by Goldberg on Mon Jan 24, 2005 3:20 am
Hmm, sounds like me a while ago, only the fault was with me and not with my absolutely gorgeous Steinway, lol...
Ok, eh, that probably didn't make you feel any better. To be honest, in the past I've had to practice--for a considerable amount of time--on bad pianos, and have had to play on absolutely horrible pianos. Although I originally despised the idea and was somewhat pompous in my attitude (I would often throw histrionic tirades about the piano just to raise a scene, lol, which didn't get much effect of course--I was just "testing the water", and wasn't really serious cos I desired to play), I now get something of a "thrill" when I perform on disabled pianos. Kind of like, "well, ok, the piano only will get me *so* far: now I'm going to have to make up for its short sides!" And then I get into the mood of the old greats like Horowitz and Cziffra and all those people, most of whom learned on absolutely despicable instruments...I find some sort of excitement in it all, even if it's absolutely crappy. But, then again, I can always come back home and play my M!
Well, ok, THAT didn't make you feel any better either. I'm not trying to say that you SHOULD practice on bad pianos, nor that you necessarily should like playing on them; as a serious student, you deserve the best you can get for yourself, to provide the most fulfilling experience for the practice sessions. If that sounds like a salesman's speech, it is; the guy who sold my parents the Steinway gave them that same little spiel...but, I think that it's quite truthful nevertheless.
In fact, my first instrument--for three or four years--was a Roland digital, comparable to one of the middle-upper models in the Clavinova line (it was one of the Roland KR series, if you'd like to do a little research...*probably* out of your price range, but not outrageously expensive). I sure smashed the hell out of it, too...in fact, I still have it now, and sometimes even perfer playing it to my M, for the reasons I discussed above (and, yes, I'm a real loon sometimes). Some of the keys stick, and the rest of them are excessively light compared to the Steinway, but it's still quite a lot of fun.
If anything, the digital helped me to refine my musical sense of the keyboard. It became apparent to me that if I could shape a phrase on the digital, then I sure as hell could play it well on my teacher's Yamaha grand (and, before anyone starts slagging me off, this was an extraordinarily *good*--yes, good--Yamaha grand. Beautiful). However, I also developed some horrible technical habits which can only be attributable to the somewhat questionable action, as well as pedal action, of the digital piano, and it has taken me a lot of time to try and remedy my technique...a work in progress even today.
Naturally, I wouldn't have had a problem if, like you, I already had a REAL piano to practice on, in order to get the feeling of the touch and everything else in my mind before taking it to the digital--so you probably won't have too many problems in that regard.
Anyhow, that's simply my experience with the digital pianos in general, not the Clavinovas. I think my technique would be much better if I had started on the Steinway, but nothing can be done about that now, and again, as you've already gotten used to the feel of a real, acoustic piano, emulating the motions on a digital shouldn't be a problem at all. And, finally, although I never really practiced on one, I've played many Clavinovas and have to say that I like their piano sounds better than Roland's, and, well, the actions are quite similar; slightly realistic, but will also wear down after about 4 or 5 years after constant use...
One should either be a work of art, or wear a work of art.
-Oscar Wilde
You know, some people just have natural talents-like some people play the piano but aren't very tall.
-Noodle pirate
