amenable to the high class of music which you play, but if this is not
the case your affliction cannot be cured offhand. If the lack of
expression in your playing should emanate from a lack of feeling in
yourself, then your case would be incurable. If, however, you play
"mechanically" because you do not know how to express your emotions in
your playing--and I suspect it to be so--then you are curable, although
there are no remedies that would act directly. I suggest that you form
close associations with good musicians and with lovers of good music. By
looking well and listening you can learn their modes of expression and
employ them first by imitation until the habit of "saying something"
when you play has grown upon you. I think, though, that you need an
inward change before there can be any outward change.
[Sidenote: _The Art of Playing With Feeling_]
In the musical manifestations of feeling how does the artist chiefly
differ from the amateur?
The artist expresses his feelings with due deference to the canons of
art. Above all, he plays correctly without allowing this ever-present
correctness to make his playing seem lacking in feeling. Without unduly
repressing or suppressing his individuality he respects the composer's
intentions by punctiliously obeying every hint or suggestion he finds in
the annotations, concerning speed, force, touch, changes, contrasts,
etc. He delivers the composer's message truthfully. His personality or
individuality reveals itself solely in the way he understands the
composition and in the manner in which he executes the composer's
prescriptions.
Not so the amateur. Long before he is able to play the piece correctly
he begins to twist and turn things in it to suit himself, under the
belief, I suppose, that he is endowed with an "individuality" so strong
as to justify an indulgence in all manner of "liberties," that is,
licence. Feeling is a great thing; so is the will to express it; but
both are worthless without ability. Hence, before playing with feeling,
it were well to make sure that everything in the piece is in the right
place, in the right time, strength, touch, and so forth. Correct
reading--and not only of the notes _per se_--is a matter that every good
teacher insists upon with his pupils, even in the earliest grades of
advancement. The amateur should make sure of that before he allows his
"feelings" to run riot. But he very seldom does.
[Sidenote: _Affected Movements at the Piano_]
Is there any justification for the swaying of the body, the nodding of
the head, the exaggerated motion of the arms, and all grotesque actions
in general while playing the piano, so frequently exhibited not only by
amateurs but by concert players, too?
All such actions as you describe reveal a lack of the player's proper
self-control when they are unconsciously indulged in. When they are
consciously committed, which is not infrequently the case, they betray
the pianist's effort to deflect the auditors' attention from the
composition to himself, feeling probably unable to satisfy his auditors
with the result of his playing and, therefore, resorting to
illustration by more or less exaggerated gesture. General
well-manneredness, or its absence, has a good deal to do with the
matter.
ABOUT THE PIANO PER SE
[Sidenote: _Is the Piano the Hardest to Master?_]
Do you believe that the piano is the most difficult of all instruments
to master--more so than the organ or the violin? If so, why?
The piano is more difficult to master than the organ, because the
tone-production on the piano is not so purely mechanical as it is on the
organ. The pianist's touch is the immediate producer of whatever variety
or colour of tone the moment requires, whereas the organist is powerless
to produce any change of tone colour except by pulling a different stop.
His fingers do not and cannot produce the change. As to string
instruments, their difficulties lie in an entirely different field, and
this fact precludes comparison with the piano. Technically, the string
instrument may be more difficult, but, to become an exponent of musical
art on the piano requires deeper study, because the pianist must
present to his hearers the totality of a composition while the string
instruments depend for the most part upon the accompaniments of some
other instruments.
[Sidenote: _Piano Study for Conductor and Composer_]
Being a cornet player, and wishing to become a conductor and composer, I
should like to know if the study of the piano is necessary in addition
to my broad, theoretical studies and a common college course.
It depends upon what you wish to conduct and what to compose. With no
other means of musically expressing yourself than a cornet it is highly
improbable that you will be able to write or conduct a symphony. But you
may be able to lead a brass band and, perhaps, to write a march or dance
piece. If your musical aims are serious by all means take to the piano.
[Sidenote: _Why the Piano Is So Popular_]
Why do more people play the piano than any other instrument?
Because the rudimentary stages of music study are easier on the piano
than on any other instrument. The higher stages, however, are so much
more difficult, and it is then that the piano gets even with the bold
aggressor. A violinist or 'cellist who can play a melody simply and with
good tone is considered a fairly good amateur, for he must have mastered
the difficulty of tone-production; he must have trained his right arm. A
pianist who can play a melody equally well is the merest tyro. When he
approaches polyphony, when the discrimination begins between the various
parts speaking simultaneously, aye, then the real work begins--not to
speak of velocity. It is, perhaps, for this reason that in reality there
are a great many more violinists than pianists, if by either we mean
persons who really master their instrument. The number of 'cellists is
smaller, but the reason for this is to be found in the small range of
'cello literature and also, perhaps, in the comparative unwieldiness of
the instrument, which does not admit of technical development as, for
instance, the more handy violin. If all beginners at the piano realized
what exasperating, harassing, discouraging, nerve-consuming difficulties
await them later and beset the path to that mastery which so few
achieve, there would be far fewer piano students and more people would
study the violin or the 'cello. Of the harp and the wind instruments I
need not speak, because they are to be considered only in matters
orchestral and not--seriously--as solo instruments.
[Sidenote: _The Genuine Piano Hand_]
What shape of hand do you consider the best for piano playing? Mine is
very broad, with rather long fingers.
The best piano hand is not the popular, pretty, narrow hand with long
fingers. Nearly all the great technicians had or have proportioned
hands. The genuine piano hand must be broad, in order to give each
finger a strong base for the action of its phalanges and to give this
base space enough for the development of the various sets of muscles.
The length of the fingers must be in proportion to the width of the
hand, but it is the width which I consider most important.
[Sidenote: _The Composition Must Fit the Player_]
Would you advise players with small hands to attempt the heavier class
of the compositions by Liszt?
Never! Whether the hands are too small or the stretch between the
fingers too narrow--if you attempt a piece which for these or other
physical reasons you cannot fully master, you always run the serious
risk of overstraining. This, however, should be most carefully avoided.
If you cannot play a certain piece without undue physical strain, leave
it alone and remember that singers choose their songs not because they
lie within their compass, but because they suit their voice. Do
likewise. Be guided by the nature and the type of your hand rather than
by its rapidity of execution.
[Sidenote: _The Best Physical Exercise for the Pianist_]
What physical exercises are most advantageous to be taken in connection
with piano practice? I have been swinging clubs to strengthen wrists and
arms, but have imagined it stiffened my fingers.
I am inclined to think that what you imagined was not far from the
truth. Can you not replace the real clubs by imaginary ones? Since
club-swinging tends to develop the agility of the arms and wrists rather
than their strength you can easily make the same motions without the
clubs; for all exertion of force that keeps the hands in a closed
condition is bound to have a bad effect on piano playing. Undoubtedly
the best exercise of all, however, is brisk walking in the open air, for
it engages every part and every organ of the body, and by compelling
deep breathing it fosters the general health through increased
oxygenation.
[Sidenote: _Horseback Riding Stiffens the Fingers_]
My teacher objects to my riding horseback; not altogether, but he says I
overdo it and it stiffens my fingers. Is he right?
Yes, he is. Every abuse carries its own punishment in its train. The
closed position of the hand, the pressure of the reins upon the fingers,
as constant as it is the case in horseback riding, is surely not
advantageous for the elasticity of the fingers. You should, therefore,
allow the effect of one ride upon your fingers to disappear completely
before you indulge in another.
[Sidenote: _When to Keep Away from the Piano_]
Do you think I should play and study the piano just because it is asked
of me, and when I take no interest in it?
Most emphatically, no! It would be a crime against yourself and against
music. What little interest in music you may have left would be killed
by a study that is distasteful to you, and this would be, therefore,
bound to lead to failure. Leave this study to people who are sincerely
interested in it. Thank heaven, there are still some of those, and there
always will be some! Be sure, however, that you are really not
interested, and discriminate well between a lack of interest and a mere
opposition to a perhaps too strenuous urging on the part of your
relatives. My advice would be to quit the study for a time entirely; if,
after a while, you feel a craving for music you will find the way to
your instrument. This advice, of course, holds good also for violin
students or any type of music student.
BAD MUSIC
[Sidenote: _The Company That One Keeps in Music_]
Must I persist in playing classical pieces when I prefer to play dance
music?
If, in your daily life, you wish to be regarded as a lady or a gentleman
you are obliged to be careful as to the company you keep. It is the same
in musical life. If you associate with the noble thoughts that
constitute good--or, as you call it, classical--music, you will be
counted with a higher class in the world of music. Remember that you
cannot go through a flour-mill without getting dusty. Of course, not all
pieces of dance music are bad; but the general run of them are such
poor, if not vulgar, stuff as hardly to deserve the name of
"compositions." Usually they are mere "expositions" of bad taste. Of
these I warn you for your own sake, and if you wish to avoid the danger
of confounding the good and the bad in that line it is best to abstain
from it entirely. If dance music it must be, why, have you never heard
of the waltzes and mazurkas by Chopin?
[Sidenote: _Why Rag-Time Is Injurious_]
Do you believe the playing of the modern rag-time piece to be actually
hurtful to the student?
I do, indeed, unless it is done merely for a frolic; though even such a
mood might vent itself in better taste. The touch with vulgarity can
never be but hurtful, whatever form vulgarity may assume--whether it be
literature, a person, or a piece of music. Why share the musical food
of those who are, by breeding or circumstance, debarred from anything
better? The vulgar impulse which generated rag-time cannot arouse a
noble impulse in response any more than "dime novels" can awaken the
instincts of gentlemanliness or ladyship. If we watch the street-sweeper
we are liable to get dusty. But remember that the dust on the mind and
soul is not so easily removed as the dust on our clothes.
ETHICAL
[Sidenote: _What the Object of Study Should Be_]
How can we know that our talent is great enough to warrant us in
bestowing year after year of work upon its development?
Pleasure and interest should be such that it is in the actual working
that one is repaid. Do not think so much of the end of your work. Do not
force your work with the one view of becoming a great artist. Let
Providence and the future decide your standing in music. Go on studying
with earnestness and interest, and find your pleasure in the endeavour,
not in the accomplishment.
PITCH AND KINDRED MATTERS
[Sidenote: _The International Pitch_]
What is meant by "pitch" as regards piano tuning? People say that a
certain piano is pitched lower than another. Would E on one piano
actually sound like F on another?
Yes, it would if the pianos were not pitched alike. It is only recently
that an international pitch has been established which was adopted
everywhere except in England. In the international pitch the A in the
second space of the treble staff makes 435 vibrations a second.
[Sidenote: _The "International" Piano Pitch_]
Which piano pitch is preferable, "concert" or "international"?
By all means the "international," because it will fit your piano to be
used in conjunction with any other instrument, no matter whence it may
come. Besides, the international pitch was decided upon as far back as
1859, in Paris, by a government commission, numbering among its members
such men as Auber, Halevy, Berlioz, Meyerbeer, Rossini, Ambroise Thomas,
and many physicists and army generals. You can easily infer from this
that, in determining that the A in the second space of the treble staff
should have 435 vibrations a second, all phases of music--vocal,
instrumental, string, brass, wood, wind--have been duly considered.
[Sidenote: _The Well-Tempered Piano Scale_]
Is there really a difference of three-eighths of a tone between A-sharp
and B-flat on the piano?
There is no difference on the piano. But acoustically there is a
difference, over which, however, I would waste no time, since the
evenly-tempered scale has been generally adopted, and every composition
from Bach's time to the present day has been thought and written in it.
[Sidenote: _The "Colour" of Various Keys_]
Is it not a mistaken idea that any one particular key is more or less
rich or melodious than another?
The effect of a tonality upon our hearing lies not in its signature (as
even Beethoven seemed to believe) but in the vibration proportions. It
is, therefore, irrelevant whether we play a piece upon a high-pitched
piano in C, or upon a low-pitched piano in D flat. There are certain
keys preferable to others for certain colours, but I fear that the
preference is based not upon acoustic qualities but rather upon a
fitness for the hand or voice. We apply the word "colour" as much to
tone as the painters apply "tone" to colour, but I hardly think that
anybody would speak of C major as representing black, or F major green.
THE STUDENT'S AGE
[Sidenote: _Starting a Child's Musical Training_]
At what age should a child begin the study of instrumental music? If my
daughter (six years old) is to study the violin should she first spend a
few years with the piano, or _vice versa_?
The usual age for a child to begin the study of music is between six and
seven years. A pianist hardly needs to learn another instrument to
become a well-rounded musician, but violinists, as well as the players
of all other instruments, and also vocalists, will be much hampered in
their general musical development if they fail to acquire what may be
called a speaking acquaintance with the piano.
[Sidenote: _Age of the Student is Immaterial_]
I am not longer in my first youth, cannot take more than one hour's
lesson a week, and cannot practise more than three hours a day. Would
you still advise me to begin the study of the piano?
Provided there is gift and intelligence, the will, and the opportunity
to study, age need not stand in your way. If your three hours of study
are properly used, and your hour's lesson a week is with a good teacher,
you should not become discouraged.
[Sidenote: _Twenty-five Not Too Late to Begin_]
Do you think that mastery of the piano is unlikely or impossible when
the beginner is twenty-five years of age?
It is neither unlikely nor impossible. Your age will to some degree
handicap you, because from purely physical causes the elasticity of the
fingers and wrists could be developed much more quickly if you were ten
years younger. If, however, you are endowed with strong musical gifts in
the abstract you will achieve results superior to those attained by
younger people with less talent. In overcoming the difficulties due to a
late beginning you will find great inward satisfaction, and your
attainments are bound to be a source of joy to you.
TEACHERS, LESSONS AND METHODS
[Sidenote: _The Importance of the Right Teacher_]
I have a son who is very desirous of learning to play the piano. I have
been advised that an ordinarily good teacher is good enough to begin
with. Others tell me a beginner should get the best teacher possible.
Which would you advise? I live in a small town.
The seriousness of your question is aggravated by the statement that you
live in a small town, and that there is possibly no teacher of ability
to be found in your town. And yet it is only such a one that I can
recommend for your son. For nothing is more dangerous for the
development of a talent than a bad foundation. Many people have tried
all their lives to rid themselves of the bad habits acquired from an
ignorant teacher in the rudimentary stages of their studies, and have
failed. I should advise you to try your best to send your boy to some
near-by city where there is an excellent teacher.
[Sidenote: _Nothing But the Best Will Do_]
Wishing to begin the study of the piano now, in my twenty-fourth year,
just for the sake of my great love for music, and knowing not even the
notes, is it necessary to go to an expensive teacher at once or would a
cheaper teacher do for the beginning?
If music is to be merely a pastime, and you content yourself with a
minimum of knowledge, the cheaper teacher will do; but if you aspire to
become musical in a better sense, why, by all means, apply to a teacher
of the better class. The maxim: "For the beginning this or that is good
enough," is one of the most harmful fallacies. What would you think of
an architect who says: "For the foundation loam is good enough; we put a
sandstone house over it, any way." Remember also, that the road a
cheaper teacher has led you to take must usually be retraced when your
aspirations rise toward the better in music.
[Sidenote: _Music Schools and Private Teachers_]
Shall I take my lessons in a music school or from a private teacher?
Music schools are very good for acquiring a general musical education.
For the higher study of an executive specialty (piano, violin, the
voice, etc.) I should naturally prefer private instruction from a
specialist, because he can give more attention to each individual pupil
than is possible under the wholesale system followed, not by all, but by
the majority of music schools. What I should advise would be a
combination: General matters--harmony, counterpoint, forms, history, and
aesthetics--in a music school; and private lessons for your specialty
from a teacher who has an established name as an executive artist. The
best music schools have such a man at their head, and in these you find
the best combination.
[Sidenote: _Individual Teacher, or Conservatory?_]
After taking lessons for five years and a half from a good teacher,
would you advise a continuance with the individual teacher or attendance
at a college of music or conservatory?
For a general musical education I always recommend a good music school
or conservatory. For the study of the piano I think it best to take
private lessons from an artist who is experienced both as an executant
and as a teacher. Some music schools have such men on their staff, if
not, indeed, at their head.
[Sidenote: _Where Outside Criticism Is Desirable_]
Having had twenty months' lessons and having now mastered Etudes by
Berens, opus 61, by Heller, opus 47, and Smith's Octave Studies, do you
think I am justified in continuing my lessons?
Assuming that you have really "mastered" the works you mention I can
only encourage you to continue your lessons; I would, however, advise
you to obtain an experienced pianist's criticism in order to assure
yourself that your idea of "mastering" is right.
[Sidenote: _The Sex of the Piano Teacher_]
Is there any preference as to sex in the question of choosing a piano
teacher; in other words, is a woman teacher preferable for any reason
for a girl and a man teacher for a man?
Your question does not admit of generalization from a purely musical
point of view. It must be--on this premise--decided by the quality, not
by the sex, of the teacher. A good feminine teacher is better than a bad
masculine one, and _vice versa_. The question of sex does not enter
into the matter. Of course, the greater number of eminent teachers are
found on the masculine side.
[Sidenote: _Too Much "Method"_]
My recently engaged teacher says that the word "method" jars on her
nerves. Kindly advise me whether a method is not the best thing for a
novice, and, if so, which one?
Your teacher, while possibly a little over-sensitive, is not wrong.
America is the most method-ridden country in the world. Most of the
methods in vogue contain some good points--about a grain of truth to a
ton of mere ballast. Your teacher's utterance makes me think that you
were lucky in finding her, and that you have excellent reason to trust
in her guidance.
[Sidenote: _What the Leschetizky Method Is_]
How does the Leschetizky method rank with other methods, and in what
respect does it differ from them?
There are but two methods in all the arts: a good one and a bad one.
Since you do not specify with what "other" methods you wish to compare
that of Leschetizky I cannot answer you with definiteness. There are,
alas, so many "methods"! But the majority of them are based upon a
deliberate disregard for that reverence which is due to great
compositions and to the example of their rendition given by great
interpreters. I have not studied with Leschetizky, but I think that he
believes in a very low position of the hand and a sort of
super-energetic tension of the tendons of the arms and hands.
[Sidenote: _Give Your Teacher a Fair Trial_]
Has a young pupil, after studying the piano irregularly for two months,
tested fairly a teacher's ability?
Of course not! Altogether I do not like the idea of a pupil's testing
his teacher's ability, rather the reverse. He may possibly find his
teacher unsympathetic, but even this matter he is apt to judge
prematurely. In most cases of irregularly attended or poorly prepared
lessons the lack of sympathy means nothing more than that the pupil is a
trifler and the teacher's honesty of purpose is not to his taste.
[Sidenote: _Either Trust Your Teacher or Get a New One_]
I have a "Piano Method," left over from lessons with my first teacher;
it was very expensive, and I learned only a few pages of it. We moved to
a different city and my new teacher objects to using the book, or, as
she says, any such book. I do not know what to do about it, and would
thank you for your advice.
When you apply to a teacher for instruction you must, first of all,
decide in your own mind whether you have or have not absolute confidence
in his ability. If you trust him you must do as you are advised to do;
if not, you must apply to another teacher. A book, costing much or
little, plays no part in the matter. By what you say of the new teacher,
however, I am disposed to think that he is better than the first one.
[Sidenote: _The Proper Course For a Little Girl_]
Commencing piano lessons with my seven-year-old daughter, should I
devote my efforts to the development of the fingers and hands, or retard
such development so as to keep pace with the expansion of the mind?
Your question is interesting. But if your mind is clear on that
point--and it seems to be--that a one-sided development (in this case
technical) is dangerous to the "musical" talent of your little daughter,
why, then, your little girl is, indeed, "out of danger." Your very
question is a credit to your insight.
[Sidenote: _Frequent Lessons and Shorter_]
Is it better for a young student to take one hour lesson or two
half-hour lessons a week?