-
What's a natural on the guitar ? does it mean he can play without putting hours and hours of practice ?
practice less and play better than the average guy , or is it just that the natural talent will develop a stronger sense of language than the average one ?
I'm realy starting to ask myself those questions nowadays ! maybe because i'm frustrated with the pace, but all good , i think that's it things don't change over night , i'm puting the hard work , but just wondering what's a natural talent ! all the great players we know started very young ! i can't see where the narutal talent fits !
-
10-13-2016 08:11 PM
-
I have to say that starting young seems to make a big difference. My kids started on violins when they were three. I never pushed them much, just 15 minutes a day when they were little, and maybe an hour by the time they were in junior high. Then when they got to high school and started playing jazz, it seemed to come to them so rapidly. Within three years they could hold their own with professionals. So I tend to believe that starting young helps to organize your brain musically. When their teachers tell them something, they can integrate it right away into their playing.
Of course, to play jazz you have to start improvising young too. My kids did it on Bluegrass and fiddle tunes. I think that sometimes classical "one right way" training can be impediment to learning toimprovise. You become too self critical.Last edited by Jonzo; 10-13-2016 at 09:39 PM.
-
-
Did you read Jaco's biography? His brother tells how when they were kids he started taking guitar lessons before Jaco, wanting to play The Beatles songs. He was struggling, making a slow progress for 4 months. Then one day Jaco picked up his guitar for the first time, and learned all those chords in 20 min and played a Beatles song right away.
You can make up for talent with practicing only so much. The good news is you don't have to be a HUGE talent to make music. You just need to have SOME talent, and you're good. You can find your niche if you are smart enough to realize what your natural strength is, and don't waste your time on something you don't.
-
I had a bass student first time this tuesday. She'd never played before except for a litte some five years ago. When I asked her to play a note the sound was good and her technique looked good as well. For the sake of fun I gave her a reggae tune to play. She learned to play it perfectly in 20 minutes. She even sang the line while playing it. Good time and correct fingerings immedeately
Inspiring!
-
Hmm. I used to be very good at karate. The very first lesson I took I did everything right: I stood in the right position and could do all the kicks that other students were still struggling with. The sensei asked where I had other karate lessons already, but it was really my first lesson. Never had that on the guitar sadly enough......
-
There is a bundle of talents that are needed to make an awesome guitar player. It's a jackpot when all of them are there. If not, some of those need many years of constant training but is most of the time obtainable. This jackpot is so rare and usually wasted:P
-
Yep, 1 out of 10 can do that. And 1 out of 100 doesn't even need a teacher. I had a few students like that. One came into class, picked up the guitar for the first time. In 45 minutes I told her how to sit, hold, pluck and pinch and all she said was "ok, like that yep".. and we learned a tune and a few chords.. It was so easy and since she only needed to learn how to play chords, it was basically done. I was baffled
Originally Posted by yaclaus
-
This is a big area of discussion.
Anyone who teaches will realise there are some students who just 'get it' and others who struggle. So there is such a thing as 'talent' in that area. Some you don't really have to teach anything, they just get on with it, and all you have to do is suggest things for them to check out. Easy money, and somewhat humbling.
But talent is a funny thing. It's possible to be talented in one area but not others.
I would not regard myself as a terribly talented musician. I know what proper talented musicians look like and they can do things I will probably never be able to, not that that stops me trying. But you can't catch up with cats who have been doing music since the age of 5.
But I am a talented player of the instrument in that I have an mechanical and kinaesthetic affinity for the instrument - particularly (I think) in that very important feedback loop between what you do with your hands and getting the sound. I also have very good chops though that took me a little longer.
Within a year I was playing paid rock gigs, for example.
But my inability to play in time, read music or play well by ear didn't stand me in very good stead when trying to play jazz lol. So jazz took so much longer because musicianship trumps technique every time :-)
I think this may actually be true of a few guitar players on the forum, and even those players who have through hard work become professionals - talented kinaesthetic rock players who struggle with the unfamiliar aspects of jazz music.
The thing is it's the things I find/found hard - timing, ear training etc - that I most appreciate in my own playing. That might not necessarily be what I'm naturally best at.
---- on the 'top percentile' -----
In terms of the top players - well I think this is where a lot of people are barking up the wrong tree. They want to do everything, and believe that only those who have the talent can master it all. This is complete nonsense IMO. Some players are terrific talents, for sure (such as Birelli who can play everything but almost seems a bit bored with his own facility sometimes) but actually many of the great players are just very good at knowing what they do well and are able to pursue that.
For example, you won't catch Pat Metheny trying to play Gypsy Jazz. Bill Frissell won't be doing a fusion album any time soon, and so on...
For me an important aspect of developing beyond the apprentice phase is getting to the point where you do not care whether or not people like your playing, and basically say 'screw you, this is my sound.'
All my favourite players have this quality. They are not looking for anyone's validation or living in anyone's shadow. That's a hard jump to make. It's also not something that can be done consciously by trying to contrive your own voice. You also have to make sure that the fundamentals - time in particular - are well addressed.
To me that's not the same thing as choosing a style and specialising in it. I respect that, but it's more like imitation.
It's not even about how you play necessarily - it's more about owning it.
Getting there and escaping from the 'session player' mindset of nailing this or that style, is one of the big jumps IMO that many players never quite make (no offence intended against great session players, who do indeed have their own voice).
It is particularly hard to do in this era, but I do think it's getting a bit easier in a weird sort of way.Last edited by christianm77; 10-14-2016 at 10:26 AM.
-
I realize now that I've been an instrument operator more than a musician. Years ago I'd been invited to play in two performing groups, one on brass, one on woodwind. But I've never felt I was a musician because I didn't understand the structure or the theory, and didn't have enough gut drive to pursue it. I needed the sheet music and played it better than many around me, and I've always enjoyed the process. I could make a lead sound technically and musically meaningful, but it was really always an intellectual and physical exercise.
Does that mean I don't have a natural talent for music? Could be, but define the terms. I could play musically better than many who understood music better, but they lived and breathed that world far more than I ever did.
Now at 56 I'm just starting guitar, and becoming interested in improvisation for the first time, which has brought me to jazz. I don't expect deep proficiency before I pop my clogs, but even the intellectual pursuit of impromptu musicality is an adventure. Improv is fast composing, composing is slow improv, and all that. Who knows, maybe I'll get carried away and surprise myself. Guitar means improv to me, and that opens up a new world. What magic. What's music. Now back to these barre chords...
Last edited by macuaig; 10-14-2016 at 12:16 PM.
-
I'm a hobbyist in every way so, no authority here. But I always felt that composing and improvising are literally the opposite ways of creating music. I know these are kinda similar but not at all the same time. Off topic though Originally Posted by macuaig
-
Working within your limitations is important. How many times you hear big players say something like 'I tried to play like so and so, but I couldn't do it no matter how hard i tried, so I had to do my own thing by default'. Finding your unique talent is the goal. Then you just spend lifetime polishing and cultivating this little thing, haha. It might be not the biggest diamond in the world, but it's yours, and you own it!
-
Some good points above. Last year I saw live, in a 3-week period, Pat Martino, Al DiMeola, and pianist Hiromi Uehara.
I came away completely convinced that a lot of it is natural talent, because it's inconceivable that an average person could get that good. For instance, DiMeola proudly introduced his first guitar teacher from the audience. Now how many students had that teacher, and how many ended up like Al?
All the same, what does that mean for me? -- Nothing!
I can still have fun getting to be as good as possible.
-
When I was young, I wanted to play like Alex Lifeson, then Joe Satriani, then Eric Johnson, and I couldn't for the life of me do it. But the exercising was good for my chops and while I was never a barn-burner shredder, I got a lot out of pursuing those three. The main thing I got was my own voice.
I sold off all my electric gear in 01-02, and played acoustic-only (flattop) for seven years. That changed my approach to the instrument entirely.
My playing is admittedly a hell of a lot more perspiration than talent, though. I can feel the rust build up if I take much time away from it.
-
I think your question moot and perhaps, frankly, even silly---no offense. Originally Posted by mooncef
What the hell does what other guys do have to do what you do? Please get your mind off such cul-de-sac head trips and back on doing your thing---whatever level of ability you were born with. It ain't about such sideshow questions anyway, but 'sweat equity'
I will add one final thought:
Red Rodney, in a 1994 interview with Phil Schaap, was talking about how one acquires knowledge and how one obtains it.
'Gil Evans was tremendously self-educated'.
and:
'I never felt Charlie Parker had the great knowledge attributed to him. Every time you stopped him and asked what he was playing he would give the same answer: Bb7'.
Finally (and my point):
'It ain't how you got it. It's what you got'...
-
I think mooncef asked some good questions
-
I agree with Charlie Parker, the answer is Bb7.
-
Ha ha... Originally Posted by princeplanet
-
OK. Well, he IS 'workin' it out' online, not at all a bad thing. Originally Posted by yaclaus
In the end it is up to him and him (he?) alone whether we gave him good answers...
-
There was an excellent documentary in which Vanessa Mae, the violinist, wanted to know whether her talent was nature or nurture.
A lot of science and pseudo science later the conclusion was basically brain plasticity and muscle memory from an early age accelerates learning.
Older students need clear definition and practices to aid learning with lots of patience as the learning process is painfully slower due to less brain placicity and ingrained muscle memory.
There maybe ways of assisting learning in relation to supplements. A hot cup of tea always sits down with me on my practice routines. Ah, caffiene. Ambrosia from the gods!
But generally there's evidence that genetics plays a part too.
Say what?
No, really....Last edited by jazzbow; 10-15-2016 at 10:44 AM.
-
I think 'interlanguage' applies to 'the jazz language'.
-
I believe that - Originally Posted by jazzbow
It takes me ages to learn anything. Kids on the other hand - boom!
-
As a teacher, I noticed kids just like adults, are very different. Some learn music stuff quickly, and some painfully slow. Originally Posted by christianm77
On the same day I had 2 new students. One is 9 year old, and the other around 40 years old. Both total beginners. Over the course of 4 weeks, the adult one learned much quicker. That's just one example, and there were many with reverse situation.
i think it's fair to say, if a kid does have some in born musical ability, he/she would learn quicker than an adult with the same amount of ability, if both are beginners. But those things are just impossible to measure!
-
As a teacher, I always liked when they started from the age 12-14. They learn 10x faster than under 8 something. Easier for me but it's gonna be a struggle for them to get real good with the technical stuff... When they start too late.. from 16, the fingers are just damn stiff already
Those who can learn fast at the age of 6-7 are so rare but imo, that's a requirement for becoming all-round professional player. Of course there are exceptions always.
Reply With Quote
How is the Steve Howe 175?
Today, 05:54 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos