Blog Archives - PIET KOORNHOF violinist

Fantastic App For Learning To Play The Violin!!

7/20/2020

Take note, folks, there is an app that completely and utterly overshadows all other teaching and learning apps. Nothing comes close. It has been tested and fine-tuned by the best violinists ever. And it's free. And you already have it.

It's your mind. It is the product of millions of years of evolution. It runs on the most complicated mechanism in the known universe. It’s hardware transforms along with its software. With every software update the hardware adapts to it. For all practical purposes it’s capacity seems unlimited. The more you use it the better it gets. It is a stupendous learning machine.

Could you expect anything that impressive from a cell phone app? Would you outsource what your mind can do to some cell phone app?

Sadly, outsourcing our minds has become addictive. We are hooked by the digital sugar designed by clever people to make as junkies, so that our mindless behaviour can make them money.

Sure, the idea of outsourcing some mental tasks in order to focus on more important things is not in itself a bad idea. But when we have become addicted to digital sugar our judgement is compromised. We lose track of the really important stuff.

We all know the spectacle of people sitting at dinner tables, unable to communicate with each other because they are glued to their cell phones for getting their continuous digital sugar fixes. Digital communication in a virtual world is no substitute for authentic interaction in the real world.

Similarly, learning apps for cell phones are no substitutes for using your own mind. Our biggest challenge is not to find the most useful cell phone app for organizing our learning, but to learn to manage our own incredible minds. By discovering and expanding the app inside our skulls while engaging with our bodies and our musical instruments in the real world, we learn vastly more, not only about playing the violin and making music, but about ourselves as living organisms who aspire to so much more than becoming digital junkies. To settle for anything less is to deprive ourselves and our fellow human beings of meaningful existence.

Don’t be a digital junkie. Don’t depend on digital apps to do what your mind can do infinitely better. Use the greatest learning app ever created. Use your mind to learn to play the violin.

As We Practiced, So We Perform

7/14/2020

As we practiced, so we perform. If we practice sloppily, mindlessly, without musical feeling, we will most likely perform that way. Think of it this way: your performance (any performance) is probably the average of how you practiced for it. If most of your practice time was spent repeating mistakes over and over, with intonation that is only approximate, with sloppy rhythm and less than concert-grade sound, at suboptimal tempi and with a lazy posture, you could expect to play exactly that way in performance! It would be totally unrealistic to expect otherwise.

Let me repeat, with full credit to Nathan Cole (wonderful player and teacher!), practice makes performance (see https://www.natesviolin.com/practice-makes-performance-training-1-3/) . We perform how we practiced. If perfection is only a minute part of how you practiced - if most of your practice time was spent doing it badly, then that is how you will play in performance.

Watch James Ehnes talk about practicing: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6noasTa4eiY).
Strive for the highest possible quality in all aspects of playing while you are practicing, as you would on stage. Condition yourself to always do the best you can. Intonation, sound, phrasing - all should be as perfect as possible.

Don’t let your guard down. Don’t let yourself get away with anything at all. No excuses. None. No “it's OK because I’m tired”, or “it is only a small thing, I’ll fix it later”. None of that should be acceptable. As any performance, your practice time should be spent using the full resources of your mind and body. Do not waste a single moment. Condition yourself to require the very best of yourself in all circumstances.

This habit of mind should include always playing with proper musical phrasing, and with character. Part of your habit of mind should be to always play as a musician with musical phrasing and feeling. Practice everything as if you are in front of an audience engaged in delivering your absolute best.

Never do mechanical, route playing, even when you are practicing scales, exercises and etudes. Music is nothing if not human, and so should be its components. It should never be merely mechanical and soulless. Often it is said of great performing artists that they can elevate even trite music with soulful playing.

It is a habit of mind worth cultivating.

Why Do I Practice So Much?

7/14/2020

When people become aware that I practice the violin for several hours daily, they often ask questions like, “why do you practice so much?”, or “what are you practicing for?”.

Usually, I reply, “for my next concert/CD-recording”, while thinking, “for the future, of course - don’t you know that performing musicians, just like athletes, need regular and prolonged practice to keep in the best possible shape?!”.

A better short answer might be, “to be fit for the demanding task of making music”.

Actually, when people suggest that I practice a lot, it should be pointed out that it’s relative. Compared to whom? Many world-class violinists practice more than I do. Like most performers I know, I wish I could consistently practice more, but then living any semblance of a balanced life would be a greater challenge still.

For those who might want to know more, here is a more comprehensive explanation of what my practicing is all about. I practice with the following goals in mind:

Maintenance
First, and most fundamental, is maintenance: I practice the violin for an absolute minimum of three hours daily to stay in shape. If I do less than that for even just a few days in a row, I feel a definite deterioration of my skills. Usually, for at least an hour every day I focus on basics like scales and exercises for shifting, double stops, vibrato and sound production.

Honing of skills
However, maintenance is not sufficient. I also practice to hone my skills. There is always room for improvement. Again, just like athletes who strive to improve on their personal best performances, performing musicians continually practice to improve.

Short Term Performance Goals
Then, of course, there are short term performance goals for which I practice: the next concert or recording that may be only weeks or days ahead. Most of my daily practice is devoted to polishing the repertoire for those performances.

Medium Term Performance Goals
Then there is repertoire that needs to be ready in the medium term. Those performances might by several months or even a year away. Part of my daily practice involves the beginning stages of its preparation, especially if new repertoire needs to be learned.

Essential Repertoire
A fourth goal of my regular practice is learning and/or refining repertoire that I regard as essential for becoming a well-rounded violinist/musician, irrespective of whether or not I ever get to perform it in public. It is repertoire that I feel the need to learn for my own development and satisfaction. It forms part of my profile as a violinist.

Exploration
Lastly, I spend part of my regular practicing simply exploring the wide and wonderful world of music for my instrument. This is what keeps my fire burning, and what often leads to exciting discoveries of unusual, off the beaten path repertoire that deserves a much wider audience. My greatest satisfaction as a performer is when I can successfully share my excitement about new musical discoveries with an audience.

So, this is my comprehensive answer to why I still need to practice a lot every day: I do it to maintain and to hone my skills, to prepare for the next performance, as well as for performances in the medium term, to learn and polish essential repertoire, irrespective of performance opportunities, and to explore new and unusual music.

One last thought: what is plenty of practice to one person may be quite insufficient to another. Each performer does what he/she needs and is able to do.

The Inner Game approach: turning wander into wonder

7/9/2020

As I have mentioned previously, The Inner Game of Tennis by Timothy Gallwey, was required reading in the class of my violin teacher, Dorothy DeLay. It still tops my reading list for learning how to learn and perform complex skills. The Inner Game is both a theory of learning and a collection of superbly effective tools. It is also an attractive philosophy of learning. It is applicable in many different contexts.

Since the publication of The Inner Game of Tennis in 1974 several other books followed, applying the principles to other activities such as skiing, golf, music, work, etc. In my opinion the original tennis book is still the best, and should be read first, regardless of your field of interest. Actually, the one I found most helpful was the follow-up book, Inner Tennis: playing the game, which is out of print, strangely.

As the title of the book implies, when we are learning and performing we are not only engaged in an outer game. There is an inner game as well, which is the interaction of different parts of our minds, and how it affects the outer game. That inner game is crucial to our learning and performance in the outer game. How we manage our minds is the Inner Game.

The essence of the Inner Game is the management of attention. Gallwey organizes his ideas about learning and performance into three main topics: Awareness, Trust & Will. We might think of it as Information, Confidence, and Motivation. The aims are to gather pure sensory information about playing actions and their results, undistorted by a cluttered mind (awareness); to have confidence in your learning potential (trust); and to have a purpose that sustains your motivation (will).

A mind divided against itself

The Inner Game approach is summed up in the equation, PERFORMANCE = POTENTIAL - INTERFERENCE. We can maximize our performance by minimizing how we tend to interfere with ourselves. How do we interfere? With thoughts that distract from our awareness.

Since we all have a finite capacity for awareness at any given moment, the more attention you pay to something, the less is available for something else. It is crucial, therefore, to manage our attention properly - to have maximum attention focused on critical elements.

By engaging different parts of the mind in activities at which it naturally excels, in ways that are mutually supportive, self-interference can be drastically diminished, or even entirely eliminated, allowing for the ultimate state of performance excellence, called “flow”. This is when the mind and the activity merge into one single self-less experience. Athletes and performing artists often refer to this as playing “out of your mind”, or being “in the zone”.

Gallwey’s useful simplification is that we have two “parts” or “selves” involved in learning and performance: sensory and conceptual. The sensory part he calls Self 2. The conceptual part he calls Self 1 (because that part likes to take the credit for learning, thinking of itself egotistically as “number 1”).

Self 1, the conceptual part (or “ego” or “conscious mind”) can either support the learning and performance of Self 2 (the part that actually controls actions), or it can interfere. Very often it interferes. How? By doing conceptual things that distract from sensory awareness: by annexing a substantial part of your capacity for awareness, by over-control, by judging, by dredging up the past and imagining the future (catastrophizing), etc.

This might be a helpful analogy: think of Self 2 as the driver of a vehicle, and of Self 1 as the back-seat driver. The back-seat driver can behave in helpful ways, or in distracting ways. By overwhelming the driver with instruction, or being overly critical, or raising the driver’s anxiety levels, or interfering with the driver’s critical awareness, or simply chattering too much about irrelevant stuff, the back-seat driver can seriously hamper good driving. Alternatively, by focusing the driver’s attention on essentials, and only when truly helpful, the back-seat driver can actually contribute to good driving.

The challenge is to engage self 1 in ways that contribute to Self 2’s task, instead of disrupting it. When Self 1 is acting as a supportive back-seat driver, instead of as a disruptive one, Self 2 can learn much faster and perform much better. It is set free to actualize its full potential. Gallwey calls it “letting go”: letting go of Self 1’s clumsy and self-defeating attempts to control the actions of Self 2.

Trust (confidence)

Trust is a positive relationship that needs to develop between self 1 and Self 2. It is built on the realization that the incredibly complicated neural processing required for quick, accurate and subtle movements are beyond the capabilities of Self 1. The most effective role for Self 1 is that of setting goals and of focusing awareness. Not control and judgement, but awareness.

Since Self 1's domain is conceptual thinking, it should have conceptual tasks that are helpful to Self 2. What could such tasks be?

Instead of disrupting awareness in the moment with judgments and attempts at control, Self 1 can be usefully engaged to focus awareness. This is done by giving it descriptive and measuring tasks. By having to describe and/or measure what is observed, awareness is sharply focused. To accurately describe to yourself whether a note is higher or lower, for example, or your bow is closer or further away from the bridge - and by how much - observation has to be pretty sharp.

Accurately describing and/or measuring what is happening in the moment can only be done if observation is keen enough. Think of Self 1’s task as that of aiming the lens of awareness and then focusing it.

Awareness cures.

One of Gallwey’s mantras is, “awareness cures”. When awareness in the moment is pure, feedback to the nervous system is optimal. The higher the quality of the sensory feedback, the more positive the feedback loop. Trust (confidence) follows.

When sensory awareness is diluted by conceptual chatter, feedback and adjustment are poor, resulting in a negative feedback loop: the worse the performance, the more Self 1 tries to control, the weaker the awareness, the worse the results.

Dorothy DeLay used to say that one can only control what you can measure. Measurement is essentially the detection and quantification of differences (distinctions). In differences resides information. Information = news of difference.

Gallwey introduces many different exercises in the context of tennis for focusing awareness. What they have in common is description, measurement and comparison.

Turning wander into wonder.

Immerse the mind in something “wonder-ful”, and it will not wander off to be a nuisance.

Almost all the Inner Game exercises involve description or measurement of some kind. Self 1 seems to be fascinated by measuring things and making comparisons. It keeps the mind engaged, preventing it from wandering off to do things that interfere with performance. By having it notice and describe/measure differences it is kept in “wonder”. Left to its own devices, Self 1 is prone to wander off and engage in all manner of distracting and interfering activities. It tends to be a control freak, harsh judge and doomster, all in one. “There you go again! Same shot you missed last time! You are going to make a fool of yourself if you blow this game! Why do you always blow it when the chips are down?!”

Gallwey makes the critical point that when our limited capacity for attention at any given moment is filled with supportive mental activity, like focusing awareness on the most critical elements of the outer game, and making fine distinctions - noticing and measuring differences - there isn’t any mental space left open for distracting thoughts. In other words, when managed properly, the mind will not wander off to do unhelpful or disruptive things. Anxiety, for example, can only take hold when the mind is not sufficiently engaged with something else.

The tipping point is saliency. Engage the mind with “wonder” or “fascination” more intensely meaningful than the content of “anxiety” and it will opt for the former. The highest rating on the saliency scale wins every time. (See my other posting about memory and saliency).

Motivation (will)

According to Gallwey, motivation results from having a clear overarching purpose for playing any game, whether it be tennis, the violin, or anything else. He distinguishes between many different kinds of games, each one with its own criteria for success, unique quality of experience, and motivational energy.

One can choose to play the “status game”, or “exercise game”, or “style game”, or “social game”, or “competition game”, etc. He suggests that deliberately playing the “learning game”, is a win-win choice. It is a kind of meta-game, a game of games. Regardless of whether you win or lose the outer game at any one time, if your game is to learn how to learn, i.e. play the inner game, you gain self-knowledge and mental skills for developing your potential to the full. You can always “win” at the inner game, regardless of what happens in the outer game.

I cannot recommend reading The Inner Game of Tennis by Timothy Gallwey strongly enough. I have reread it several times since its original publication in the 1970’s, and my admiration has only grown. Gallwey was way ahead of his time. Do yourself the favour of reading it. It is one of the best books you could read on learning to do anything.

Feed-forward vs Feed-Back

7/9/2020

[06/30, 15:35]

Dear violin students, here is another way to think about fixing problems in the wrong place. (Remember, the wrong place to fix problems is at the fingers; the right place is in the mind). The idea is "feed-forward", as opposed to "feed-back". Feed-forward is the opposite of feed-back. Feed-back is feeding information about results back into a process or system, after the event, with the goal of improving it with repetition. It happens "after the fact". Feed-forward is the process of feeding information into the system BEFORE-hand to improve the likelihood of correct action. When you properly plan the logistics of actions that need to happen on the violin, before you actually perform those actions , then you are feeding information forward to positively influence the future. In a way, feed-back is damage control; feed-forward is damage avoidance, or success insurance. Having a good plan for playing actions - sorting out the logistics - is practicing "feed-forward". It is the intelligent way to practice.

Useful Filters

7/9/2020

[07/01, 22:51]

Our way of being in the world is organized by the filters we have in our minds. These are of different kinds. For instance, our sense of purpose filters our experience. It determines what we focus on, and what we ignore. Similarly, our sense of identity filters our experience. So do our beliefs, values, capabilities, actions, and our environment. Our filters are not always the same. In different contexts we might have different filters. By becoming aware of our filters, we can improve our way of being in the world. We can ask whether our filters serve us or hinder us. When our filters are rich in possibility, and when they are aligned, they energize us, pushing us forward to realize our goals in ways that contribute positively and creatively to the world. For example, when we find purpose in serving something larger than ourselves, we partake of the energy of that larger system, which is much more than we can muster from any self-centered little universe. Such an energizing purpose can in turn shape our sense of who we are, and influence our beliefs and values in ways that unlock our capabilities, making us act surprisingly and delightfully. Perhaps, as musicians we can ponder what unique purpose each one of us might serve, and then watch in wonder as it transforms our way of being in the world.

More Thoughts on Learning and Memory

7/9/2020

24/6/2020

More thoughts on learning and memory

I would like to share with you another important idea. It has to do with memory. Usually, we assume that to remember anything it has to be repeated many times. This includes competencies. To become competent we have to perform actions many times correctly, going from being clumsy (conscious competence), or even overwhelmed (conscious incompetence), to being fluent (unconscious competence).

That is often true. And yet...and yet... we can certainly all think of single experiences that stayed with us, even though it was not repeated many times. This tends to be the case with intense experiences, whether positive or negative. Experiences that have unusual intensity stick in our minds. No need for lots of repetition. Love at first sight. The first taste of Italian ice-cream. Your first solo flight as a student pilot. Or think of phobias as examples of one-trial learning. A phobia is an extremely intense negative reaction permanently associated with and triggered by particular sensory stimuli, usually as the result of one single intensely negative experience. Intensity is the critical element.

The author of a book that surveys the scientific research about memory summed it up with: memory = meaning. Indeed. The meaningfulness of experiences determine how well, and how quickly, we remember them (or not).

MEMORY = MEANING

The more meaningful an experience, the better it sticks in our memory. And if the intensity of that meaningfulness crosses a certain threshold, a single experience could be sufficient for lasting impression. Positive or negative.

It is called saliency. SALIENCY: the quality of being particularly noticeable or important.

If an experience impresses us as being extra meaningful, it engages more of our neurology. Let’s think of it as the fight-or-flight-or-mate survival reflex kicking in. (Yes, I added “mate” to it for the sake of completeness).

The great performing musicians have uncanny ability to learn extremely quickly, both technically and musically. They are able to perfectly memorize vast quantities of music, and they overcome technical challenges with stunning ease.

I think their astounding speed of learning is in large part due to the SALIENCY of their musical experience. And they do not save their intense musical experiences only for formal musical performances. Everything they do on their instruments -- every note they play, every scale, every exercise, every phrase of music -- in the practice room as much as in performance, is loaded with so much musical/aesthetic/emotional meaning that one-trial learning is often possible.

MEMORY = MEANING
MEANING = MEMORY

Their learning and performing experiences are so infused with high-intensity meaning that it immediately sticks in their minds. In short, they use SALIENCY as a learning tool. I am convinced that the idea holds for technique as much as for music. The learning of complex movements happens faster and deeper and more thorough when it is also associated with high intensity musical meaning.

Profound aesthetic meaning elevates learning to a higher plane where greater sophistication is possible. I think that is the fundamental reason why Mikhael Pletnev could learn all the Scarlatti sonatas on one airplane flight; why Anton Nel could memorise and play perfectly the accompaniment of the Dvorak violin concerto from scratch by playing it only twice in rehearsal with me (I swear it’s true!); and why Christian Altenburger could learn and memorize the Alban Berg violin concerto away from the instrument in a single week and play it perfectly from memory at a lesson with Dorothy DeLay! Even she was astonished! The list of examples can go on and on.

There is a lesson in it for all of us lesser mortals. Instead of practicing mindlessly and mechanically, we should deliberately seek out the musical meaning in everything we do. Even technical work should not merely be technical work. We should find ways to make it salient, to make it stick in our minds. Saliency can come in many forms. Beauty is salient. Surprise in salient. Humour is salient. Anything unusual is salient. It stands out from uniformity.

Even a “boring” technical exercise, or a scale, can be made salient. We can do it by adding all kinds of salient features: vibrato, accents, rhythms, pressures, tempi, dynamics, variations of all kinds -- anything that makes it unusual. We can play it in ways that represent different emotions or characters: happy, sad, funny, agitated, angry, mischievous, lazy, seductive, cruel, frightened, loving, tender, etc. Your imagination is the limit. It is simultaneously also an exercise in imagination, musical characterization and communication.

It is the same principle on which the technique of mind-mapping is based. By using pictures, colours, humour, metaphor, playfulness, unusual perspectives, unusual associations, sexyness, even grotesqueness and aversion, ideas and information can SALIENTLY be represented in a mindmap, MAKING IT MUCH MORE MEMORABLE.

MEMORY = MEANING
MEANING = MEMORY

I remember reading flutist James Galway’s first autobiography many years ago in which he recounts how he turned his aversion to practicing scales into pleasure by making a game of it. The object of the game was to play any scale in as many wildly different ways as his imagination could conjure up. Voila!, the element of SALIENCY was added, not to mention the resulting increase in variety (see my essay on the Law of Requisite Variety). Different, unusual ways of playing a scale is not only more salient, and therefore more memorable, but each different way of playing it also offers a new set of information. The more information you can process, the richer your representation of a skill, resulting in greater flexibility.

Memory = meaning. Practice with meaning in mind. Use your imagination to make things salient. Your learning will be greatly enhanced.

Frames of Reference for Bow Control (continued)

7/9/2020

24//6/2020 Frames of reference for bow control (continued)

I have already described to you the system of numbered sounding points for developing control of sound production.

Of course that is only part of what is involved in sound production on bowed string instruments. It focuses on one of four elements involving the right hand/arm that influences sound. Recall that they are:

Sounding point
Bow peed
Bow weight
Size of area of contact

These elements operate in combination. Changes in one necessarily affects changes in the others. Different combinations result in different sounds. For example, closer to the bridge requires more weight and less speed; closer to the fingerboard, less weight and more speed; and so on.

Since our attention is limited, it is useful to focus on one element at a time as a frame of reference for developing sound control. When we focus on sounding point, we play the numbered sounding point game, using the numbered locations between the bridge and the finger board as our frame of reference. To recap, the essential steps of the game are:

start with slow, short detache strokes on a chosen sounding point
gradually increase the length of the strokes while keeping the duration (note length) the same, and maintaining the chosen sounding point, resulting in faster and faster bow speed, until whole bows are used.
test for the maximum bow speed that still allows for a clean resonant sound
test for the minimum bow weight that still allows for a clean resonant sound
listen very attentively for clean bow changes
reverse the process and start again from the beginning
do it at each one of the 5 sounding points
do it on different strings

The focus of this version of the game is primarily on sounding point and bow speed. However, it is necessary to compliment it with other versions of the game. Here are some.

Focusing on bow weight

Choose a sounding point and maintain it precisely
Play whole bows with clean, resonant sound
Gradually subdivide your bow, alternating the amount of weight you use: half a bow with more weight, the other half with less weight; Then divide the bow stroke in thirds, quarters, sixths, eighths, and so on, alternating the weight between them.
Test how many subdivisions you can do with alternating weight, while still maintaining clear and resonant sound.
Do it on different strings, open as well as stopped notes (left hand fingers used)

Focusing on bow speed

Subdivide whole bows into smaller and smaller sections, as in the previous exercise.
Alternate bow speed between slow and fast, starting with half a bow each, then a third of a bow each, then a quarter, etc.
Test for how small you can subdivide the bow while maintaining clear and resonant sound
Do it on different strings, open and stopped.

Focusing on area of contact (amount of hair touching the string)

Subdivide whole bows into smaller and smaller sections, as in the previous exercise.
Alternate the amount of bow hair touching the string by rolling the bow between the thumb and second finger, starting with half a bow each, then a third of a bow each, then a quarter, etc.
Roll between vertical (full hair touching the string) and tilted away from the bridge (few hair touching)
Maintain the basic position of the wrist and the hand, while rolling the bow between the fingers. Use finger action only.
Test for how small you can subdivide the bow while maintaining clear and resonant sound
Do it on different strings, open and stopped.

Bow division

Here is another frame of reference for viewing bow control: bow division. The idea, wonderfully explicated by the great French pedagogue, Lucien Capet, in his book, Superior Bowing Technique, is of proportionality between bow length and note value. For example, if a whole bow is used for a whole note, half a bow is then used for a half note, a quarter of the bow for a quarter note, an eight of the bow for an eight note, a sixteenth for a sixteenth, etc. Various scales can be used, of course, but the principle of proportionality remains the same. The length of bow used should be proportional to the note values. The effect of this approach is great evenness of line, where notes do not stand out disproportionately, whether in lyrical or more articulated passages.

Playing different games for achieving the same phrasing goals

A fascinating game is to see to what extent one can shape a phrase of music by primarily using one element of sound production. For example, play a phrase a number of times, each time shaping it dynamically by using only one of the following:

sounding point variations
weight variations
bow speed/length variations
contact area (amount of hair contacting the string)

It forces one to maximally use any particular element. It is surprising how much can actually be achieved in such a way. At the same time it also highlights the interdepence of the different elements. Try it. It is a fun way to learn.

The purpose of these different frames of reference is to gather as much information about different elements of sound production - and their combinations - as possible. In effect, it allows one to systematically assemble a whole “library” of different bow strokes and their effects. The greater your library of bow movements and their associated sounds, the greater your potential skill in producing sound. Eventually, control of these different elements of sound production and their different possible combinations should become automatic competencies. It is then possible to apply it intuitively while making music.

A Protest!

7/9/2020

20/06/2020

A WORTHWHILE PROTEST
I know what you are thinking. You are thinking that I am inspired by the media frenzy about protests to join one of them. Actually, no, not today. I have something much more violinistic in mind. So, while so much protest is happening in the world, let’s consider a protest that might serve us violinistically.

PROTESTING DOODLING

I nominate “doodling” as a prime subject for violinistic protest. Doodling = the mindless scribbles of a distracted mind. Let’s protest against the time-wasting doodling of left hand fingers on the violin. (The same goes for the right hand, but more on that later.)

Fixing problems in the wrong place.

Doodling happens when we try to fix problems in the wrong place. What is the wrong place? The fingers are the wrong place when we do not have a clear idea of exactly what they are required to do. In that case the right place to fix problems is in the mind. First the mind, then the fingers.

When students make mistakes in lessons, as in the practice room, they often automatically start playing the passage over and over, hoping that the fingers will correct themselves without thinking carefully about the problem first. They try to fix the problem at the fingers, instead of where it originated, which is in the mind. Vague idea in the mind = wrong movements of fingers. Since they can hear the errors, they assume that the fingers will correct themselves. Usually this involves a drawn-out process of trial and error, with errors getting repeated more than the corrections, resulting in a self-defeating process that actually solidifies the errors. The pattern is something like this: error, error, error, error, error, correction (mostly by chance), yippee, it’s fixed! No, it’s not! Many errors + one correction does not = success! Especially if the correction resulted more from chance than from a clear conception of what should happen.

It happens countless times that students doodle at lessons, trying to fix mistakes at the fingers. When I ask them to explain exactly what their fingers are supposed to do - exactly what the intervals in the music are, and what the spacing between fingers should be to actually play those intervals, or exactly what measurable distances should be travelled - they do not actually know. They think they know, because they could hear that something doesn’t sound quite right. But that is too late, and it is not enough information. They haven’t understood exactly what is in the score, and they haven’t thought of exactly what the fingers should do. They had a vague plan, or no plan, heard the resultant mistake/s, and then tried to move the fingers differently, still without knowing exactly what should happen. That is, trying to fix the problem in the wrong place (the fingers) without having a plan (the mind).

When the fingers do not have a clear conception of exactly what they should be doing, in terms of spacing, patterns and frames, they are lost, trying to find their way based only on what is heard. Depending on our hearing for detecting mistakes is making use of information after the fact, which is too late. Instead of error correction, we should aim for error avoidance. Or better still, precision. With a good plan, we can play correctly from the start, with mistakes literally inconceivable (the brain doesn’t conceive of wrong movement, but of the correct ones).

I have often heard it said by virtuoso performers that technique is in the mind, not in the fingers. That is what they mean. The clearer your conception of what should happen, the more precisely your fingers can move. So, for example, my esteemed pianist colleague, professor Albie van Schalkwyk, refers to learning to play a piece at the piano, as first and foremost a process of “sorting out the geography” of the required movements. In other words, how movements relate to the keyboard and to one-another. I think of it as “sorting out the logistics”. Same thing.

That is also why great performers claim that much of their most essential practicing is done away from the instrument. It involves conceptualizing clearly what the fingers have to do, before actually having the fingers do it. How do we avoid mistakes? By having a good plan first. It is told that the great Russian pianist, Mikhail Pletnev, learned the complete set of Scarlatti sonatas for a recording, for which he received the highest accolades, on the plane from Moscow to London on his way to the recording session! I believe it is true. That is how effective proper mindful activity can be as preparation for finger actions.

Fingers can only do what the brain instructs them to do. If they do not get clear instructions from the mind, they cannot move precisely. The quality of finger actions is exactly equal to the quality of the instructions they receive from the mind. However, we instrumentalists all too easily fall into the habit of regarding the fingers as the place where most learning happens. As a result we develop a time-wasting habit of doodling with our fingers. We have our fingers move according to some vague idea of what they should be doing, and then try to correct the mistakes, still without a precise conception of exactly what is required. This is mostly trial and error, but even the error correction is clumsy because of lack of clarity in the mind.

Frame of reference for the left hand

To navigate the territory successfully we need to first have a good map. Since we cannot see the notes on the violin fingerboard, we have to have a frame of reference for placing our fingers correctly. Such a frame of reference involves feeling the distances between notes with our touch-sense (tactile sensations)as well as our movement sense (proprioceptive sensations). But those senses, working of course in conjunction with our hearing, have to operate according to a precise plan. The alternative is doodling.

To do so, we use half-tone and whole-tone spaces between neighbouring fingers as our basic units of “measurement”. We can then extend that into patterns of arrangement. The most basic pattern of finger arrangements consists of two whole-tone spaces plus one half-tone space (the location of the half-tone space can vary) between fingers on one string, making up the interval of a perfect fourth (E to A on the D-string, for example). The perfect fourth constitutes what we call the basic frame of the hand. When that spacing between fingers is done across neighbouring strings, the result is an octave. That is the basic frame of the hand, making a fourth on one string, and an octave on two strings. That Frame of the hand should be as basic and familiar to you as is half-tone and whole-tone spaces between neighbouring fingers.

So now we have three elements constituting our frame of reference for finger placements and movements of the left hand:
Half - and whole-tone spaces
Patterns of those spaces
The Frame of the hand

For finger placements in one position, we use the basic units of measurement (half- and whole-tone spaces between fingers) and their possible arrangements in patterns as our frame of reference. For movements between positions (short or long distances), we use the basic frame of our hand, measuring distances between frames, rather than between single notes.

I consider this conceptual framework to be essential for executing precise finger movements on the violin. Most of the strategies for left hand movements relate in some way to it.

Frame of reference for the right hand/arm

Of course, for right hand/arm movements a similar frame of reference is required. The most basic
elements of such a framework is the numbered sounding point system proposed by Carl Flesch and used by many great pedagogues since. The system consists of 5 distinct sounding points between the bridge and the fingerboard.
Sounding point 1 = right next to the bridge (Flesch would say “on the bridge”)
Sounding point 2 = a little bit further from the bridge (let’s say halfway between sounding point 1 and the middle between the bridge and the fingerboard)
Sounding point 3 = in the middle between the bridge and the fingerboard
Sounding point 4 = next to the fingerboard
Sounding point 5 = on the fingerboard (right next to the edge of the fingerboard)

This is a very effective reference system to control the movements of your bow relative to the bridge and the fingerboard, using visual information. It allows for having not just two, but three sources of information about the bow’s movement: auditory, kinesthetic and visual - you can hear, feel and see what the bow is doing. Having the visual information provided by the 5-point sounding point reference system is invaluable for developing good control of your bow strokes.
The great violin pedagogue, Simon Fischer, has developed excellent exercises based on this system for developing sound production on string instruments. It is worth exploring in detail.

So, to summarize: this is a protest against doodling on the violin. The antidote to doodling is to realize that activities of the mind should precede activities of the hands. A conceptual frame of reference that allows measurement of distances for both hands allows for clear instructions from the mind to the fingers. First the mind, then the fingers. That’s the right way around.

Score Reading, Fingerings and Bowings

7/9/2020

[06/16, 21:00] Piet Koornhof: I have already brought to your attention the requirement to read a score properly. Proper reading saves you from having to unlearn unnecessary mistakes due to careless reading, and saves your teacher from having to point out basic reading mistakes that should have been avoided in the first place. In short, it saves time for both you and your teacher. Who wouldn’t want that?!

Please note, a musical score can be thought of as having three levels of information:
The stave
Above the stave
Below the stave

The stave contains the clef, key signature, meter, pitches, note values, rhythms, and rests.

Above the stave are indications of tempo, character, articulation, phrasing, fingerings and bowings.

Below the stave are mostly expressive indications, including dynamic levels and fluctuations, tempo fluctuations, and phrasing and articulation of notes with their stems pointing upward.

Negative hallucinations
It is all too easy to read only and carelessly what is on the stave, while missing most of what is above and below it. Look again at the lists above, and count the number of different categories. There are more than fifteen (15) different categories of information present on a page of music notation. It easily happens that much of it is missed in a careless reading. Please guard against it.

It requires acute awareness and discipline to thoroughly read all three levels of musical notation. Please be reminded of it. I do not like having to point out negative hallucinations. (Negative hallucinations = not seeing what is in fact visible)

Let me explain a few principles of fingerings and bowings that will improve your reading of scores.

These are the criteria for deciding on fingerings and bowings:
Musical sense (is the interpretation supported by the choices? Does it sound like I want it to?)
Technical efficiency (is it the least effortful way to achieve the musical goal?)
Expressive devices which may (or may not) be independent of the overall interpretation.

The ideal is to have “musical sense” (nr.1) as the highest criterion. Sometimes, in rare circumstances, we have to compromise. Hopefully, very seldom. In the vast majority of cases, musical decisions should override technical comfort. There are exceptions, of course. When a musical outcome is unattainable, due to technical inability, it is conceivable to choose fingerings and bowings that are at least playable for the time being.

Unfortunately, many students reflexively use the fingerings and bowings which they find most comfortable, ignoring the indications in the score. They fall back on their default habits. This usually involves preferring to play in first position and, if unavoidable, third position, with other positions seemingly avoided at all cost. It also usually involves substituting open strings for the fourth finger. The consequences, in the longer term, are continued ineptness in other positions, and a fourth finger that remains weak from lack of use.

Leaving your comfort zone
Improvement, per definition, is a process that requires us to venture outside of our comfort zones. If we never attempt something that is less familiar and therefore less comfortable, we cannot improve. Therefore, if you want to improve you have to have the courage and the discipline to move outside of your comfort zone. You have to try things that are uncomfortable and/or unfamiliar. If you remain comfortable for any extended period of time, the chances are that you are not learning anything new. Comfort should not be your default position if you want to develop as a musician. Those who learn the most and improve the quickest are those who seek out and welcome discomfort as learning opportunities.

I am often asked, incredulously, why a passage cannot be played in first position and with open strings. My answer usually involves the following:
The first position/open strings option doesn’t make nearly as much musical and/or technical sense as the indications in the score (those that I approved or indicated).
You need to develop proficiency in other positions than the one or two that you are comfortable with.
Your pinky needs to be strengthened and exercised so that you can use four fingers with equal proficiency instead of just three. Who wants to be a three-finger violinist if you can learn to use all your fingers equally well?!

Now, here are some specific musical and technical criteria for choosing fingerings and bowings.

Minimizing string crossings.
Often we have to choose between discomfort in the right hand/arm and discomfort in the left hand. The choice depends on the context and the musical goal. I often choose fingerings that minimize big or awkward string changes with the bow. It can save energy, as well as ensure better articulation and coordination.

Staying within timbre zones (different strings and positions have different “tone colours”).
Sometimes, depending on the context, I might prefer to keep the timbre the same for a complete phrase. This might require going into a higher position on the same string, which might be less comfortable for the left hand, but sound better musically. So be it. Musical considerations should usually trump technical ones. At other times, in different contexts, one might decide to change the timbre within a phrase, or between phrases for subtle contrast. It has implications for choices of fingering.

Iterating/maintaining finger and/or bowing patterns, including string changes.
If possible, and it very often is, it saves much effort and brain power if a pattern of fingering and/or bowing can be repeated (iterated), provided that results in sound don’t conflict with the musical goals.

Rules for score reading and finger and bow setting when indications are absent:

Stay in the position of the last fingering indication, until there is a new indication. Do not revert to an “easier” position, simply because you feel like it. Only change to a different position when there is an explicit indication to do so.

Use an up-bow for an upbeat, if nothing is indicated, especially at the beginnings of phrases after rests. Usually (there are always some exceptions), it sounds and looks more musical. The principle is congruence = looking the way you sound = up-bow for an up-beat; down-bow for a down-beat). Congruence has persuasive power. If you look the way you sound, you are communicating the same message in two perceptual channels, instead of two contradictory messages.

Use down-bows for endings of phrases, whenever possible, unless explicitly indicated otherwise by the composer (not the editor, who may or may not be any good!). It allows for natural decrescendos/diminuendos, and it looks the way it sounds, making for congruence.

Avoid string crossings for single notes, i.e. avoid going to a different string for a single note in a group of notes which could otherwise be played on one string, unless a string crossing with the bow is less problematic than a shift or stretch in the left hand.

Avoid shifting down to first position for only one or two notes, and then back up again, simply for the momentary comfort of playing in your default comfort zone.

Resist the temptation to play open strings when you see the notes E, A and D that correspond to those open strings. Again, being in your default comfort zone should not be your only criterion for choice of fingering. Open strings sound quite different from other notes. They tend to stand out like sore thumbs in the midst of musical phrases of notes that are pressed down and are coloured with vibrato. Usually, we want consistency in phrases, with subtle, and not sudden and glaring changes. Open strings, depending on the context (mostly in lyrical passages) can sound too glaringly different. In fast passages, however, for purposes of articulation, and for more comfort, they can be useful.

Rest assured, I spend a lot of time and effort deciding on fingerings and bowings. Usually, when I have completed the process of deciding on fingerings and bowings (with minor changes still possible as work on a piece progresses), most of the learning process is done. Think of it as plotting the logistics of a piece. To me that is usually more than 60% of the work required to technically play a piece. It is also based on the most important musical decisions. What remains then is fine-tuning of the technical and musical execution. That is how much thought and experimentation goes into fingering and bowing decisions.

Of course, there is scope for your individual differences and tastes, but not as much as you might think, and not this early in your violinistic education. First of all, the constraints imposed by thorough musical and technical considerations, keeping in mind the rules of musicianship, the universal characteristics of the human anatomy, and typical violinistic practices, don’t usually leave much room for substantial differences in fingerings and bowings. Not if we are dealing with a well thought-out, consistent interpretation of a work, and a responsible violinistic approach. With a completely different interpretation, yes, different fingerings and bowings might be suitable, but still constrained by well-tested violinistic practice. But first you have to learn about musical and technical thinking within a consistent framework. Once you understand that, you’ll be free and capable of developing different and unique frameworks.

Part of my job is to expose you to the complete process of musical interpretation/conception of a composition AND the technical execution of that interpretation/conception. We strive for consistency in that process. Once you have been sufficiently exposed to the process and developed a fundamental understanding of the principles involved, you’ll be able to apply it on your own.

But before you can do that with any measure of success, you’ll have to follow the instructions of your teacher. Your ability to make musical and technical decisions will increase in proportion to the discipline with which you learn from people who have already walked the path. Musical and technical independence is acquired through disciplined study, not a birthright.

It is my hope that these principles, rules and practices will become clearer to you through practical musical examples.