How much is inherent ability?

[Fungus Kahn]

I think it was Steve Martin who said, "Obsession is a great substitute for talent."

Rob

[mmmaak]

Everyone has *some* amount of innate talent, I think. If you have dreams of being a great guitarist, you probably need more of it than the average person. But for hobbyists (like most of us here) a little talent goes a long way and the rest is "perspiration", as others have said

[endpin]

Plain ol' good taste goes a long way and several session guitarists that are in high demand got that way simply by knowing what NOT to play.

[Hendra]

Originally Posted by Fungus Kahn

I think it was Steve Martin who said, "Obsession is a great substitute for talent."

Rob

Great Line...

That confirm I am an "Obsessed"

[TaylorDK]

Originally Posted by min7b5

I agree.

I loved the book Talent Is Overrated
Tigar Woods, Mozart... I think the author makes a good case these people were not “gifted”, they got started on the ten thousand hours (or whatever amount it was, can’t remember) that it typically takes to master something, at a young age. They both incidentally had fathers that were masterful at golf and composing respectively, and were taught to practice deliberately. As for deliberate practice, I always tell my students that playing things you already do pretty well, noodling with amp sounds, etc, for an hour is not really practice. Deliberate practice is working on things you don’t do well for a solid hour, at least. Very big difference. It’s controversial, not everyone agrees with the book, and that’s ok. Personally I’m a big believer. I got up at 5 am this morning to get my three hours in. Any less than three hours and I start going backwards, so I know for sure I wasn’t given and gifts

I have been wrestling with this for, well, YEARS...

I bought a guitar back in the late 70's, then another... I took some lessons and learned how to Travis pick and play "Needle and the Damage Done"

And, well, here is it 2009, and after months of guitar lessons, I am just a wee bit farther along. But very little wee.

I think, in honesty, my problem is that I don't set aside the time to practice - every day, on harder things, like what was so clearly said above.

My guitar instructor (i am on hiatus now, trying to digest and apply all he gave me) challenged my way of attacking playing. He said it was statistical. If I practice it wrong 50% of the time, I have essentially not progressed. He encouraged me to go through a piece such that I could play it perfectly 10 times, and to keep count. If I played it the first time, and got it right, that was "1", when I practiced it the second time, and goofed up, my score was back to "0". Essentially, I had to be perfect 10 times in a row.

Great advice.

It might take me three hours...

which leads to my primary question ----

How do people cordon off their practice time?

I would love to have 3 hours to practice, in a focused setting, every day. I am lucky to practice 45 minutes every third day.

operative word:

HELP!

Dave

[sidneystreet]

Originally Posted by Glennwillow

...I have no idea what my balance of innate ability and hard work is, but I suspect it's about 20% ability and 80% work and effort...

That is pretty much how I feel about my own abilities.

Even though most of my friends and family may have thought I was some kind of guitar natural, I knew how hard I struggled to reach each knew level of performance.

After 30+ years of playing, I feel I can play just about any piece at a very high level --- given enough time in the woodshed. I guess nothing changes much?

[gitfidl_pickr]

I have been playing for 50 years and I teach a little too. I am constanly awed by guitarists like Barney Kessel, Herb Ellis, Joe Pass, Robert Conti (amazing!) ... that's 4 (four) out of 300 million. The rest of us are working at it and the more you work, the more it pays off. Guitar is not easy to learn (Ok? Nobody just sits down and starts playing -- even those 4). It's a substantial amount of effort -- especially in the beginning. It is still a lot of TIME (after 50 years -- 2 hours a day) but it's fun now. So I like it now. But in the beginning it is work.

I was practicing not long ago with piano and a bass and flute and everyone was jumping over bars (not counting) and ruining a song .. so I started to count out loud at the end of a phrase 2-3-4-5-6-7-8 (and the others said "thanks!") Well this is pretty elementary stuff (but that's important).

We need to re-inforce the basisc every time we practice (after 50 years!). It is pretty well know that bands tend to "speed up" at the bridge and so the drummer and the bass are the "metronome."

The product (a song) will never be better than the worst player. All the other instruments need to practice too. They need to read, count, tap their foot, do lead in, do a turn around.

Ther are a lot of good tricks for playing guitar but no substitute for the basics.

[JoeCharter]

I'm a terrible basketball player. Everytime I tried, I was terrible. Of course, I would've improved had I practiced a bit more but I didn't practice because I didn't see much improvement.

Same principle with the guitar. Good players are good because they practice a lot, they're motivated to practice a lot because they see lots of improvement, and they see lots of improvement because they're talented. It's all intertwined.

One thing's for sure, music is enjoyable for all levels of skills.

If you enjoy the guitar, keep playing. If you have to write down "guitar practice" in your agenda to discipline yourself, maybe you should consider the bass...

[RP]

"Outliers is a non-fiction book written by Malcolm Gladwell and published by Little, Brown and Company on November 18, 2008. In Outliers, Gladwell examines the factors that contribute to high levels of success. To support his thesis, he examines the causes of why the majority of Canadian ice hockey players are born in the first few months of the calendar year, how Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates achieved his extreme wealth, and how two people with exceptional intelligence, Christopher Langan and J. Robert Oppenheimer, end up with such vastly different fortunes. Throughout the publication, Gladwell repeatedly mentions the "10,000-Hour Rule", claiming that the key to success in any field is, to a large extent, a matter of practising a specific task for a total of around 10,000 hours."

[Fliss]

I definitely agree that most people will have some level of natural ability/talent, and I'm sure that starting young must be a big benefit, but I definitely think there are some who possess more natural ability than others. For me - I'm a plodder, I need guidance/tuition from others, and I have to work hard to develop the relatively small amount of natural talent that I have.

Fliss

[Neal]

There is no such thing as natural talent.

There is, however, aptitude. Some make good accountants, some detectives, mechanics, carpenters.. and some may refer to aptitude as talent. Maybe it is. Maybe that's the elusive variable in these discussions.

We're all different.

[luckycanine]

"The Natural" comes to mind, as does Michael Jordan, Pele, Segovia, Jim Thorpe, etc. Folks that not only have the inherent abilities, but the drive and dedication to use them. That does not mean others cannot excel, but perhaps not be on the same level. MHO.

[random works]

Only one out of my 8 children, ( the youngest is 17) plays guitar. They were all raised with guitar music. My brother plays and remarked that it has to be in the genes or they aren't driven to play. One of my daughters picked up a guitar for the first time and was playing clear chords and single notes in no time. I was shocked and wanted to see her continue...she has no interest! All but one of my kids are exceptional artists ( visual arts), they win contests, get commissions and so forth; the one who does not is the guitarist. Just to make it clear about the genetics part...one wife.

My grandfather and great-grandfather on my mother's side "played anything with strings on it." I encouraged all my kids to play, but it only stuck with one.
This is just an observation from the home front and statistically might mean nothing; I have often wondered about the seeming strength of genetic predisposition.

Some studies have been done on twins and triplets who were separated at birth. The results are intriguing

[JohnZ]

Originally Posted by Neal

There is no such thing as natural talent.

There is, however, aptitude. Some make good accountants, some detectives, mechanics, carpenters.. and some may refer to aptitude as talent. Maybe it is. Maybe that's the elusive variable in these discussions.

We're all different.

Having known Chris Thile when he was six and began playing mandolin, I'd have to differ. At that age I was playing too but was nothing more than a sock puppet for a stage mom. His conceptual abilities were pre existing, so, at the end of his 10,000 hours, we end up with a very different musician. Though I think it is absolutely necessary, 10,000 hours of practice and stagecraft will net you varying degrees of skill, but not talent.

[Howard Emerson]

Originally Posted by Neal

There is no such thing as natural talent.

There is, however, aptitude. Some make good accountants, some detectives, mechanics, carpenters.. and some may refer to aptitude as talent. Maybe it is. Maybe that's the elusive variable in these discussions.

We're all different.

Dear Neal,
What do you even know about natural talent?? You play Ukulele...........not even a real instrument.......

Really now.............:-)

Hope all is well over your way.

Be well,
Howard