วีดีโอ

Its called a search, bro. lol

@@THEcucufate I'm sorry, I don't understand. Is your implication that the evidence is everywhere you care to look (search online), but that you shouldn't expect to see actual evidence of it, because the 'method' becomes...'invisible' at speed, an idea that 'advises' the hand, and that in deploy by sufficiently 'nuanced', trained, and skilled hands, they only appear to operate outside of the method. That sounds like a case of the Emperor's New Clothes.

@@philosophicallyspeaking6463 wow

​@@philosophicallyspeaking6463 - the primary concern around remedying poor, injurious technic centers around elimination of tension. Specifically related to piano technic, tension is the simultaneous contraction of opposing pairs of muscles. Earlier keyboard technic (i.e. harpsichords) incorporated a lot of lifting of the fingers. This was survivable on the harpsichord due to its very light action. However, on the heavier action of the modern piano this is deadly. Lifting the fingers uses the muscles in the top of the forearm -- i.e. the extensors. The extensors are engaged to lift the fingers, whereas the flexors (underside of the forearm) are engaged to play (pull down) the fingers. Lifting a finger via the extensors creates a situation where, for a brief moment the extensors are still engaged to lift the finger while at the same time the flexors become engaged to play (pull down) the finger. In each of these moments, the opposing pairs of muscles are "fighting" each other, which creates tension, stress on tendons and joints, and may result in pain and injury if continued over time. This error is frequently exacerbated by those who teach, for example, Hanon, which has in its instructions to lift the fingers high. This is devastating to a good relaxed pianistic technic. Leschetzky solved for this by eliminating the "lifting" part. Rather, he simply plays (flexors engage, pulls down) and releases (flexors disengage) -- called the "close touch" because the fingers do not necessarily leave the keys (advanced chordal passages notwithstanding). Learning to play with a "close touch" (using flexors only) minimizes the lifting of the fingers, thereby minimizing tension and risk of injury. Taubman's approach also eliminates use of the extensors by engaging the entire arm and flexors only, which can be useful and effective for healing and restoration of injuries caused by excessive tension. But it only goes so far, and somewhat immobilizes the wrist. Understanding, of course, that all beginning technical approaches must evolve.

No...not Bach, play a piece that actually taxes the hand (more so than the brain). These Taubman people are always 'demonstrating' by using pieces whose practice never leads to hand problems. On rare occasion when they do play something challenging to the hand, they have to play it slowly to allow for the intrusion of all the extra movement the method introduces, while inferring that the slow speed is specifically adopted to make it easier for 'you' to 'observe', not for them to play, or, they play it so badly that one is caused to doubt if they can, or ever once actually 'could' play, at a high level, thereby disproving the prescriptive value of the method into the bargain. Where did Taubman get the idea the no one before her had realized the valued in sharing the work of the finger with the wrist and forearm? Garrick Olhsson is the only one who reliably proves a 'viable' discourse and 'practical' assimilation on 'hybrid' play. Grahan Fitch seems to teach similarly without mention of Taubman.

​@@philosophicallyspeaking6463 - some very good points. It's one thing to identify some technically incorrect practices and suggest that the way to remedy them is to not do them, and the Taubman approach may have some usefulness at the onset to avoid some bad habits. But eventually all those pedagogical manuvers must give way to the necessary technics for playing more advanced pieces. In particular, Leschetizky seems to have a better integration of the forearm/wrist/finger movement.

What do you say is so true. I don’t know how many people are turned off to the piano because it is so uncomfortable for them. As a former Taubman student I count myself very lucky that I never had one of those teachers

Actually, in terms of in and out motions, a c major scale is one of the most complex BECAUSE its all on white keys. So I think this is a good example. Take for example a b major scale, there wouldn't be as much in and out because the short fingers (1,5) play white keys, and long fingers (2,3,4) play on black keys.

@@theo5069 oh sure! I didn't mean to imply that C major isn't very useful. As you say, I guess it's the most complicated one. I seem to remember reading that Chopin taught his students starting with one of the black key scales for the reasons you gave. But I guess each key presents its own challenges.

@@neilward5825 yeah for sure!

Chopin had his students perfect the b scale first.

Hahaha !

@@piano9051 I do.