Thank you for your very kind comment, James. I'm very glad that my videos are helpful! A.

Thank you for your comment Scott. I disagree with Seymour Bernstein's perspective as described in your comment. Of course Chopin indicated when to lift the pedal; many clean examples can be seen on the first page of the manuscript of the Polonaise in A major Op. 40 No. 1. Chopin will write "ped" in italic cursive to begin using pedal, and then the release is marked by a circle with a cross drawn through it. The symbol looks like this '⦻' but with the lines vertical and horizontal (sorry, I couldn't find the identical symbol in the character map). Other manuscripts exhibit this signage as well. While Chopin didn't always write pedaling for every single piece, when he did write pedaling, it was very precise and careful. There are, of course, pieces where the manuscript doesn't exist anymore or is lost; in these cases, pedal markings from the editions left to us may be more heavily scrutinized. Thanks for your comment! An interesting and important topic, for sure. A.

Thank you very much, stevenqirkle; I appreciate your kind comment, and I'm glad the video was helpful to you! All the best, A.

Thank you, zweiwelten, for your very kind comment. I'm glad that I can help! All the best, A.

My sincerest thanks to you arniaow! It is wonderful to know that my channel is helpful to you, and that you can see concrete results in your own playing. For me, music is, of course, emotionally interactive, but for us to perform it well, we have to understand all of the 'whys' of what we do; thus, the analytical approach is the one that I prefer. Good luck in your continuing musical education! All the best, A.

Thank you for your kind comment MusiMedMusi! I'm glad you enjoyed the episode! Thanks for watching, A.

Hi Tony, Upright pianos in general will respond differently, however, given that upright pianos are not used in concert except in emergencies or as a last resort, the only concern therefore becomes whether or not the technique can be practiced on an upright. The answer to that is dependent on the specific upright in question. Upright pianos tend to have quite a lot of variation between action designs than what we see in grand pianos, and this goes laterally through companies (as in, different upright pianos from the same decade) as well as backward historically (upright pianos from different decades). For an upright piano, you'll have to do this technique 'by feel' without a hard reference point. 1) depress the key to the bottom so you hear a note. 2) very slowly let the key rise until about halfway. 3) depress the key again and see if you hear a second strike. If you do, then you have the upright piano's version of the 'bump' of a grand, and in this case it is somewhere under the halfway point, though you won't feel it as a physical barrier. If you don't hear a second strike, then you'll have to let the key rise higher and try again until you can find it. Once you know the point of re-engagement, then you can tailor your technique to play just above this. I hope this helps. The modern grand piano action will offer you the most control of any action, and the upright piano action is one designed to save space and to approximate the grand feel and reaction. However, in my experience so far, the two never feel the same. All the best, and thanks for watching! A.

Hi ABB, Thank you for your very kind comment! The mechanics of an instrument are always useful to know, but in truth the vast majority of our thought and concentration is centered on notes, dynamic control, sound quality, etc., so it's only in isolated technical issues like this (such as playing softly but fast using repeated notes) that 'knowing how the instrument functions' becomes directly useful. I'm glad that my video is helpful and enjoyable! All the best, and thanks for watching! A.

Thank you geniustotal for your very kind comment, and I'm glad you enjoyed the video! Thanks for watching! A.

Hi Raj, Thank you so much for your kind thoughts regarding these episodes. I'm glad that you find them enjoyable as well as helpful! I'll address your thoughts in the order you wrote them. Regarding the thumb: The thumb tends to produce a sound that is different because the downwards motion that we normally associate with playing a key is not natural to the thumb if the palm is facing down. The fingers move best when 'gripping' or 'releasing', and therefore the thumb is most comfortable moving inwards towards the palm rather than downwards. Therefore, when we use the thumb to play, we have to use slight rotation of the forearm, but to make this happen, we use larger muscle groups (as you mentioned in your comment). With the individual fingers however, they can create the same movement downwards using anything as small as a single knuckle group. Bear in mind that using the thumb does not necessarily result in 'greater control'; all it does is create a sound that is usually sounding less percussive than the other fingers. I take the position (which you can find in the Season 3 Episode "Sound Quality Change: The Aarons Hypothesis", ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-lKz1ON-6gVg.html) that it's not just the speed at which the hammer contacts the string, but specifically the acceleration (or deceleration) of the hammer that directly affects the sound quality outcome. In short, my hypothesis is that the contact time of the hammer and the string (along with potential rubbing of the two contact surfaces) directly affects which partials of the fundamental are amplified or dampened: that's the actual source of the change in sound. To change the contact time (and how the hammer contacts the string), we alter the acceleration of the hammer towards the string, and this acceleration affects the hammer shank and causes it to flex to differing degrees. To alter the flexing of the hammer shank, we alter the acceleration, deceleration, or neutral downward speed of the actual key. To bring it back to the thumb and why it tends to create a less percussive sound (which is what a 'singing tone' actually is: a loud sound that is non-percussive): percussive sounds happen when the acceleration is removed and the shank is not flexing or in-vibration when the hammer hits the string. Non-percussive sounds happen when the acceleration is constantly increasing (as if you're 'whipping' the hammer to the string using the shank). This is why the standard technique to create non-percussive sounds is to push forward and down with a 'follow-through' (as some teachers describe it) rather than to bang the keys downward like a small child might. By pushing on an angle forward, you steadily increase acceleration of the key, but by banging down, you have a sharp acceleration followed by a steady speed of the hammer and hammer-shank (due to the first impact on the keytop slowing down the finger). When we use the thumb, we need the arm to help slightly, and because the arm is larger to move, it takes a longer time to accelerate (and requires more mass to resist it); in other words, the key has to resist the thumb and the forearm, whereas when using other fingers, the key only has to stop the finger or even just the joint. So, to sum up, here's how I see it. We change sound quality by altering the acceleration and deceleration of the key as we engage it. This acceleration or deceleration affects how much the hammer shank is flexing, which in turn affects the orientation of the hammer as it contacts the string. The orientation (which would correct when the contact to the string is made) affects the contact time of the hammer on the string, and the felt of the hammer serves to amplify or dampen the higher partials of the fundamental that are vibrating, thus changing the sound quality to our ears. The thumb uses the arm to help it, and this results in a 'naturally' less percussive sound due to the larger constant acceleration, whereas the fingers tend to create a more percussive sound because we don't naturally think of using the rest of the body to help them manipulate the key. This is why the longer the hammer shank, the more control you tend to have over sound quality change, and also why pianists need to have time to get accustomed to an instrument in order to get the best sound they can. They're spending time learning how to control the boundaries of the acceleration in the action of the specific instrument at hand. If the velocity of the hammer were the only factor, then you could make hammer-shanks out of inflexible material and the sound quality control possibilities wouldn't be any different than with hammer-shanks made of wood. Unfortunately, in real world testing, this fails miserably (I think it was Mason and Hamlin who did this, but I'm not sure). Finally, this is also why humans perform better on individual pianos than standard piano recordings replayed on player-pianos: the human is altering the acceleration dynamics as they play, moving closer to an ideal for that specific instrument, whereas the recording on a player piano (even modern Spirios and Disklaviers) will only sound correct on the instrument it was actually recorded on. The acceleration of the hammer-shank has to be controlled based on feedback from the individual instrument at hand, and adjusted by the pianist as they play through the piece. Some pianos have more flexibility, some less, and that's in addition to all the other elements that are factors to consider (how it was tuned, how old the strings are, how well regulated the action is, etc.) I hope this helps! Thanks for watching!!! A.

@@andrewaarons1072 Oh my god, WOW, thank you so much for taking the time to write this incredibly insightful and detailed reply!!! This is something I've wondered about for like 20 years now and has seemed like such a mystery to me, but that makes total sense. Thank you! (And I've said this in another comment, but I love your channel!)

@@rajx82 I'm glad I could help! All the best, and good health to you! Sincerely, A.

@@andrewaarons1072 Thank you, same to you!

Thank you Levi! I'm glad you enjoyed it! All the best, and thanks for watching. A.

Thank you Carlos for your very kind thoughts; I appreciate it greatly, and I'm glad that my videos are helpful. Thanks for watching! A.

Thanks Raj D! I'm glad that you have enjoyed my videos so far. If you watch the videos in order, then listen carefully to the intro and outro music that I play....they are also 'in order'. Thanks for watching! A.

@@andrewaarons1072 wow, that’s really cool, didn’t notice there was a pattern to it!

Thank you for watching, Raghunath! I'm glad that you enjoyed it, and most importantly I'm glad that you found my video useful and informative. All the best, A.

You may be surprised, but your comment is one of the kindest ones I've ever received. It's heartwarming to know that my thoughts on piano performance are of value, and worth even re-watching for a second time. I appreciate it greatly, and I hope in the future that I can complete Season 3 and the planned Season 4. Thank you. A.

Hey pull finger, The 3rd movement is like many other fast movements of Beethoven that involve large and sudden contrasts in sound. As a result of this, a pedaling tutorial would be mostly useless and generally not applicable. The reason why is because pedaling is usually dictated by the sound the instrument is producing at the moment, and unlike the first movement (which involves the removal of dampers for the entire piece), the third movement is continuously shifting within the boundaries of pedaled and unpedaled. No general sound envelope is required, and therefore no generalized pedaling tutorial would be useful. Every piano is different, every pianist is different, so for continuously shifting resonances, pedaling tutorials in general are unhelpful. Good luck with the 3rd movement though; it usually requires a lot of maintenance to keep it running smoothly. All the best, and thanks for watching, A.

Thank you MusicallyFitMusician for your kind thoughts; I'm glad that you found my video enjoyable! Sadly, I haven't had much time lately to continue the series, but maybe in the future; we'll see. Thanks for watching! A.

Hi Mark. Pianos are quite similar to cars in a way. You can lease them, you can do payment plans for them, you can buy and re-sell on the open market, and you can go new or vintage. Furthermore, the same problems occur; you have to tune and regulate pianos (and service cars), mechanical instruments vary in their quality (and cars their capability), and all the rest. I think that the question you have in front of you is this: 1) Buy a mid-level electric piano. It's cheaper, but you know that in a few years you'll want to buy a good acoustic that will likely cost more money but will be better. The downside is that you might wish to sell the electric, but by that point the electric might not be worth much money. So, money lost. 2) Buy a good upright or a decent grand piano now. Lots of money now, but you won't have to upgrade later on. The only downside is that you need to spend lots now (and also; do you have the space for the acoustic piano?). Electric pianos don't need servicing, they are more portable than acoustic pianos, and they give less trouble. Expensive electric pianos will mimic a lot of what an acoustic piano can do, but ultimately the 'feel' and 'response' of an electric is a facsimile, and is not real at all. Truth be told, as a professional I can easily feel the difference in the response between an electric and an acoustic, in the same way that I can feel the differences between actions of different pianos manufacturers. Your question is a serious one, but one that has a wildcard that is your private business: how much can you spend? You have to do the calculations to decide: 1) How long do I want this instrument for? 2) Can I re-sell it afterwards to help me upgrade to a better one? 3) Will I still be playing when I feel like upgrading (or will I have other responsibilities that take up all my time)? 4) Will I have the space (and will my neighbors not complain of the noise)? 5) Are there any financial considerations I need to have? If the equation were simple, then I'd say 'buy a piano that is so enjoyable to play that you want to practice all the time'. But that's too simple. If you want the bare-bones of it: 1) A good acoustic is far better than an electric. 2) A poor acoustic is far worse than an electric. Does that help at all? There are so many factors to take into consideration, and there are so many manufacturers that make instruments that you might consider that it may in fact be the best solution to go to a store that sells acoustics and digitals and see what you can find. That's the best I can suggest at the moment. I really hope that helps. Thanks for watching, and let me know how things go, whichever decision you make. All the best, A.

Buy a good upright piano. I bought a new Yamaha 20 years ago for $3000, I am still playing it almost every day. I can play soft shimmering tone, change tone color, play Chopin and Debussy on this upright piano. It feels different from a grand, but you only need to make minute tweaks to translate your techniques to a grand. You need to get used to the action of each piano you play anyway. I haven't out grown my piano, yet. My mother in law also loves my piano, she is a professional pianist graduated from the famous Moscow conservatory.

Hello Cesar! I'm glad that my video was helpful for you. Thanks for watching! A.

Dear Miroslaw, I appreciate your thoughts, and I'm glad the video was helpful. Regarding half pedaling, fractional pedaling, or any other 'named' pedaling (aside from 'flutter pedaling'), I have a few thoughts. 1) "Half" pedaling, from the use of the term where I live, means to raise the dampers to the point where they are slightly off the strings. This usually means that we're depressing the pedal 'about halfway' down and judging from the mixture of the resonance and the decay of notes if we're at the right point or need to adjust. The purpose of this is to restrict or prevent the total resonant capability of the piano (which exists when we depress the pedal fully) from being activated or available. "Fractional" pedaling essentially means the same thing, only that the person using the term has had the experience where they're only depressing the pedal 'a fraction' of the way instead of 'half'. 2) The adjustment of the pedals is different for every piano, so the terms 'half' and 'fractional' need to be understood as 'guides' or 'approximations'. The idea is to name the technique whereby we simply don't depress the pedal all the way down to the bottom, but instead only push it down so the dampers rise above the strings 'just enough' for them to start resonating freely. There is still some contact between stray felt hair, and because the vast majority of grands do not have their dampers regulated as often as their actions, there is usually a 'sweet spot' where you can get some general sympathetic resonance but not fully unrestricted resonance in the strings not being played. This technique is different for every instrument, and must be controlled using a combination of listening carefully and adjusting 'as you go' how far down you depress the pedal. 3) "Half" pedaling is used just as frequently as full pedaling, perhaps more-so because it's one of the main pedal techniques that we use when we're playing a melodic phrase in the right hand. Because it's not a specific pedal effect (unlike una-corda or sostenuto), you should think of 'half-pedaling' as something as common as playing 'mezzo-piano'. You will use it in every composer, every style, every period of music. The reason it even has a name is because pedagogically it's important to teach students how to do clean pedal changes first; only once they have control of this can they relinquish conscious control of the pedal to muscular memory and 'automatic pilot'; once they can pedal without thinking about it, then they have the freedom to listen to the resonances they make and adjust their pedal accordingly. Then they are taught about half-pedaling and half-changing (half-changes occur where you bring the dampers down to the strings but touch them for a moment before raising them again; it damps 'some' of the sound, but not all, and usually bass notes last longer than treble notes due to the comparative inefficiency of the dampers themselves). I hope that all makes sense, but let me know if you have any other questions. To answer your question, I would recommend half-pedaling anytime it is required, which is usually 50% of the time or more. Thanks for watching! A.

Thanks for watching Cosi, and I'm glad this video was informative! All the best, A.

It's a pleasure Dan Venn, and thank you for watching! A.

It's a pleasure Arvind Iyer, and I'm glad you found the video helpful! Thanks for watching, A.

I appreciate it Dan! All the best, and thanks for watching! A.

Hi Bill, Practicing trills specifically means focusing on producing the effect at the keyboard with the least amount of muscular 'effort'. It's difficult to explain in words, but I'll try. As a warning though for anything technical; if you are experiencing pain when you play or practice, STOP immediately and consult a teacher who can work with you in person. The phrase 'no pain, no gain' is quite the opposite of what should be happening. Playing the piano should be comfortable. That's rule no. 1. If it's not comfortable, then you're using the wrong muscles, and you'll end up with injury. Now, on to trills. Think of it this way: how much effort does it take to play a single note? If you can do it with little to no effort, then the next step is to 'attach' a note to it afterwards. So, if you're doing a trill A - G - A - G repeated, then start by playing the A alone. Notice the effort or the 'command' you make to your fingers to play the note. Then add on the G afterwards, but aim the 'effort' of the entire gesture to the ending A, the idea being that you 'get to the A by going THROUGH the G first'. In other words, risk missing the G entirely to get to the A. If you can do this in one gesture with one effort, then you're doing well (and you've technically played an appoggiatura) . If however you still think of it mechanically as 2 separate notes with 2 separate impulses, then you have to rethink it. Once you can feel playing 2 notes, 1 after another, using 1 effort or impulse, then you can add on the next, and so forth. Trills by nature are controlled using 1 impulse; for some people it's an impulse at the beginning, for others it's in the middle somewhere. The point is that you're not using effort to control every single note; you're using a single impulse to control everything within the group, and like a gas pedal on a car, you are increasing or decreasing the energy you put into the trill while letting the fingers alternate automatically. Finally, once you get the trill comfortably going, you can practice the general control of the trill. This includes changing your speed (speed up the trill or slow it down), changing the dynamics (get louder or softer), and changing which of the trill notes is louder (i.e. is the A louder than the G, or vice-versa). Trills appear difficult for the same reason that someone learning a language will find it difficult to speak fast using those new words. It's about learning how to control a group rather than individual components. Please let me know if this makes sense; it's far easier to teach at the piano in studio. All the best, and thanks for watching! A.

Hello M-SV, I very much appreciate your kind thoughts; in my view, I'm presenting a niche-within-a-niche topic in piano, which means that the audience is necessarily going to be smaller. Furthermore, any debate or disagreement occurs at a level wherein the participants would require several years of training in order to form cogent positions. Since argumentation generates viewership, the traffic to my channel will, once again, necessarily be smaller than other channels. RU-vid as a platform is precisely the opposite to this, and it benefits channels that appeal to the largest possible audience while presenting polarizing positions from daily life in order to generate views. This is clearly understood throughout the community, and I accept it as a function of the site. The popular videos are obsolete in a day, but I intend mine to be timeless. So don't worry; I'm definitely not removing these videos, and I intend to have them somewhere on the internet forever. To me, I think it's important that pianists understand that there are many levels to our art form; too many students get bogged down in learning notes, memorizing for 'the next concert/competition/exam', etc., without realizing that our strategy of thought towards how to interpret music is just as important as the physical demands of integrating our body with the piano as well as executing commands reliably under stress. While my students have the opportunity to learn this from me directly, I think it's just as important for musicians that I do not know to consider it too. If they disagree, that's cool; at least they've thought about what I have to say. All the best to you, and thanks for watching! A.

Hello Christen, I'm glad you enjoyed the video, and I'm happy that I was able to illuminate the murky and often poorly defined area of 'rubato'. Always remember: rubato is just a way of putting a 'spotlight' on a moment in the music using timing changes. That's all. We make something special, by using time. How much time we use and where we use it depends on the specific composer and the compositional rules they employ. That's why rubato will differ in Bach, Mozart, Chopin, Beethoven, etc, and that's also why the precise placement of rubato is not determined by 'feeling' but by analysis and compositional knowledge. The only element of rubato that our feelings affect is how much we do or how extreme it is during live performance; if we 'feel' that the audience is listening to every last note, then we can exaggerate the rubato slightly more....but if the audience is bored to tears or not enthralled by the piece of music, it might be best to emphasize only special moments. That's where our flexibility lies. Thanks for watching! A.

Hi Zdrange03, It can be thought of in a different way. Consider this: we can affect the speed and acceleration of the downward movement of the key, but it's very difficult to affect the key's return to the top. In other words, we control the 'down', but not the 'up' of the key. Therefore, in order for a key to return to the top sooner than normal, we have to diminish our downward movement of the key so that it has less distance to travel to its resting state. To do so, we imagine or aim for a 'bottom' of the key that is higher than the actual 'bottom'; so, we aim to play 'above the escapement'. Technically, when we play 'above the escapement', we're essentially aiming to use acceleration on the key in the top portion, without continuing the application of power at the escapement engagement point or lower. However! The inertia of the key will make it travel downwards past the escapement engagement point, so the escapement will engage regardless. The modern grand piano action is sensitive enough that even a slight 'crossing' of the engagement point will cause the escapement to function properly, so there's never any fear that there will be a technical problem. Finally, to make a sound on the piano it is usually necessary to cross the escapement engagement point; it's difficult to make a sound without the key and the action actually doing so (you'd have to hold the key from the front, jerk it downwards to a height controlled above the escapement, and hope the hammer gets launched with enough energy to make it to the string). So, to answer your question, the key still crosses the escapement engagement point even though we 'aim' to play above this point. We're resetting the 'bottom' of the key in our physical commands, leading to a quick return of the key to the top and thus a quicker ability to replay the same key than if we'd played to the bottom. Since we only have full control of the key when its motion is begun from the resting state (as opposed to halfway up or 3/4 up from the bottom), we get the added benefit with this technique of being able to fully control the sound quality of the note that is being repeated. I hope this helps! Thanks for watching! A.

@@andrewaarons1072 Thank you for the detailed answer!

Hi Spiess, I definitely still play the piano; my research and teaching schedule keep me quite busy, so unfortunately I haven't had time to film new videos. Each 'season' of Ask a Pianist was planned by me in full before filming, but my teaching and adjudicating commitments made it almost impossible to complete the 3rd season as it stands. Hopefully in the future....we'll see. Thanks for watching and for the interest in the channel! A.

If you make an concert tour here in Germany I am going to watch it. : )

@@spieauskofte2506 You are very kind! The last time I performed in Germany was over a decade ago....time flies. All the best, A.

I'm glad that it all makes sense! Thanks for watching, A.

Thank you ollie61 for your kind and very thoughtful comment! I'll try to take each idea in turn. When I was a student, only one pedagogue I studied with integrated the issues of mechanical control of the piano with physical technique of the body, and he was known as one of the few who did so specifically, so I'm not surprised that you had not encountered this kind of approach before; it is definitely rare in the piano world. I've expanded his ideas with many of my own, but the core fundamentals stay the same. If I were to guess, then I'd say the reason why this line of thinking is rare is that the vast majority of students who study the piano do so because they love the sounds they can make, the music they can replicate or manifest, and the emotional gratification they can get from playing it comfortably, and therefore the mechanics of the instrument are not important to them from their perspective. From the other side, the vast majority of teachers were taught from the perspective of, 'I'm your teacher, play the music 'my way', and don't ask why', which leads to a 'broken-telephone' scenario where one teacher passes on ideas of interpretation to a student, who becomes a teacher in time and passes it on to another student, etc., without critical judgement or reflection on the quality of the content. This leads over generations to less precision and very little questioning of 'tradition'. From my point of view, the only way a student can do well is if they understand precisely 'why' they are doing things, not only in terms of musical interpretation but also in terms of physical choreography at the piano. The added evidence for this is simple: the modern piano can be considered 'universal' or 'standardized' in terms of its keyboard layout and measurements, whereas each individual human has a different body with different physical proportions. One of the most important jobs of a teacher is to help a student learn precisely how to integrate their own unique body with a standardized piano. To do this, a mechanical understanding is required. You are correct in your conclusion regarding the requirements of letting the key return to its resting position; this is one of the subtle techniques that students can learn, usually when being trained how to play trills easier. If we let the key rise to just above the 'bump', then we can play that note again with a clean hammer attack (though the dampers will not have engaged, so there will be resonance layover). This is advantageous with soft and fast playing as in the opening of Ondine as you point out. But there are two basic reasons why most techniques that we use involve having the key return to the full resting position: one is that if the distances of travel are universal, then our ability to predict the speed and acceleration required to create the sound we want is greatly enhanced. In other words, phrasing without having the key return to the top is more difficult and less predictable. Two is that increasing the volume requires as much key travel as possible, so anything above 'piano' will be difficult to produce without creating a percussive sound. So, playing just above the 'bump' is really something for soft or very fast repetitious technical concerns. It's a 'special effect', but one that needs to be in the technical arsenal of every pianist. All the best to you for the future, and thanks for watching! A.

@@andrewaarons1072 thank you for the kind reply. Your precision and insight really are remarkable. Your response on the limited application of not letting the key to return to full resting position is dead-on accurate. You are right that tonal control above 'piano' requires we have the full range of descent. However limited its application, the concept of working in this reduced range can be revolutionary, or it was for me. I am currently discovering how long I held on to some completely wrongheaded notion that the key must always return to the top before we replay it. Shocking to discover how ingrained this false notion was for me. Somehow it felt dishonest to not let the key fully rebound, like cheating! Ondine is one example but there are so many passages that seem now almost easy, or at least comprehensible technically when we embrace this very subtle engagement with the point of sound. My current eye-opener is Chopin's double thirds etude. The 'sotto voce' thirds are not so daunting, even easy in a way, when we work in the reduced range. Just like trills, as you point out, this makes an immense difference in the sounds we produce. Thanks again, so much.

The Berceuse is an awesome piece in terms of the mix between simplicity and complexity, and for pianists it also serves as a guaranteed hit when played as an encore. Thanks for watching! A.