I brought this back up, because I’ve been screwing around on the piano this morning and with all the talk about Gould on the Bach thread, I thought I would try playing piano sitting on a low chair. I never before tried it. (My teacher’s is probably going to shake his head if he learns about this. But he should know better then to go off concertizing around the country this week instead of staying home and teaching me. )

The result is that I think I did have better finger control. Could be just my imagination, though. But it is something how when my eyes were closer to the keyboard, and with the Rach prelude I’m working on, I think I was able to bring out the top notes better (something I’m struggling with). But it was awkward coming down on big chords spread far apart – like I’m too close the keys and can’t see both hands out there, so that’s not so great. And Robert, you’re right about reading the music. It’s much higher up. And since I'm short it's always been high up, anyway.

I’ve never heard Gould play Chopin and wonder if there’s a video of that on youtube. I'll check it out after this. If there is, I sure hope he doesn't sing along.

I can't add anything to all that has been said about Gould except that I agree with those who believe he was a great genius who would had accomplished a lot more if he had not died so prematurely. I agree with Robert and those who believe he had Aspgerger's Syndrome or something akin to it. I don't believe his eccentricities were feigned to attract attention. Like Einstein, he was a genius who often didn't relate to others normally.

Someone told me I have Asperger's or whatever it is.

This is linked to the thread Terez posted about Barenboim and the Bach Goldberg Variations.

I found Barenboim on Youtube playing the Aria from the Goldberg variations. Here’s the link:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=AcXXkcZ2jWM
So I watched him first and thought, “Ok – that’s nice. And look how high he sits at the piano. Many times, his forearms are slanted down toward the keys a great deal. He seems to have good control over his fingers like this. And what a pretty piece.”
Then I found Gould playing the same piece. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rtt1msnwlZQ
the Aria starts at the 5:50 mark. I am astonished! He plays it much slower and I think more beautiful than probably anyone else could ever hope to do. What he is producing on the piano is nearly killing me, it’s so nice. Like it lures you in, undresses you, hands gently rubbing all over your body, and then love-making - nice and slow, lingering on and on…Do you see what I mean? He caresses the keys like he is making love to the piano. That may sound weird, but I don’t know…there’s something about watching that video that’s got me all ‘worked up’, if get what I'm talking about. (And doesn’t it just figure that my husband is never around when I need him most!). Also, there’s that posture that Gould has at the piano. With his face so near the keys, that has to be the way he controls his fingers like that, don’t you think?

I doubt it, because sometimes he's rolling his head back with his eyes closed.

But yeah, I also found that video of Gould's Goldberg earlier and bookmarked it, and I agree it's nicer than Barenboim. But I don't think Barenboim is bad at all, and I just didn't see why he would be described as "too romantic" an interpretation of Bach, which I think is what was said.

Also, I saw in the comments on YouTube that Gould had done an earlier recording of Goldberg in which the Aria was played faster, probably similar to Barenboim's tempo.

Yeah, I don't get that, either.



My teacher suggested that I listen to Gould's first recording of these. But I kind of like this one.

Well, if you have, you should have severe problems to understand body language, communication with other people and especially "everything that is in between the lines" and you would take everything literally, be focused on just certain special areas in which you are very skilled, anti-social, bad emotional and especially no empathy for other people. Who said it? A doctor? If not, ignore it.

Yeah, it wasn't a doctor. It was a person I know who I guess had read about it, and he said I had signs of it - extreme OCD, extremely anti-social (I don't guess you can tell since I find it much easier to be sociable online in written form - in real life, I'm very anti-social), and I do tend to get super-lost in my interests/skills, which would be music/literature, and most of my obsession with those tends to be in a loner sort of way, either at my digital piano with headphones, or at my computer with headphones. I don't really take everything literally, though - I'm not the best with hints, but I can pick up on them every now and then.

My son is now diagnosed HFA which means High Function Autism and there is small differences between that and Asperger's syndrome so I know what I am talking about. If you just feel lucky about your life, you shouldn't bother too much.

Dear Piano enthousiasts,

Here are my 2 cents....

I realy don't know what it is about Glenn Gould that people always come to analyse his strangeness. I for my part find what he did whit the piano not strange at all. In fact, his piano technique as well as his interpretation make a lot of sense. Let me confine my remarks to the technique:

- compared with other pianists, his technique comes by far the closest to the natural "grasping" function of the hand, enabling him to play with great security.
- related to this is his bodily posture that makes sense from a physical viewpoint as he makes excellent use of gravity.
- his singing, humming and even his swinging is nowadays often advised as a relaxation technique.

I realy don't understand why his example is not followed more often until now. I am quite sure, that by the time his excentricities are forgotten, his example will be followed more often since it makes great sense!

Greetings from Peter

My teacher has been trying to modify my own eccentricities at the piano. She says that performing is an athletic event and that I have to be in proper form. I tend to sway a lot unconsciously as I play, and she will put her hands on my back to keep me still, or just coach while I'm playing - "Move nothing but your arms!" My non-pedal foot, I often keep underneath me, and put a lot of my weight on it. I sort of use it like a brace (against what, I'm not sure - it's just something I do). She'll grab my leg and place my left foot somewhere up by the pedals. My old teacher did the same thing with my pedal foot, because when I was playing a piece where I didn't use it at all (like a Bach invention or something) I would keep both of my feet underneath me, so he would constantly have to remind me to keep my pedal foot in position. At least he didn't worry about my left foot.

Hmmm......I know I should just shut up because I don't want you to doubt your teacher, since I'm sure she is telling you what she believes just because she may not have done any recent readings, and certainly not to harm you. And I don't wish to argue with anyone at PS here who thinks otherwise, but........moving only your arms is now an old-fashioned way of playing because it has proven to be the surest way to get strain in the back and everywhere else. In my opinion and based on my own experience and on lots of reading, the best way to play is often the way that comes natural, and that is to sway freely from your torso -- both leaning forward (ie.head further forward than hips are) and freely swaying from side to side, essentially so that your sternum (chest) ends up centred over the area of the keyboard your hands are at. And as far as your left foot tucked under you and you digging into the ground, that is very much recommended in some readings. It is hard to explain and I am currently on only a 15-min. break from teaching so hope I am making sense in a rush, but by left foot being on ground and not just resting lightly there either, it allows the energy of your thigh quadricep muscles to be transferred up to your torso, which is where the energy then goes to arms and eventually fingertips. Again, not my crazy logic, but based on what I've read. Don't ask me the exact authors or book titles because I've read about a dozen books from the local library on correct body position, so wouldn't know where to begin looking, but I hope this info is helpful anyway.

lol...by all means, question anything and everything. I know she's going to have a really hard time breaking me of my natural position, because I've always played that way. She'll probably give up eventually.


That's why I like it, I think - like, if I do it that way, I feel like I have not only gravity but also my body weight to contribute. It's not always in use, but it's potential force at my disposal for when I need it.

Hi Peter - welcome to the conversation. I remember you from another topic about hand position and also remember that some people here find your description of how to hold the hands totally against what is considered normal. Still, as someone who is struggling with practically everything regarding playing piano, my ears are never closed. I have a very good teacher, who in my very first lesson told me I was holding my wrists up too high. That may have been one of the reasons I have tendonitis. But in addition to that, I don't use enough weight, gravity, strength, play with too much tension...etc...whatever else is needed to improve my tone. I tried sitting on a low chair the other day, (like Gould) and it felt very strange. Like I was a kid sitting at our big formal dining room where my chin barely cleared the table. I don't know how tall Gould was, but I'm only 5 feet 2 inches tall, so sitting on a low chair makes me really short. Yes, my eyes were close to my fingers so maybe that's one way of gaining more control over the fingers, but the fact that I couldn't get a high up view of the whole keyboard is not so great. It would take a lot of time to get used to playing the piano this way. So I'm not sure if sitting low is the right thing for me. My trouble seems to be more the way I hold my wrists, but also my fingers coming down with the right amount of weight, force, with tension, without tension...oh, forget it - so much to learn!

Terez and Nicole - I saw Pollini play a few months ago, and he used the soft pedal a lot. But when he wasn't, he put his left foot under the bench. As to swaying, the only thing I can say is that my teacher says to play however you feel is natural. So what if you sway when you play, as long as it's not crazy-looking, but I have to add that my teacher does not sway and sits very straight. That is his natural way. (and he plays very well!)

Just thought of something else. Do you think that women tend to move more when they play piano than men? Maybe because we are more emotional, dramatic, sensitive, used to expressing ourselves etc...? Maybe we are more physical at the piano because that's what is normal for us? But then look at Lang Lang. He's certainly not shy when it comes to 'letting it all go'.

I almost never use the una corda pedal. Which is probably a good thing, because I think I still have a long way to go on mastery of the sustain pedal. I like to think that I enjoy the challenge of making soft passages sing without it, but that might just be one of those things I tell myself.

By the way, Monica...I noticed you wondering a while back if Gould played Chopin, and though you might have already looked it up, Wikipedia quotes him saying that he played Chopin once or twice a year, "for himself", but that it "didn't convince" him. I can certainly understand his appreciation of the things in Bach that are absent in Chopin, namely strict counterpoint. With Chopin, counterpoint is rarely so strictly defined - rather, it's implicit, with the way that Chopin voices his chords (usually quite perfectly). As much as we love Chopin, much of what he wrote can be easily used as an accompaniment to yet another melody that intertwines perfectly with both the existing melody(-ies) and the chord voicing. Even a simple mind like mine could probably easily come up with something beautiful and profound that would move through those gaps, with what is already written acting like the banks of a river.

I've actually thought about doing that, with the concertos. Not sure if I've mentioned that before, but it's something I've been thinking about a lot with this recent renaissance of love for the concertos I've experienced. I wouldn't change the slightest bit about the piano part. Chopin was in his element writing for the piano. But it's pretty obvious that he didn't really put a whole lot of love into the orchestrations. The harmony is perfect, and there several submelodies that have his name clearly written on them, but he didn't get too adventurous with it. So I get to thinking, wouldn't it be cool if I could transcribe, and embellish, the orchestral parts for a string quartet? That would turn the concertos into quintet sonatas, but I think it could be awesome...Chopin was certainly capable of doing such a thing for himself, but he wrote these concertos at a very young age, and I think he probably used them as a part of his purchase into the music scene. Keyboard music was not at that time nearly as popular as the larger-scale sort of music, and chamber quintets don't quite hack it either. Chopin made his name known fairly quickly, and then essentially retired from the stage and made a good bit of money teaching piano lessons. The wealthy youth in Paris and the surrounding area were I'm sure quite willing to pay exorbitant prices for his guidance, and there were probably quite a few talented ones, too.

So, no more torturous orchestral scoring projects. I can imagine Chopin being so tortured with having had to do it the first time around that he didn't want to touch it again to try to make something else out of it.