrel between the two schools of bow
handling (the Russian vs. the Franco-German).
There never was a "Franco-German" school of string playing, bonehead. You
obviously have very little idea what you are talking about. Quit while you
are ahead and stop talking about things beyond your experience and knowledge
and using pretentious and pompous language in an obvious attempt to add
weight to your arguments. You have obviously offended many readers of this
group with your posting and not welcome here. This group is for people
interested in pianos and piano playing and not for selling instruments.
Musicians are especially allergic your brand of BS. You have already proved
that you are trying to rip off readers of this group by asking a
horrendously inflated price for your BS, which was manufactured in Korea by
Samick and not posting an original bill of sale to counter claims that is
worth much less than you say. Your attempt to write posts relating to
musical issues has failed because you write about things you don't know and
this has further damaged your credibility as a piano salesman. Please stop
the show and give it up.
Edvard
There are two distinct "schools" of violin playing, which originated
at a time before musicians had much opportunity to hear one another.
You could say there "were" two schools, in addition to many others, but
really this is a great oversimplification of things, especially today since
violinists from these schools have been listening to each other for the last
hundred years or so. It would be better for you to use the past tense or, as
I suggested, not get into this at all.
Post by Michael Sayers
There is the Franco-German school
Sorry, but it's called the "Franco-BELGIAN" school and it's teacher and
founder was Eugene Ysaye (a Belgian). Look it up in that outdated book or
liner notes you read again.
Post by Michael Sayers
(two exemplars of which are Kreisler
and Joachim)
Well, one could say that Joachim, who was from the Vienna Conservatory
admired Ysaye's playing, and although he and Kreisler (another student of
the Vienese school) went to study in Paris, they are not from the
Franco-Belgian school.
Post by Michael Sayers
and the Russian school (an exemplar of which is Heifetz).
Heifetz was a student of Leopold Auer, who class produced many of the great
virtuosos of the early 20th century, but evolved and changed quite a bit as
the "Soviet" school developed under the tutelage of David Oistrach.
Post by Michael Sayers
The Russian school involves holding the bow with a deep index finger,
and a better control towards the end of the bow furthest from the hand
(have you ever noticed how Heifetz's tone deteriorates when he plays
in the three or four inches of the bow nearest the hand?).
Good boy, the part about the index finger is correct. The part about better
bow control at the tip (that's what one calls the "part of the bow furthest
from the hand") is rubbish. I haven't noticed what you are talking about
with Heifetz and you who by all accounts little more than a
Samick-key-pounder are not the one to criticize his tone.
Post by Michael Sayers
The
Franco-German school is the opposite.
I guess you are looking for the easy way out here, but considering that you
are out of your area here, it's no wonder. You oversimplify things by
lumping a lot of schools together. It's like saying there is the Russian
school of piano playing (Rachmaninov) and the Franco-German (Clara Schumann
and Liszt) school of piano playing. You can make it up, but it's just made
up and below the surface it makes no sense.
Post by Michael Sayers
Even today there are strong opinions on this, and I don't wish to
quarrel with you about it (I assume that you are a violinist?). You
might use both approaches: the Russian for larger spaces, where a
bigger tone is required, and the Franco-German for a more exquisite
tone in smaller spaces.
First of all you are in no position to even have an opinion on this at all
so the need for a quarrel is superfluous. My beef with you is that you have
a penchant for expounding on issues that are beyond your grasp. This
paragraph is similar in its opportunistic character as your attempt to win
the trill debate by jumping in late and saying "it's not rotation, it's not
flexion, it's both" and run home with the laurels sought after by get real
and greg presley. As for string playing, if you don't know something go to a
different newsgroup, ask a question and listen. You can gain more by asking,
reading and listening than by writing and talking about things of which you
know very little and covering up for it with a false sense of superiority.

Secondly, as you seem to have gathered, string playing has become very
international in the last fifty years or so and as you imply, the great
players and teachers of the last half of the 20th century including
Oistrach, Persinger, Galamian and DeLay combined aspects of both methods, so
the "school" debate is not really relevant, which to your credit does have
something to do with how greg and get real were arguing about thumb flexion
(I'll give you a break on that one), but leaves you out in the cold with
regard to spouting out half-witted, not thought out statements regarding
violin schools.
Post by Michael Sayers
To my view there is no one way; the violinist's goal is an individual
tone, and each of these violinists had it.
Excuse me please, but you are going off into the pretentiousness again. It
sounds as if you're saying you single-handedly discovered the greatest
violinists of the century. Of course they had "it," but every schmuck knows
that. Your "to my view" dilutes any credibility to zilch.
Post by Michael Sayers
Their various
student-emulators, who didn't pursue an individual tone, didn't get
far (I can't think of one famous Heifetz pupil, in spite of all his
years of teaching). Mischa Elman, when asked about how he produced
his "golden tone", said that he strove for the type of tone he had
heard his father produce on the violin. None of the Mischa Elman
pupils, for instance, acquired his golden tone in spite of emulation
attempts.
Mr. Heifetz and Mr. Elman were fiddlers, not teachers, but that's another
story. Actually, Ivan Galamian managed to do a pretty good job of
integrating the best of Capet's bow technique with the russian school and
Dorothy Delay had an outstanding class for decades. The "American's"
produced many famous pupils, but coming from your point of view, I'm
surprised you put so much emphasis on fame. Wasn't your idol Mr. Nyiregyhazi
rather unknown compared to a famous pianist such as Mr. Gieseking, who you
disdainfully said was "obviously not a pianist".
Post by Michael Sayers
One must experiment with diverse methods, to arrive at the end that is
sought, and one must have a clearly aural perception throughout that
process of the tone that is to be achieved.
Um, yeah. Obvious. Anybody could say that, so what? It's as if you say
"music is the sounds which we all hear in our head and a performer brings
these sounds to life uniting the one of humanity in its humble journey to
reach harmony" or just blah, blah, blah.
Post by Michael Sayers
M.S.
P.S. - I am curious about what type of bow you use, because I
understand that in the case of a good French bow, the vibration of the
bow especially aids the type of tone production that evolves with
without the deep index finger position.
I do use a good French cello bow. The bow makes the sound when it rubs
across the string. A good bow sounds better than a bad one. The bows from
the famous french makers are considered the best. Vibration does have
something to do with sound and tone and the stick vibrates, but mostly it is
there to hold the bow hair which gets frequently replaced and does not come
from French horses. Does that answer your question or am I gettting over
your head?

Please post the bill of sale for your Samick piano to show us how much you
really paid for it. It won't hurt you at all. O.K. we'll all have a good
laugh, but maybe someone would like to have your piano for a fair price and
you could stop trying to sell it here.

I'm sorry, but due to the lack of content and false use of terms, your
attemt at describing the "Russian vs. Franco-German" violin school post gets
a D.

Regards,

Edvard
Michael Sayers
2003-10-17 18:46:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Edvard
Post by Michael Sayers
Post by Edvard
Post by Michael Sayers
P.S. - This reminds me of a quarrel between the two schools of bow
handling (the Russian vs. the Franco-German).
There never was a "Franco-German" school of string playing, bonehead. You
obviously have very little idea what you are talking about. Quit while you
are ahead and stop talking about things beyond your experience and knowledge
and using pretentious and pompous language in an obvious attempt to add
weight to your arguments. You have obviously offended many readers of this
group with your posting and not welcome here. This group is for people
interested in pianos and piano playing and not for selling instruments.
Musicians are especially allergic your brand of BS. You have already proved
that you are trying to rip off readers of this group by asking a
horrendously inflated price for your BS, which was manufactured in Korea by
Samick and not posting an original bill of sale to counter claims that is
worth much less than you say. Your attempt to write posts relating to
musical issues has failed because you write about things you don't know and
this has further damaged your credibility as a piano salesman. Please stop
the show and give it up.
Edvard
There are two distinct "schools" of violin playing, which originated
at a time before musicians had much opportunity to hear one another.
You could say there "were" two schools, in addition to many others, but
really this is a great oversimplification of things, especially today since
violinists from these schools have been listening to each other for the last
hundred years or so. It would be better for you to use the past tense or, as
I suggested, not get into this at all.
Even today, most teachers and violinists fall distinctly into one of
the two rubrics.
Post by Edvard
Post by Michael Sayers
There is the Franco-German school
Sorry, but it's called the "Franco-BELGIAN" school and it's teacher and
founder was Eugene Ysaye (a Belgian). Look it up in that outdated book or
liner notes you read again.
I learned it in a masterclass of Eduard Schmeider. My literal memory
is not what it used to be - but I do now recall that, yes,
"Franco-Belgian" is the designation used by Schmeider.
Post by Edvard
Post by Michael Sayers
(two exemplars of which are Kreisler
and Joachim)
Well, one could say that Joachim, who was from the Vienna Conservatory
admired Ysaye's playing, and although he and Kreisler (another student of
the Vienese school) went to study in Paris, they are not from the
Franco-Belgian school.
This is absolutely not correct. Fritz Kreisler was Franco-Belgian all
the way. I too, after hearing those scratchy 1903 recordings, have
had my doubts about Joachim.
Post by Edvard
Post by Michael Sayers
and the Russian school (an exemplar of which is Heifetz).
Heifetz was a student of Leopold Auer, who class produced many of the great
virtuosos of the early 20th century, but evolved and changed quite a bit as
the "Soviet" school developed under the tutelage of David Oistrach.
Post by Michael Sayers
The Russian school involves holding the bow with a deep index finger,
and a better control towards the end of the bow furthest from the hand
(have you ever noticed how Heifetz's tone deteriorates when he plays
in the three or four inches of the bow nearest the hand?).
Good boy, the part about the index finger is correct. The part about better
bow control at the tip (that's what one calls the "part of the bow furthest
from the hand") is rubbish. I haven't noticed what you are talking about
with Heifetz and you who by all accounts little more than a
Samick-key-pounder are not the one to criticize his tone.
I am not talking about better bow control in tip - I am not talking
about "control" at all, but about tone. I am talking about worse
violin tone when the 3-4 inches of the bow closest to the hand are
used - plainly audible in the audio and video recordings of Heifetz.

Heifitz had a wonderful, luminous Apollonian tone. Nothing can be
gained, absolutely, without a loss somewhere else. That is all.

The recordings on the Bernhard Steiner brand piano (which you refer to
as a Samick piano) are of Michael Allen, not of myself.
Post by Edvard
Post by Michael Sayers
The
Franco-German school is the opposite.
I guess you are looking for the easy way out here, but considering that you
are out of your area here, it's no wonder. You oversimplify things by
lumping a lot of schools together. It's like saying there is the Russian
school of piano playing (Rachmaninov) and the Franco-German (Clara Schumann
and Liszt) school of piano playing. You can make it up, but it's just made
up and below the surface it makes no sense.
Clara Schumann and Liszt......two pianists whose playing were
completely opposite, by all accounts, you place in the same school.
Your analogy does not hold at all.

The violin schools are distinguished by the technique of tone
production. The piano schools are distinguished by the goals of one's
interpretation.
Post by Edvard
Post by Michael Sayers
Even today there are strong opinions on this, and I don't wish to
quarrel with you about it (I assume that you are a violinist?). You
might use both approaches: the Russian for larger spaces, where a
bigger tone is required, and the Franco-German for a more exquisite
tone in smaller spaces.
First of all you are in no position to even have an opinion on this at all
so the need for a quarrel is superfluous. My beef with you is that you have
a penchant for expounding on issues that are beyond your grasp. This
paragraph is similar in its opportunistic character as your attempt to win
the trill debate by jumping in late and saying "it's not rotation, it's not
flexion, it's both" and run home with the laurels sought after by get real
and greg presley. As for string playing, if you don't know something go to a
different newsgroup, ask a question and listen. You can gain more by asking,
reading and listening than by writing and talking about things of which you
know very little and covering up for it with a false sense of superiority.
I suspect that I have asked, read and listened, much more profoundly
and deeply than you.
Post by Edvard
Secondly, as you seem to have gathered, string playing has become very
international in the last fifty years or so and as you imply, the great
players and teachers of the last half of the 20th century including
Oistrach, Persinger, Galamian and DeLay combined aspects of both methods, so
the "school" debate is not really relevant, which to your credit does have
something to do with how greg and get real were arguing about thumb flexion
(I'll give you a break on that one), but leaves you out in the cold with
regard to spouting out half-witted, not thought out statements regarding
violin schools.
My observation of living violinists bears out the separation under the
two rubrics.
Post by Edvard
Post by Michael Sayers
To my view there is no one way; the violinist's goal is an individual
tone, and each of these violinists had it.
Excuse me please, but you are going off into the pretentiousness again. It
sounds as if you're saying you single-handedly discovered the greatest
violinists of the century. Of course they had "it," but every schmuck knows
that. Your "to my view" dilutes any credibility to zilch.
It means that by thinking about and considering the view, it has
become my own.
Post by Edvard
Post by Michael Sayers
Their various
student-emulators, who didn't pursue an individual tone, didn't get
far (I can't think of one famous Heifetz pupil, in spite of all his
years of teaching). Mischa Elman, when asked about how he produced
his "golden tone", said that he strove for the type of tone he had
heard his father produce on the violin. None of the Mischa Elman
pupils, for instance, acquired his golden tone in spite of emulation
attempts.
Mr. Heifetz and Mr. Elman were fiddlers, not teachers, but that's another
story. Actually, Ivan Galamian managed to do a pretty good job of
integrating the best of Capet's bow technique with the russian school and
Dorothy Delay had an outstanding class for decades. The "American's"
produced many famous pupils, but coming from your point of view, I'm
surprised you put so much emphasis on fame. Wasn't your idol Mr. Nyiregyhazi
rather unknown compared to a famous pianist such as Mr. Gieseking, who you
disdainfully said was "obviously not a pianist".
The fingerings in that urtext Schubert edition are distinctly the work
of a German musicologist, not a pianist. If they were published under
the name of "Walter Gieseking", then that doesn't, unfortunately,
change the nature of those fingerings.

We are overdue for a Nyiregyhazi revival. 150 years from now he will
be right up there with Bach, Beethoven and Liszt, and every piano
student (if there still are pianos in production) will study his works
just like they do Schumann's Kreisleriana.

J.S. Bach was unknown for quite some time. Didn't that Leipzig church
hire him only with great reluctance, settling for someone who in their
view was a "mediocrity"?

History repeats itself.

And, I don't idolize Nyiregyhazi as a pianist. In many of those
recitals from the 70s, his playing is in pieces unusually mechanical,
and even shallow (such as in the Chopin F Minor nocturne Op. 55 No. 1,
or Liszt's Il Eglogue). He drank considerably, and was highly self
abusive - and this emerges often in his playing. But his recordings
do achieve extraordinary insights at times, and show what has been
lost from culture of today's best pianists (I suppose the Clara
Schumann-Brahms "school" won out over the Anton Rubinstein-Liszt
"school", would be the proper historical vantage point).

He is most to be admired as a composer; and only secondly as a pianist
who is the strongest recorded link to how the composers of the 19th
century were accustomed to hearing their music performed. Those who
lived long enough to hear the old Liszt and the young Nyiregyhazi,
noted the remarkable similarity of tempos and touch, and the
"astonishing technique", et c.

Brahms gave Anton Rubinstein permission to play Brahms' pieces however
he preferred, by the way.
Post by Edvard
Post by Michael Sayers
One must experiment with diverse methods, to arrive at the end that is
sought, and one must have a clearly aural perception throughout that
process of the tone that is to be achieved.
Um, yeah. Obvious. Anybody could say that, so what? It's as if you say
"music is the sounds which we all hear in our head and a performer brings
these sounds to life uniting the one of humanity in its humble journey to
reach harmony" or just blah, blah, blah.
I am just saying that emulation of a particular technique does not
produce equivalent results.
Post by Edvard
Post by Michael Sayers
M.S.
P.S. - I am curious about what type of bow you use, because I
understand that in the case of a good French bow, the vibration of the
bow especially aids the type of tone production that evolves with
without the deep index finger position.
I do use a good French cello bow. The bow makes the sound when it rubs
across the string. A good bow sounds better than a bad one. The bows from
the famous french makers are considered the best. Vibration does have
something to do with sound and tone and the stick vibrates, but mostly it is
there to hold the bow hair which gets frequently replaced and does not come
from French horses. Does that answer your question or am I gettting over
your head?
I know very little about the mechanics and acoustics of the
violincello, and wouldn't venture to discuss an instrument that is
played from such a different position as the violin.
Post by Edvard
Please post the bill of sale for your Samick piano to show us how much you
really paid for it. It won't hurt you at all. O.K. we'll all have a good
laugh, but maybe someone would like to have your piano for a fair price and
you could stop trying to sell it here.
The decision to post the bill of sale or not is mine, not yours.
Since Fletcher has now stated that not only did he not speak with Ivan
Kahn, but also that I and the prototype C-8 weren't even discussed, it
seems like there is nothing to refute.

Rmmp is a group of highly vulgar people, to whom any self-expression,
if it can be done, then by all means should be done (which includes
calling others "moron" and "idiot", rather than engage in a rational
discussion). Quite distinct from these persons, I do attach some
value to other human beings on the planet, and I do think a certain
decorum and responsibility for others should be maintained in how one
proceeds.

I may or may not post the bill of sale, but if I do so it will be at a
time and (internet) place of my choosing. I am not obligated to post
it, any more than I am obligated to post my bank records to prove to
"getreal" that I do, yes, derive an income from performing.

Perhaps I should just leave my doors unlocked, and invite the whole
world in 24/7 to see every detail of my existence? No doubt, that
would please you tactless brutes greatly.
Post by Edvard
I'm sorry, but due to the lack of content and false use of terms, your
attemt at describing the "Russian vs. Franco-German" violin school post gets
a D.
I propose that it now be upgraded to a B+.


M.S.
scanman
2003-10-17 20:56:29 UTC
Permalink
x-no-archive: yes
Post by Michael Sayers
Rmmp is a group of highly vulgar people, to whom any self-expression,
if it can be done, then by all means should be done (which includes
calling others "moron" and "idiot", rather than engage in a rational
discussion).
This is one of the most incomprehensible and convoluted statements I
have read in a great deal of time. Are you aware that your use of the
written language is awkward, artless, confusing, stilted and often
outright incorrect? .....no, I didn't think so.


/
ptooner
2003-10-17 22:53:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by scanman
x-no-archive: yes
Post by Michael Sayers
Rmmp is a group of highly vulgar people, to whom any self-expression,
if it can be done, then by all means should be done (which includes
calling others "moron" and "idiot", rather than engage in a rational
discussion).
This is one of the most incomprehensible and convoluted statements I
have read in a great deal of time. Are you aware that your use of the
written language is awkward, artless, confusing, stilted and often
outright incorrect? .....no, I didn't think so.
You gotta wonder why he insists on associating with us "highly vulgar"
people??

gerry
Hilde
2003-10-17 23:52:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Sayers
Rmmp is a group of highly vulgar people, to whom any self-expression,
if it can be done, then by all means should be done (which includes
calling others "moron" and "idiot", rather than engage in a rational
discussion).
The whole group is like that, because of a handful of posters who've taken
issue with you? That's a rather hateful thing to think, even if you were
justified in your contempt for those specific posters.
Post by Michael Sayers
Quite distinct from these persons, I do attach some
value to other human beings on the planet, and I do think a certain
decorum and responsibility for others should be maintained in how one
proceeds.
Your posts are nothing but passive aggressive foppery. You intentionally
set yourself up to be flamed, so you can pretend to absorb and respond as
you think a martyr might. All of which is because you have rage issues
connected to social ostracization during your formative years.
get real
2003-10-18 00:13:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hilde
Post by Michael Sayers
Rmmp is a group of highly vulgar people, to whom any self-expression,
if it can be done, then by all means should be done (which includes
calling others "moron" and "idiot", rather than engage in a rational
discussion).
The whole group is like that, because of a handful of posters who've taken
issue with you? That's a rather hateful thing to think, even if you were
justified in your contempt for those specific posters.
Post by Michael Sayers
Quite distinct from these persons, I do attach some
value to other human beings on the planet, and I do think a certain
decorum and responsibility for others should be maintained in how one
proceeds.
Your posts are nothing but passive aggressive foppery. You intentionally
set yourself up to be flamed, so you can pretend to absorb and respond as
you think a martyr might. All of which is because you have rage issues
connected to social ostracization during your formative years.
Pretty good!

f***@m0x0.conservatory.com
2003-10-16 22:26:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Sayers
There is the Franco-German school (two exemplars of which are Kreisler
and Joachim) and the Russian school (an exemplar of which is Heifetz).
So you're an expert on string technique as well? Qualified enough to
criticize Heifetz? Amazing that you aren't conducting a symphony
orchestra, what with your amazing pianistic abilites and newly revealed
string expertise. (Ten Horowitzes conducting. That would be something.)

Well, I guess I should just wait for you to shoot your mouth off about
French horn, then I can bring Melissa into the discussion. After she's
done with you, you'll think of Larry Fletcher as your admirer and bosom
buddy :-)

Finish the chess game so I can finally just filter you out.
Michael Sayers
2003-10-17 18:48:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@m0x0.conservatory.com
Post by Michael Sayers
There is the Franco-German school (two exemplars of which are Kreisler
and Joachim) and the Russian school (an exemplar of which is Heifetz).
So you're an expert on string technique as well? Qualified enough to
criticize Heifetz? Amazing that you aren't conducting a symphony
orchestra, what with your amazing pianistic abilites and newly revealed
string expertise. (Ten Horowitzes conducting. That would be something.)
I am no expert on string technique, and have said nothing to criticize Heifetz.
Post by f***@m0x0.conservatory.com
Well, I guess I should just wait for you to shoot your mouth off about
French horn, then I can bring Melissa into the discussion. After she's
done with you, you'll think of Larry Fletcher as your admirer and bosom
buddy :-)
Finish the chess game so I can finally just filter you out.
I have been waiting on a move from Peter for some days now.


M.S.
gregpresley
2003-10-16 08:24:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by get real
Post by gregpresley
Edward, the thumb should NOT be flexed.
This statement proves you haven't a clue. Better learn a little before
giving advice. As with the fingers, the thumb flexes at three joints.
flex:1. v. to bend, as the arm.
This is the sense in which I was using this word.
Then you should have been more precise.
getreal, when I post here, I'm writing for people who do not use scientific
terms for the muscles, tendons, etc. (The vast majority of posters and
readers at rmmp).
Man, you just don't get it. You are giving advice to someone who may
be led down a wrong path due to your ignorance. Telling someone to
play without flexing the thumb is madness and irresponsible.
As Edwards subsequent post PROVES, my advice didn't lead him down a wrong
path at all, since he is now accomplishing the trill using the image that
his teacher gave him that my post reinforced. YOU are the one insisting
that flex means the same thing to all people, which is patently false, as I
gave you the first dictionary meaning (meaning it is the most common one)
which is NOT the the scientific meaning you have attached to it. It IS a
scientific term but ALSO a common term which can and is interpreted in
different ways. You keep insisting over and over again that flex is a
scientific term and only a scientific term and I simply don't accept that.
To give a different example, one which I hope will penetrate, anyone
who knows anatomy knows that the phrase "pull in your stomach" is "madness"
as you describe it. Nonetheless, 99 out of 100 people will contract the
muscles which pull in the abdominal wall, which is the exact result people
who call out that directive want to accomplish.
In 20 years of teaching pianists, NONE of my students has ever injured
himself/ herself, and I have helped a number of people rehabilitate
themselves from injuries caused by bad physical habits. I myself have played
much of the most difficult piano repertory for 35 years and have never had
so much as a sore forearm in all those years. I KNOW how to play the piano
well without hurting myself and I know how to teach others to do the same. I
resent your efforts to paint me as a person whose advice is dangerous and
ignorant. I'll be happy to send you any number of CD's that I have made in
live performances over the years if you need proof that I know what I'm
talking about when it comes to accurate and technically clean piano-playing.
You need only request it.
Although I'm not particularly a devotee of Taubman's technique, a
simple google search would show that she is A. famous for rehabilitating
injured pianists, and B. she is adamantly opposed to tightly curving the
fingers. Have your argument with her, not with me.
get real
2003-10-16 12:21:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by get real
Post by gregpresley
Edward, the thumb should NOT be flexed.
This statement proves you haven't a clue. Better learn a little
before
Post by get real
Post by gregpresley
giving advice. As with the fingers, the thumb flexes at three
joints.
Post by get real
Post by gregpresley
flex:1. v. to bend, as the arm.
This is the sense in which I was using this word.
Then you should have been more precise.
getreal, when I post here, I'm writing for people who do not use
scientific
Post by get real
Post by gregpresley
terms for the muscles, tendons, etc. (The vast majority of posters and
readers at rmmp).
Man, you just don't get it. You are giving advice to someone who may
be led down a wrong path due to your ignorance. Telling someone to
play without flexing the thumb is madness and irresponsible.
As Edwards subsequent post PROVES, my advice didn't lead him down a wrong
path at all,
Lucky for him.
since he is now accomplishing the trill using the image that
his teacher gave him that my post reinforced.
Your post was nonsense. It is clearly impossble to trill without
flexing the thumb or finger. Whether that flexion happens with
resultant motion, or is resisted by its opposing muscle and causes
fixation, without contraction of the flexor the key will not go
down.What about this do you not understand?
YOU are the one insisting
that flex means the same thing to all people,
Please show where I state this. QUote, please.
which is patently false, as I
gave you the first dictionary meaning (meaning it is the most common one)
which is NOT the the scientific meaning you have attached to it.
Yes, it is the same. When flexing from the basal joint, you are
bending. When extending from the basal joiint you are straightening.
It IS a
scientific term but ALSO a common term which can and is interpreted in
different ways. You keep insisting over and over again that flex is a
scientific term
YOu are an impossible person. I HAVE NEVER used the word "scientific".
It is YOU who have somehow assumed my definition is different from the
dictionary. It is not.
and only a scientific term and I simply don't accept that.
To give a different example, one which I hope will penetrate, anyone
who knows anatomy knows that the phrase "pull in your stomach" is "madness"
as you describe it. Nonetheless, 99 out of 100 people will contract the
muscles which pull in the abdominal wall, which is the exact result people
who call out that directive want to accomplish.
In 20 years of teaching pianists, NONE of my students has ever injured
himself/ herself, and I have helped a number of people rehabilitate
themselves from injuries caused by bad physical habits. I myself have played
much of the most difficult piano repertory for 35 years and have never had
so much as a sore forearm in all those years. I KNOW how to play the piano
well without hurting myself and I know how to teach others to do the same. I
resent your efforts to paint me as a person whose advice is dangerous and
ignorant. I'll be happy to send you any number of CD's that I have made in
live performances over the years if you need proof that I know what I'm
talking about when it comes to accurate and technically clean piano-playing.
You need only request it.
Although I'm not particularly a devotee of Taubman's technique, a
simple google search would show that she is A. famous for rehabilitating
injured pianists, and B. she is adamantly opposed to tightly curving the
fingers. Have your argument with her, not with me.
All of this blahblah and the fact still remains that your advice was
ill-conceived due to ignorance. Re Taubman, she is a remedial expert,
and essentially has a "shtick" as well, albeit a shtick that sometimes
works. Regarding your phrase "tightly curving", again, this is your
invention, I have never used it. You have put words into my mouth
throughout this post. It seems the only way you can make your point.
gregpresley
2003-10-17 09:02:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by get real
Your post was nonsense. It is clearly impossble to trill without
flexing the thumb or finger. Whether that flexion happens with
resultant motion, or is resisted by its opposing muscle and causes
fixation, without contraction of the flexor the key will not go
down.What about this do you not understand?
I ALREADY said that I was specifically talking about bending the thumb at
the joints nearest the thumbnail - THAT is the flex I was talking about.
Post by get real
Post by gregpresley
YOU are the one insisting
that flex means the same thing to all people,
Please show where I state this. QUote, please.
Post by gregpresley
which is patently false, as I
gave you the first dictionary meaning (meaning it is the most common one)
which is NOT the the scientific meaning you have attached to it.
Yes, it is the same. When flexing from the basal joint, you are
bending. When extending from the basal joiint you are straightening.
I would argue that not one person in 50 would perceive this motion from the
basal joint as bending in the sense that most people use and understand that
word, while I grant you that from a scientific/technical aspect what you are
saying is absolutely true. Bending IMPLIES a noticeable change of angle,
one which is not visually apparent with movements from the basal joint. (As
its dictionary meaning is to form a crook, curve, or bow). Again, what you
are saying is scientifically/technically correct, so I'm not arguing with
you on that account - and never have......you keep referring to a flexor and
my supposed lack of understanding of that idea as though I had used that
term in these posts, which I never have.
If you ask someone to create a bend involving his arm or his leg, he
will create a noticable angle at the elbow or the knee - NEVER at the
shoulder or the hip. Not because those motions would not be a correct
interpretation of your request, but because that's NOT the first "idea" of
bending or flexing that comes to mind. If you think I'm crazy to think so,
do a trial run on your friends, making those requests. As I said before, I
was using terminology in a way that I think it is commonly understood, not
in its scientific application. I readily admit that what I said was not
correct in the scientific application of the term flex, and I wish I
believed that that would satisfy you, but it seems clear that you have
"issues" and are looking for more from me, such as some admission that I
know nothing about playing piano, that I'm an idiot, that I could not
possibly have trained a capable pianist in my life, that you are a great
genius and should never be contradicted, etc etc.
get real
2003-10-17 12:13:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by gregpresley
Post by get real
Your post was nonsense. It is clearly impossble to trill without
flexing the thumb or finger. Whether that flexion happens with
resultant motion, or is resisted by its opposing muscle and causes
fixation, without contraction of the flexor the key will not go
down.What about this do you not understand?
I ALREADY said that I was specifically talking about bending the thumb at
the joints nearest the thumbnail - THAT is the flex I was talking about.
Snipping the section to which I am replying and then attempting to
refute that reply is not a good habit. Let's just say that when you
give advice, you should make sure that you are using words correctly.
Post by gregpresley
Post by get real
Post by gregpresley
YOU are the one insisting
that flex means the same thing to all people,
Please show where I state this. QUote, please.
Post by gregpresley
which is patently false, as I
gave you the first dictionary meaning (meaning it is the most common one)
which is NOT the the scientific meaning you have attached to it.
Yes, it is the same. When flexing from the basal joint, you are
bending. When extending from the basal joiint you are straightening.
I would argue that not one person in 50 would perceive this motion from the
basal joint as bending in the sense that most people use and understand that
word, while I grant you that from a scientific/technical aspect what you are
saying is absolutely true. Bending IMPLIES a noticeable change of angle,
one which is not visually apparent with movements from the basal joint. (As
its dictionary meaning is to form a crook, curve, or bow).
Find a new dictionary. From merriam webster on the web:

4 a : a bending movement around a joint in a limb (as the knee or
elbow) that decreases the angle between the bones of the limb at the
joint -- compare EXTENSION 3b

Clearly, flexion at the basal joint fulfills this definitioni.
Post by gregpresley
Again, what you
are saying is scientifically/technically correct, so I'm not arguing with
you on that account - and never have......you keep referring to a flexor and
my supposed lack of understanding of that idea as though I had used that
term in these posts, which I never have.
Edward, the thumb should NOT be flexed.
If you ask someone to create a bend involving his arm or his leg, he
will create a noticable angle at the elbow or the knee - NEVER at the
shoulder or the hip.
Also from merriam webster:

4 b : a forward raising of the arm or leg by a movement at the
shoulder or hip joint
Post by gregpresley
Not because those motions would not be a correct
interpretation of your request,
I am not aware that I made a requsst. Whatever.
Post by gregpresley
but because that's NOT the first "idea" of
bending or flexing that comes to mind. If you think I'm crazy to think so,
do a trial run on your friends, making those requests. As I said before, I
was using terminology in a way that I think it is commonly understood, not
in its scientific application. I readily admit that what I said was not
correct in the scientific application of the term flex, and I wish I
believed that that would satisfy you, but it seems clear that you have
"issues" and are looking for more from me, such as some admission that I
know nothing about playing piano, that I'm an idiot, that I could not
possibly have trained a capable pianist in my life, that you are a great
genius and should never be contradicted, etc etc.
More blahblah. All I am saying and have ever said is that you are too
cocksure of yourself, you jump in with advice which at the very least
is unclear, and you make generalizations about technique, for instance
about finger curvature, which are simply the product of ignorance
(please see the separate thread I started about that). I am suggesting
that you examine yourself before giving advice, because it's so easy
for any of us to aim someone down a wrong path, and open your mind to
the fact that you, and I, and everybody has more to learn. And I do
not think you are an idiot, sorry if I somehow gave you that
impression.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...