Do you work on "pure piano technique books"

...or do you practise only on real pieces passagges (slow motions, variations as in Cortot editions
about Chopis and Schumann's works)?
Which books do you use, if you do "pure technique"?
For an intermediate level I think to Pischna and Hanon, for an advanced level I consider very good
Brahms and Dohnanyi excercises (and when I have time I used them, plus some Foldes and mine
excercise). Do you know any books at the level of Brahms and Dohnanyi, or better?

Thank you and all best,
Sandro

 

I own Hanon but I never use it. I just play what I want to play and consider that my technique practice

 

As child I got some pieces to learn by Hanon and Czerny, but alltogether only a handful. I will be forever grateful to my teacher not beeing maltreated by more of those pieces. :lol:

Now, I prefer by far to practise "real" pieces. I like to play some pieces of WTC1 from Bach for that as I think, all fingers of each hand are trained for independency. Furthermore the listening gets skilled for following multiple voices at the same time, and all above, it is great music.

Anyhow I think playing etudes purely for technical purposes is waisted time, because in the same time one could practise pieces which are not only technical interesting, but are music!

 

technique

As a child I practiced major and minor scales, arpeggios, and broken chords for every piano lesson. I also used materials like Hanon and Phillipe School of Technique. Czerny and Clementi were a regular part of my piano lessons. I'm sorry to say that it may appear now that I had very little technical training. I still warm up with scales and etudes most of the time.

Now I believe that playing the great masters like Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Chopin and so forth is practicing one's technique. I often have to stop playing through pieces and practice on particularly difficult parts. Isn't that developing one's technique?

 

I heard that Bartoks mikrokosmos is very good for beginners and developing technique, but i never touched it don't know if it's worth to learn those pieces. I'm studying the czerny etudes and the bach 2part inventions which are (IMO) very good for technique, too.

 

Mikrokosmos

I didn't play the Bartok as a child because my teacher didn't let me play twentieth century music with a few exceptions such as Rachmaninoff. I played them after high school. They are great for sight reading and exercises in twentieth century rhythms. However, I don't think they are designed for practicing "physical technique," if you know what I mean. Some of them are charming short pieces.

 

Re: technique

> I'm sorry to say that it may appear now that I had very little technical training.

Don't be so severe!

>I often have to stop playing through pieces and practice on particularly difficult parts. Isn't that developing one's technique?

Of course. There are two "schools" (and I respect both): 1) pure technique exercises (like
Hanon, Pischna, or my preferred Dohnanyi and Brahms) 2) technique "on the music", varying
the passages of the music one plays.

All best,
Sandro

 

I'm doing Czerny's School of Velocity, and I hate it. You have to play them at insane speeds, which I just can't seem to pull off, and most of all it's boring! I have noticed that I can play a lot faster now, though, so I have to admit that it's worth practicing these Etudes.

Same here. I bought the book, played the first piece and never touched it again. Instead I started playing the Heroic Polonaise, which was a lot of fun and an excellent way to improve my technique.

 

Dohnanyi and Brahms are both very good, but I would also recommend Alfred Cortots "Rational principles of piano technique" which I'm using a great deal at the moment. Very useful! But it should be done with somebodys guidance - don't do it completely on your own. (same goes for Brahms and Dohnanyi)