-
04-12-2009, 07:57 AM #26Ray C. Guest
This is a book one should read if you really want to dig into this subject-the concepts about putting in your, "10,000 hours," peeling back the exterior of someone's success to see that it is more likely one's background, upbringing, and environment rather than pure innate talent-he goes into them in very well written style. If you are an artist of any kind, I would suggest this book.
-
04-12-2009 07:57 AM
-
Originally Posted by franco6719
-
Originally Posted by Ray C.
-
Originally Posted by derek
Yes, you're right. I donìt even know what the heck I was arguing about. I think I was arguing with myself, as usual, Derek. When I go through some period of frustration, I sometimes just want to give up and say "it's all innate. I don't have the talent. Etc..."
However, I think I made an important baby step yesterday afternoon. I started playing along with Joe Pass and Niels, and I almost worked out the changes to "Have You Met Miss Jones" by ear, without Real Book. The bridge threw me off. But it seemed, for a moment, that all the work may not be for nothing.
Follow whatever approach works for you.
-
Originally Posted by Ray C.
-
I read a quote not long ago (maybe on this site) that said something to the effect that a true master's greatest conceit is thinking he did it with just hard work.
All masters have massive loads of innate talent. You simply can't get there without it. Talent without hard work is a shameful waste. Hard work without talent is a noble waste. Only when the two are combined do you get brilliance.
-
Originally Posted by Goofsus4
How could you possibly know that with any certainty? There are certainly freaks of nature, Mozart, Stevie Wonder, Bo Jackson, LeBron James, et al, but how do you (or anyone else for that matter) know that you cannot achieve greatness (however defined) by average talent and extraordinary work ethic?
-
Originally Posted by derek
High talent + hard work = brilliance
Average talent + hard work = mastery
Low talent + hard work = proficiency
Any talent level + no work = waste
-
I don't think anyone has certain answers or even solid statistics like "80% this and 20% this" for music or life in general. I do think both elements have to play some role. And it will be different for different individuals, like everything else in life.
I just try to say and think "Do the best you can with what you do have" and don't think about becoming the next Mozart, UNLESS you really do have that level of "freakishness". That way lies madness...
-
Originally Posted by Goofsus4
How about High talent + laziness? I have seen this before in a variety of settings, just frustrates the heck out of me.
Talent is such a difficult thing to quantify, and it is just impossible to know how much of a difference it makes if you and Pat Metheny, Pat Martino (running out of Pats) put in the same amount of time practicing and performing, do you reach the level of competency they have?
-
You all should read Kenny Werner's "Effortless Mastery".
-
Originally Posted by derek
-
04-14-2009, 07:07 AM #38Ray C. Guest
The problem is understanding what aspects of one's talent are "innate."
Take a high school jazz band. There's and alto and tenor, both boys took up their instruments at the same age, both went to the same music school early days. The tenor sounds smooth-like a natural. The alto choppy; seems unsure in his solos. Does the tenor have more innate talent? Maybe-or maybe he comes from a supporting family who fully back his ambition in music. And maybe the alto come from a single parent home and is distracted at home. Or his parents are not supportive and and have beaten into his head that music is a waste of time-maybe they even hate jazz.
But you in the audience...you haven't got clue-all you have is what your hear. And what you hear may not tell anything about the true nature of the talent on the bandstand.
It's a very tricky subject if you really dig deep. That's why I noted the Gladwell book. He goes into this and makes think about a lot of talent in many areas is wasted in our society.
-
Originally Posted by jthguitar
Kenny's take has certainly partially informed how I look at all of this talent vs work thing.
-
Originally Posted by franco6719
Wanna get to Carnegie Hall? Got 10,000 hours? - The Artful Manager
Secrets of greatness: Practice and hard work bring success - October 30, 2006
-
Originally Posted by derek
-
We are not talking about noodling along to your favorite cd or backing track.
You can't do "focused noodling" with backing tracks?
-
We are not talking about noodling along to your favorite cd or backing track, but really focusing on technical aspects of your playing.
Well, I'm going to spend more time playing and noodling these days. I already did the 8-hour a day non-musical scale/technique/reading/theory insanity back at Berklee. I almost ended up insane, quite literally.
I work on ear training and licks now. Period. And chords. If its' not somthign musical, I will go nuts again.
-
agree, perhaps "shredding" is something like "woodpecker's nightmare".
I'm truly fascinated, if someone is able to play that fast.
On the other hand, isn't it boring sometimes to listen to "technical virtuosos"?
I'd prefer to define something like "music" that has to do with - hm - somekind of "mystery tour".
Remember that it isn't the guitar (wonderful instrument) alone
Might be something related to voice and subconsciousness.
Or is it a "lifestyle" ?- sorry - not meant ironic.
Regarding my thread - "music and drugs addicted"
any answers without poisoning appreciated.
Because sometimes playing a trumpet or a saxophone I'm always thinking
why?
Once I seemed to have a pretty good baritone voice,
now tell me the secret of "speedpicking".
oh sorry, I really wanted to stop posting, but the post-offices in Austria
are shutting down more and more...
-
hm, strange thing, you don't think of "Johann Sebastian Bach"?
-
It's like a story that Tommy Tedesco told at Berklee on a visit one time. He told about a student who could play the C Major scale faster than anyone he ever heard. That's ALL he could play though. HAHA!! He just practiced playing the C Major scale as fast as possible and became fast.
Yes, Bach was a virtuouso and also a genius of composition, improvisation, musicality, etc..
-
Bach? you mean a virtuoso?
no he didn't spread words
he was vegetarian, if u understand what this might mean to "music"
-
Hubert said:
"agree, perhaps "shredding" is something like "woodpecker's nightmare".
I'm truly fascinated, if someone is able to play that fast.
On the other hand, isn't it boring sometimes to listen to "technical virtuosos"?
"Speedpicking" is just the normal types of picking played fast. There is no specific technique. The two most common aspects are "legato" and "sweep picking". Legato just means hammering on notes with your left fingers rather than picking each individual note with your right hand. This technique would have been invented 10 minutes after the first guitar was made. "Sweep picking" simply means strumming slowly in one direction, so that a chord will sound like an arpeggio. The arpeggio sound is reinforced by slightly reducing the finger pressure after picking, to deaden the string.
The biggest problem most shredders have is that they don't have enough musical ideas to keep playing at the speed of light for more than 30 seconds. It is rather sad that Metal has contributed so much to the physical technique of modern guitar playing but hasn't maintained a concurrent growth in musicality. Effectively we have a generation of very technically articulate players with nothing interesting to say.
-
well done, banshia,
for example - metallica produces a lot of noise - my opinion -
Jimi Hendrix might have done too, but a lot of difference between
metal and Jimi
-
ok - you have to admire your mistakes
and all of that little stuff
trying to express notes without a cup of coffee
Charlie Garnett - Franken Tele
Yesterday, 08:52 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos