Pete Academy Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 (edited) I'm currently reading a book called 'Bounce'. It's by a world champion table tennis player. Basically, it debunks the myth that people are born to be at the top of their game, whatever they're into...sport, music, etc. The author gives an example of young violinists. They are spread into three categories - those that become top soloists; those that play in a top orchestra; those that become teachers. Research shows that the top soloists did considerably more hours' practise than the others. The amount of hours needed to become an amazing musician or sportsman is 10,000. Apparently, it has nothing to do with genetics or anything similar. I can believe this. But what puzzles me is that I've seen people pick up playing an instrument very quickly. It would seem that certain people have an aptitude for learning that is far faster than other people. Any thoughts on this subject? Edited May 27, 2011 by Pete Academy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mykesbass Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 But do those that have the natural ability and pick up playing quickly possibly have the tendency to just go with it rather than sit down and put all the heavyweight pratice in - Keith Richards vs Julian Bream perhaps? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Academy Posted May 27, 2011 Author Share Posted May 27, 2011 [quote name='Mykesbass' post='1247578' date='May 27 2011, 08:52 PM']But do those that have the natural ability and pick up playing quickly possibly have the tendency to just go with it rather than sit down and put all the heavyweight pratice in - Keith Richards vs Julian Bream perhaps?[/quote] Interesting point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZMech Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 (edited) I think there's also an element that it doesn't have to be strictly on that instrument/activity. Your practise in one area can often translate over to another. For example, whilst it seemed I never had to work as hard as most of my friends at maths, I've always enjoyed logic puzzles and games of a similar nature, for which the hours I spent playing probably carry over since they use a similar skill set. Edited May 27, 2011 by ZMech Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skol303 Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 [quote name='Pete Academy' post='1247562' date='May 27 2011, 08:40 PM']The amount of hours needed to become an amazing musician or sportsman is 10,000.[/quote] ^ I've heard that figure applies to just about anything. I'm currently close to that for making cups of tea as it happens (not that anyone at work appreciates my mastery of the art). Seriously though, I'm sure some people do have a natural aptitude for things - and this may well give them an edge to begin with. But 10,000 hours practice at anything - roughly 3 hours per day for 10 years - is surely going to pay off. I guess the moral of this story is to be blessed with aptitude and practice your a$$ off! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skej21 Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 (edited) If only spending 10,000 hours reading through basschat threads was transferable! I'd be flippin' off Wooten (et al) right now Edited May 27, 2011 by skej21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrismuzz Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 At this rate I might become amazing by the time I retire Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Austin7 Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 If you don't have sufficient musical talent, practicing can only take you so far no matter how much you do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThomBassmonkey Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 I find people who are natural musicians are more likely to put the hours in because they get into it and enjoy it faster. I'd agree that practice can only take you so far if you don't naturally take to an instrument, but I always find it's more to do with feel than with technical ability. I've met some great guitarists that can play as fast as you like, but there's no feel in their music. On the flip side, there's people like me that are considered natural musicians and can pick up most instruments and play a tune, but can't be bothered to properly practice (I've not even picked up my bass in almost a week). I think natural ability is more to do with nurture than nature though. People who are surrounded by music from a young age seem to be able to pick up what's going on faster. As a teacher I've seen it plenty of times, the kids who have listened to their parent's music will pick up instruments faster than kids who's parents think they should have something to do so they get them an instrument and they have no clue about music. One of my best students when I was teaching was a 9 year old who's favourite band was Saxon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
risingson Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 *Puts his boring hat on* There is a theory that I was told by one of my old lecturers that from birth; we choose to utilise our ears in different ways depending on the kind of person you are, i.e. if we react well to music from a young age then generally you develop a musically discerning ear, which can lead to sufficient interest in music and perhaps later for some. an interest in playing an instrument. There will be other people that choose to use their ears for much more medial and naturally human tasks, e.g. engaging in everyday discourse, spacial awareness and balance etc, all things that our ears are naturally meant to help us with. I find this fascinating because if it's true, then the path that we take to becoming musicians is largely a subconscious decision as opposed to a sudden choice to take up an instrument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssentialTension Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 [quote name='Pete Academy' post='1247562' date='May 27 2011, 08:40 PM']I'm currently reading a book called 'Bounce'. It's by a world champion table tennis player. Basically, it debunks the myth that people are born to be at the top of their game, whatever they're into...sport, music, etc. The author gives an example of young violinists. They are spread into three categories - those that become top soloists; those that play in a top orchestra; those that become teachers. Research shows that the top soloists did considerably more hours' practise than the others. The amount of hours needed to become an amazing musician or sportsman is 10,000. Apparently, it has nothing to do with genetics or anything similar. I can believe this. But what puzzles me is that I've seen people pick up playing an instrument very quickly. It would seem that certain people have an aptitude for learning that is far faster than other people. Any thoughts on this subject?[/quote] The conclusion, i.e. 'it has nothing to do with genetics or anything similar', does not logically follow from the reason given, i.e. 'that the top soloists did considerably more hours practise than the others'. For instance, it is quite possible in logic that there was a genetic cause for members of one group doing more practice - that conclusion would also fit with the reason given but wouldn't be any more or less certain than the conclusion which is given. So, assuming you have reported the conclusion of the study accurately, I'd say that it was a very poor study that fails to debunk any myths whatsoever. The best that could be said is that there is a correlation between practising a skill and being good at that skill and we don't really need a study to figure that out. Having said that, I'm not myself usually convinced by genetic explanations for this kind of thing - nurture is at least as important as nature, even if nature is also where we start from. My argumentative opponent might say that my tendency not to believe genetic explanations was itself caused by genetic factors but, of course, I wouldn't believe them even if they were correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xilddx Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 In 30 years of playing I have calculated I have played (not necessarily practiced) for about 8,000 hours. And technically, I'm sh*t Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3below Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 Practise - is that the new name for sound check? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssentialTension Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 (edited) [quote name='silddx' post='1247730' date='May 27 2011, 11:31 PM']In 30 years of playing I have calculated I have played (not necessarily practiced) for about 8,000 hours. And technically, I'm sh*t [/quote] Only 2,000 hours to go Nigel. With some amphetamine you could probably manage it before the end of June. Edited May 27, 2011 by EssentialTension Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xilddx Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 [quote name='EssentialTension' post='1247737' date='May 27 2011, 11:36 PM']Only 2,000 hours to go Nigel. With some amphetamine you could probably manage it before the end of June.[/quote] I have actively thought about, and analysed my approach to, music for ten times that though, and that can have massive benefits. But I still feel like a baby musician. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deepbass5 Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 It is comforting to hear many of you feel as I do. Bass does not come easy to me, I would not class myself as a natural, I have to work at it. I am in love with the Bass as an instrument and in its ability to move people and transform a piece of music. That’s what drives me on, to be part of that. There is a lot to personal discipline and hard work; I have the attention span of a nat. Most pro bass players and I refer to session type guys rather those who have grown up in one successful band. Are totally focused and disciplined and do a huge amount of home practice, never rest on their laurels. We don't see all this we just see the YouTube videos of the end results and it comforts us to dismiss it as they are naturally gifted and that’s why I can't achieve that standard. They have to maintain that and you will find they organise their day around that, they will practice what they need to just stand still and have other allotted times developing new techniques and working on particular projects they are booked for. Music for me started in Brass Bands, Orchestras and then Big bands before taking up the Bass and I know that a contesting brass band practicing the same number for weeks and months takes a great leap forward. I used to hate it but it works. Just wish I had that discipline in my Bass practice. If we all practiced for the time we spent here we could all improve. One Tip Don't practice what you know Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markstuk Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 Just to add my threepenny worth, talent without working hard only takes you so far, and working hard without talent also only takes you so far... :-) Cheers Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essexbasscat Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 Research into post - stroke rehab suggests that a movement needs to be repeated about 1600 times before it becomes habitual, or the 'muscle memory' is deveoped, if you prefer that term. That is just one movement however, not a pattern or combination of movements. Add to that comprehension of context, the ability to busk, interpreting audio feedback from your own playing and signals from others etc and it's easy to see where the work starts to creep in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_b Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 I don't buy the basic point: anyone can be as good as anyone else with enough practice. That's not true. If you have the talent and don't practice then you'll loose it but natural talent and ability is with you at birth. Top athletes certainly are genetically predisposed, with more efficient circulation, larger lungs, hearts etc. There was a 12 year old Vietnamese girl on TV last night who is fluent in 11 languages and could speak 2 languages by the time she was 3. She was born with that ability. The talent of top musicians is improved and honed in the practise room but they come with that talent hard wired. F1 drivers have a resting heart rate lower that any of us could achieve through training. Senna was a natural; Mansell had to work very hard to get to the top. Their respective records illustrate the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deepbass5 Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 Yes Chris-b i believe you are right, how your brain is wired is what marks us out between Technicians and gifted artists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delberthot Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 Can I be the first to say that I had my 10000 hours in by the time I was 19. Does it prove anything? No. Did I annoy the hell out of my neighbours? Hell yeah It wasn't a gradual getting better either - I found that my playing improved a great deal when I joined my first proper band at 17 which was a big band but the biggest improvement was definitely joining a wedding/function band. A lot of people knock them but there's no better laxative than being put on the spot to play something you've never played before with no dots or remember so many songs in such a short space of time than doing that kind of work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonybassplayer Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 10,000 hours practice !!!! Well that would explain why my girlfriend tells me i'm "f*****g awesome" in bed ( or did she say awful....my ears are not too clever these days ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xilddx Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 (edited) [quote name='deepbass5' post='1248082' date='May 28 2011, 11:38 AM']Yes Chris-b i believe you are right, how your brain is wired is what marks us out between Technicians and gifted artists. [/quote] I tend to agree with Chris too. I think it's about whether you choose music, or music chooses you. That said, I think music chose me, but I only practice when I have a need to, so technically I'm very poor. Sitting on the sofa playing a bass doesn't normally float my rubber duck, but I'm thinking about music almost constantly. I tend to think that the music you make should be strongly linked to your emotions and how you feel about experiences, almost an unconscious expression of yourself through your instrument. Those musicians who spend much of their time practicing and not interacting with the world, or demonstrate little interest in the world and other people, I think often suffer a lack of expression and life in their playing. I think it takes extremely talented and naturally sociable musicians to achieve both great technical and theoretical ability AND have the time to experience the world and develop complexity in their feelings and emotions, and how they interact with and understand other people, and therefore achieve great levels of communication through their music. I think these people are rare, their synapses need to fire quicker, and need to make connections between concepts much quicker in order to have the time and energy to be interested in, and experience, the world and connect it to their music. There are plenty of people with either quality, but very few with both. Edited May 28, 2011 by silddx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len_derby Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 [quote name='Mykesbass' post='1247578' date='May 27 2011, 08:52 PM']But do those that have the natural ability and pick up playing quickly possibly have the tendency to just go with it rather than sit down and put all the heavyweight pratice in - Keith Richards vs Julian Bream perhaps?[/quote] I'm not disagreeing with you here, but if you read Keef's autobiography it's clear that he put in years of graft on the guitar. I think in the UK the issue is clouded a bit because we have a tendency to play down hard work and practise. Not in the sense of devaluing it, but in casually pretending we don't do it. It's just a national sort of pretend 'cavalier' outlook. I've got the Bounce book too. Very interesting. I think most of us on this forum are working towards our 10,000 hours (if we live that long!) in the form of 'on the job' training. Nothing wrong with that in my mind. Did you know that under Jockey Club rules 'training in public' eg. entering a horse in a race with the purpose of giving it a training exercise, not to try and win, is a fineable offence if found proven? Just as well they're not in charge of the music business! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doddy Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 I think that more important than the 10,000 hour 'rule' is what you practice. If you spend 3-4 hours a day playing riffs and lines that you can already play and enjoy,you won't benefit as much as someone who studies new material for an hour. As far as the 'natural' talent thing is concerned,you still have to work at it.All these people that are call 'a natural' at what they do have usually spent a lot of time working on it but all you ever see is the end result-you don't see the hours and hours spent practising. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.