First of all. Eddy, I hope I caused you no offence. My remark did sound a bit blunt but it was not meant to hurt. I keep David's words (in another post) at heart.

It did sound at first that you relied on the metronome. There are such people in the world, maybe the same who need a keyboard with the names of the notes written on the keys, but your following post makes clear you are not one of them. By all means, the metronome might be useful, but not a substitute to counting, to feeling time inside you. I strive for the latter and I seem to be managing this. Once time is in you, once you can "get out of your body" and hover above the piano and listen, a metronome is needless.

I sound like an Indian holy man.

I can't believe anyone would even raise the ideas of "crutch" and "counting." Such an inadequate level of development should not (hopefully) even be associated with this on-line community. I think that the recordings that I have already submitted betray a little something about my abilities and I just can't understyand how foreign the metronome seems to be to so many here but. This to me reveals a certain lack of understanding. In every physical endevor of performance, whether music, dance, athletics, etc. training always attempts to exceed that required. Runners run through the resistance of water or on sand or sprint uphill, dancers practice for endless hours to gain endurance that they will only need a fraction of for performing, and musicians (or at least myself) also practice works or passages in manners that are more difficult than that of an actual performance because it is one way of building reserve. One manner of doing such is to play extended passages (or entire works depending on their simplicity) with metronome (because it removes the psychological comprehension of time and replaces it with an objective rule by which we can measure ourselves). Then, to practice in such a manner at a speed that is greater than that required for performance builds reserve technical mastery. The point is not that when you attempt to do so it begins to disintegrate, the point is to master it at that faster level so that playing at normal speed is done with technical margin. When I am working to systematically develop speed and accuracy, I will proceed as follows: Say I am trying to "pass" at a speed of 96; I advance the metronome two clicks faster (to 104) and practice each hand seperate thusly, working all the problems that arise or are revealed. Then, when I am satisfied, I adjust the metronome to 96 and attempt to play it hands together. If I can do it well, I have passed "96" and can try all of it again one click faster. BTW, in the way that practicing with metronome faster than comfortable helps (IMO evidently) develop the physical execution, so to practicing SLOWER than comfortable develops the mental execution.

Last, I will draw upon the words of others to help me in my time of need. Ruth Slenczynska, who was a child prodigy performing her debut in Berlin at age 6 and who studied with Rachmaninoff, wrote an excellent little book entitled, Music at your Fingertips: Advice for the Artist and Amateur on Playing the Piano. In chapter 3 (Concepts of Proportion, Tempo, Rhythm) on page 27, she writes the following:

"A student's presto , for example, may sound very fast because he will play as fast as he can manage and his efforts to hurry become evident; but when an artist uses the same tempo it might sound slow, since he has perfect control of his hands and sounds controlled, while the student sounds hurried. This is why I recommend use of the metronome from the very beginning, from the very first scale, throughout our musical lives. I still use it daily, even on tour, to maintain the discipline of daily practice and full mastery of the keyboard, even when the keyboards vary. I prefer to increase speed by regular intervals ..." {bold is mine}

click, click, click, ...
Eddy