Go Back   UG Community @ Ultimate-Guitar.Com > Instruments > Guitar Techniques
User Name  
Password
Search:

Closed Thread
Old 08-19-2013, 07:00 AM   #21
Dreamdancer11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
You can find "gifted" people being surpassed by "less gifted" people all the time just like the opposite....now try to find someone who didnt bled,sweated and practiced like mad gifted or less gifted.....There is your answer.Instead of worrying about the 1 or 2% of what nature gives you, start worry about the rest 99 or 98% that you can influence through crazy effort and dedication .
__________________
Dreamdancer11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2013, 07:22 AM   #22
Facecut
Vorsitzender
 
Facecut's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Germany
That's basically the gist of my initial post, although I wouldn't sign that percentage.
__________________
My band
Facecut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2013, 07:53 AM   #23
Dreamdancer11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Facecut
That's basically the gist of my initial post, although I wouldn't sign that percentage.


The percentage is irrelevant since its obvious talent isnt the defining factor for anything.You would have a case if ONLY "talented" people surpassed less talented people on a regular basis.But that doesnt happen.The opposite happens just as frequent and that proves that talent isnt to be bothered with in the first place.In your initial post you said "Some people just get more in return for the hours and attitude" but that still isnt a case over "talent".One hour of study isnt the same between a highly dedicated and analytical person who tries to milk every second of it and one hour of someone who is just going through the motions.

99%perspiration 1%inspiration...that pretty much covers it for me....you can change the words for example like... 99% effort 1% talent or not but that is pretty much the same message.Nurture decides everything.
__________________
Dreamdancer11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2013, 09:27 AM   #24
Facecut
Vorsitzender
 
Facecut's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamdancer11
In your initial post you said "Some people just get more in return for the hours and attitude" but that still isnt a case over "talent".One hour of study isnt the same between a highly dedicated and analytical person who tries to milk every second of it and one hour of someone who is just going through the motions.



Why are comparing a gifted lazy person with a less gifted dedicated person. When I say they get more in return for their hours and attitude i think it is clear that it is provided that both put in the same amount and quality of time, dedication and passion. Otherwise a comparison makes no sense.

If percentage is irrelevant why did you choose one?
__________________
My band

Last edited by Facecut : 08-19-2013 at 09:31 AM.
Facecut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2013, 09:36 AM   #25
Dreamdancer11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Facecut
Why are comparing a gifted lazy person with a less gifted dedicated person. When I say they get more in return for their hours and attitude i think it is clear that it is provided that both put in the same amount and quality of time, dedication and passion. Otherwise a comparison makes no sense.


i didnt say the lazy one is the talented...you did..but lets take your scenario...you say same amount and quality of time.You can only measure amount of time(and still not accurate enough) not quality or dedication or passion......and thats your problem....the things you cant measure you call them talent.
__________________
Dreamdancer11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2013, 10:15 AM   #26
Facecut
Vorsitzender
 
Facecut's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Germany
That's not my conviction but it's true, I can't measure them so I can't prove you wrong.
__________________
My band
Facecut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2013, 12:01 PM   #27
Captaincranky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velcro Man
....[ ]....But yes, champions ****ing devote their entire lives to perfecting themselves and being champions, try telling them they were just handed skill on a silver platter, but you'd better be good at ducking...
I certainly don't think that any champion was "handed" his or her success, but I do think a predilection toward greatness existed before all the hard work.

What you enjoy, you do often.

What you find comes easiest to you, and most natural, you'll do often.

What you do well, you do often.

And all of those attributes will point you toward success.


I agree completely that anyone can use, "I don't have the God given talent to be good" as an excuse for lack of participation.

But to imply all of us have the same abilities, is patently absurd.

It sounds like something I'd say after a couple of lines of meth, and in the right mood for an argument.

Last edited by Captaincranky : 08-19-2013 at 01:11 PM.
Captaincranky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2013, 12:30 PM   #28
GS LEAD 5
Registered User
 
GS LEAD 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Calcutta
Quote:
Originally Posted by Facecut
I'm sorry I can't take you seriously anymore. You believe in your crap with religious fanatism and there is no fertile discussion possible with those guys. Everybody can get decent in the physical dimension, not everybody in the same pace but they can get there. But Music is so much more than that.
And to think a 3 year old mind is capable of PROPER practice 8 hours a day says something about your understanding of the matter.


Everyone in my family a generation or two before mine has had that sort of background, learning classical since 5 or so :shrugs: as a result just about everyone from my mom's side of the family has utterly insane vocal and instrumental skills :shrugs: I'm the dark horse of the family, playing satanic music same with quite a few friends of mine who have been exposed to music since very tender years- I know this chappie who started on the violin at 8 or so, now he's 19 and he goes on international tours with his dad and uncle, also famous violinists from where I come from
And all those champions you mentioned? They all are usually exposed to their sport of choice from single digit ages. Any footballer in the top leagues for example, will have started playing football between 5 and 10 or so, often playing professionally in the lower leagues at 11, 12, 13 etc. David Beckham signed for Manchester Utd at the ripe age of 14 for example. Not only that, different players have different work ethics. Most are simply satisfied playing in a mid to moderate team an getting a decent amount of cash. Similarly, the vast majority of bands are happy playing local events and getting cash for it. Really technical and skilled players, on the other hand, have that "must....do....more...." attitude which is quite rare in real life, such types make up a tiny portion of the human pyramid.

The only thing related to music that people are born with would be perfect pitch. Everything else is plain and simple learnable.

Not just that, kids below 15 or so learn skills much faster than an adult, like much much much faster. So the 10k or so hours suggested is a massive overstatement, considering that figure is for an adult. 2-3 hours is more likely- thats about how much afore mentioned family members used to practice when they were kids.
__________________
Gear:
ESP/LTD MH100QM, H50
Digitech RP500
Peavey KB4



DSP's FTW

You Liek Digitech?

Last edited by GS LEAD 5 : 08-19-2013 at 12:36 PM.
GS LEAD 5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2013, 04:19 PM   #29
Velcro Man
A person
 
Velcro Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captaincranky
I certainly don't think that any champion was "handed" his or her success, but I do think a predilection toward greatness existed before all the hard work.

What you enjoy, you do often.

What you find comes easiest to you, and most natural, you'll do often.

What you do well, you do often.

And all of those attributes will point you toward success.


I agree completely that anyone can use, "I don't have the God given talent to be good" as an excuse for lack of participation.

But to imply all of us have the same abilities, is patently absurd.

It sounds like something I'd say after a couple of lines of meth, and in the right mood for an argument.


Like most talented musicians will tell you, it was hard in the beginning, everyone struggles, that's the different with music, it's not always fun, if you're not willing to dedicate yourself enough, you won't make it. That's what separates the greats from fakes, they didn't just accept that they'll never be good, they practiced their asses off because they needed it, they wanted it, they made it happen.

There is not latent ability someone is born with, some might instinctively have better ears, but learning proper music theory will do MUCH more good than anything else.

Tommy Emmanuel is a great example, when he was born, a disease destroyed his hearing, he suffers from severe hearing loss, always had, yet he still trained himself and became one of the greatest guitarists to have ever lived.
Velcro Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2013, 05:01 PM   #30
Captaincranky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velcro Man
Like most talented musicians will tell you, it was hard in the beginning, everyone struggles, that's the different with music, it's not always fun, if you're not willing to dedicate yourself enough, you won't make it. That's what separates the greats from fakes, they didn't just accept that they'll never be good, they practiced their asses off because they needed it, they wanted it, they made it happen.
There is such a thing as a "learning curve", and it's not the same for all people. So, no matter bad somebody may want something, it may be unobtainable with the genetic "gifts' any "X" individual has been given.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Velcro Man
There is not latent ability someone is born with, some might instinctively have better ears, but learning proper music theory will do MUCH more good than anything else.
No, nobody is born with "talent" per se, at least with the definition I understand the word to mean.

But, individuals adapt better, are more physically and mentally suited to different tasks, thus subsequently thrive under much different conditions.

Just for laughs, consider a 350 pound man, ham fisted and mean. Now, consider a 4' 6" tall Asian woman, very gentle and slight in nature. So, we'll train the huge man to make ladies panties on a sewing assembly line, and let the tiny little woman, act as the center for the New England Patriots. What thinkest thou? That oughta work out real well.

Granted, that is a hyperbole, but it isn't unrealistic to assume that genetic makeup could (HELP) determine an individual's success at any particular endeavor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Velcro Man
Tommy Emmanuel is a great example, when he was born, a disease destroyed his hearing, he suffers from severe hearing loss, always had, yet he still trained himself and became one of the greatest guitarists to have ever lived.
No Tommy Emmanuel is a poor example. All he illustrates is how hard work can overcome a handicap. It still doesn't serve to illustrate that he didn't have a disposition towards music in the first place. It does go to the fact that work ethic is as important as a natural proclivity. I don't think you can separate the two.

While we're on this topic Beethoven was deaf in his later years, and Jeff Healey was always blind, (AFAIK). But Beethoven couldn't play an upside down Stratocaster either. (Just put that in there for comic relief).

A question I always ask myself while watching the Olympics is this, "are these people really the best in the world at what they do, or are they the ones that simply worked the hardest". After all, there could be many tremendously talented, or gifted if you prefer, people who simply haven't chosen to invest the time or effort to crack a ten second 100 meter dash or whatever. Perhaps they're in college, studying to be all that they can be in the field of accounting ....

When all of the pieces of the puzzle fit, work ethic, practice, desire, and genetic ability coalesce, then you have the exceptional.

Last edited by Captaincranky : 08-19-2013 at 05:07 PM.
Captaincranky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2013, 06:36 PM   #31
Velcro Man
A person
 
Velcro Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captaincranky
There is such a thing as a "learning curve", and it's not the same for all people. So, no matter bad somebody may want something, it may be unobtainable with the genetic "gifts' any "X" individual has been given.


There really isn't that much knowledge needed to excel at playing guitar, perhaps if you want compose, but for guitar playing, hardly. Just look at savants for **** sakes.

Quote:
No, nobody is born with "talent" per se, at least with the definition I understand the word to mean.

But, individuals adapt better, are more physically and mentally suited to different tasks, thus subsequently thrive under much different conditions.

Just for laughs, consider a 350 pound man, ham fisted and mean. Now, consider a 4' 6" tall Asian woman, very gentle and slight in nature. So, we'll train the huge man to make ladies panties on a sewing assembly line, and let the tiny little woman, act as the center for the New England Patriots. What thinkest thou? That oughta work out real well.


This doesn't even come CLOSE to applying to music. Perhaps someone that wants to play an octobass by themselves, then physicality is relevant, but otherwise, no. Barring deformities or injuries, there's literally no genetic difference between Steve Vai and Justin Beiber.

Quote:
Granted, that is a hyperbole, but it isn't unrealistic to assume that genetic makeup could (HELP) determine an individual's success at any particular endeavor.


Slightly, possibly, depending on the activity, but playing an instrument is not one. As someone said, perhaps some people may have around 1% advantage, but nothing noticeable.

Quote:
No Tommy Emmanuel is a poor example. All he illustrates is how hard work can overcome a handicap. It still doesn't serve to illustrate that he didn't have a disposition towards music in the first place. It does go to the fact that work ethic is as important as a natural proclivity. I don't think you can separate the two.


THAT'S THE POINT! His handicap made him LESS naturally inclined to be a musician, yet he overcame it with hard WORK!

Quote:
While we're on this topic Beethoven was deaf in his later years, and Jeff Healey was always blind, (AFAIK). But Beethoven couldn't play an upside down Stratocaster either. (Just put that in there for comic relief).


He also switched to just composing instead of being the Yngwie Malmsteen of piano AND composing lol

Quote:
A question I always ask myself while watching the Olympics is this, "are these people really the best in the world at what they do, or are they the ones that simply worked the hardest". After all, there could be many tremendously talented, or gifted if you prefer, people who simply haven't chosen to invest the time or effort to crack a ten second 100 meter dash or whatever. Perhaps they're in college, studying to be all that they can be in the field of accounting ....


There ARE some physical predispositions that can lead to physical excellence, but they don't even compare to the amount of work these athletes put in. Someone with long legs will most likely run much faster than a dwarf, because the longer your legs, the further they can reach, but there is nothing that transfers to the guitar in a similar manner. Even finger length doesn't apply, children can play the guitar, so unless you have hands the size of a baby's hand...
Velcro Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2013, 07:23 PM   #32
Dreamdancer11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Best example ever....electric guitar vs instruments like violin piano or even classical guitar etc etc etc.Learning electric guitar is simply a hit or miss process...few good teachers,no real structure or curriculum too much....hippy attitude "duuuude play what you feel and it ll all fall into place" and things like that.Result? for every really good player you ll find about 1000 pretty shitty ones.

Now to the instruments where real structure is applied.Take piano or violin for example and try find someone who follows the curriculum and is less than...very good technically.Not only that but most of them ll put to shame almost every "talented" electric guitar player theorywise cause they know theory by heart they have good ear,can sightread etc etc etc.Its not even close in terms of producing quality capable musicians.

So its no contest or really a debate here.Its all about Nurture.Whoever wants to get serious must leave the hippy bullshit about talent and gifted people and do the hard work .
__________________

Last edited by Dreamdancer11 : 08-19-2013 at 07:25 PM.
Dreamdancer11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2013, 12:04 PM   #33
Tazz3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
i think playing comes to some people more easy then others
Tazz3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2013, 12:29 PM   #34
ChrisN
I signed up for this?
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Nottingham, England
This is just the kind of thread I could have done with seeing earlier in the year. I did my dissertation on this exact subject. Innate talent does not exist.
__________________
404: Sig not found.
ChrisN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2013, 12:41 PM   #35
sweetdude3000
Registered User
 
sweetdude3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
This is a terrible thread. Okay so scientists are never going to identify a guitar playing gene so why bother. Guitar skills are the confluence of many aptitudes. Some people may have a slightly higher mental processing speed, better ability to memorize, better sense of pitch - but you know what, the more you practice certain elements correctly, the better you get at them and they become ingrained. That means for the same amount of effort, you get more in return than you once started, as your body has adapted.

Correct playing habits, focus and determination, and within due time, if you have confidence, anyone can be a damn good guitar player.
sweetdude3000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2013, 02:24 PM   #36
Velcro Man
A person
 
Velcro Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamdancer11
Best example ever....electric guitar vs instruments like violin piano or even classical guitar etc etc etc.Learning electric guitar is simply a hit or miss process...few good teachers,no real structure or curriculum too much....hippy attitude "duuuude play what you feel and it ll all fall into place" and things like that.Result? for every really good player you ll find about 1000 pretty shitty ones.

Now to the instruments where real structure is applied.Take piano or violin for example and try find someone who follows the curriculum and is less than...very good technically.Not only that but most of them ll put to shame almost every "talented" electric guitar player theorywise cause they know theory by heart they have good ear,can sightread etc etc etc.Its not even close in terms of producing quality capable musicians.

So its no contest or really a debate here.Its all about Nurture.Whoever wants to get serious must leave the hippy bullshit about talent and gifted people and do the hard work .


Ex-****ing-actly.
Velcro Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2013, 02:29 PM   #37
StreetLight3989
Registered User
 
StreetLight3989's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Jersey
It's both to an extent.

Anybody can become a good guitarist with enough practice, but it comes more naturally to some people.

I know one guitarist who is very good in most aspects, practices for hours every day, and is going to school for jazz, but he was never able to keep time and he still has a ton of trouble with it. Not saying that he can't get over this hurdle, he just naturally has a shoddy sense of rhythm.
__________________
I'm the same as I was when I was six years old
And oh my god I feel so damn old
I don't really feel anything
StreetLight3989 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2013, 03:19 PM   #38
Dave_Mc
Chirp and Swirl
 
Dave_Mc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Northern Ireland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamdancer11
Best example ever....electric guitar vs instruments like violin piano or even classical guitar etc etc etc.Learning electric guitar is simply a hit or miss process...few good teachers,no real structure or curriculum too much....hippy attitude "duuuude play what you feel and it ll all fall into place" and things like that.Result? for every really good player you ll find about 1000 pretty shitty ones.

Now to the instruments where real structure is applied.Take piano or violin for example and try find someone who follows the curriculum and is less than...very good technically.Not only that but most of them ll put to shame almost every "talented" electric guitar player theorywise cause they know theory by heart they have good ear,can sightread etc etc etc.Its not even close in terms of producing quality capable musicians.

So its no contest or really a debate here.Its all about Nurture.Whoever wants to get serious must leave the hippy bullshit about talent and gifted people and do the hard work .


are you suggesting that everyone who plays piano is amazing or is it maybe that you're only looking at the professional players? there are plenty of kids who go to piano lessons who aren't that great. the not so great ones may well be self-selecting themselves out of it, too, because (as you said) classical music requires you to be good, as opposed to rock (or similar) where a much more relaxed attitude is taken towards skill on the instrument, most of the time.

i think a lot of things which used to be considered talent may well not be (better life chances, better teaching, etc. etc.), but at the same time i think it's fairly obvious that some people take more naturally to some things than others. That's not to say that you can't overcome it with hard work, because of course you can, but still.

look at chrissie wellington. kinda hard to explain that kind of achievement without natural talent. Now, of course, you could claim that sports and music aren't analogous, and that may well be the case. but the people who were claiming about the 10000 hour rule used to claim that about sport, too, so...

if you ask me it's both.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blew1
I've seen some great videos on YouTube e.g The Tone King


er....



Quote:
Originally Posted by Roc8995
Rob Chappers would tell you he couldn't tell a cat from a dog if it would get him more hits on youtube.

Last edited by Dave_Mc : 08-20-2013 at 03:22 PM.
Dave_Mc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2013, 04:06 PM   #39
Dreamdancer11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_Mc
are you suggesting that everyone who plays piano is amazing or is it maybe that you're only looking at the professional players? there are plenty of kids who go to piano lessons who aren't that great. the not so great ones may well be self-selecting themselves out of it, too, because (as you said) classical music requires you to be good, as opposed to rock (or similar) where a much more relaxed attitude is taken towards skill on the instrument, most of the time.




Iam suggesting that all those who DO the actual work and pass the classes they supposed to pass by absorbing the curriculum yes are all at least very good , especially compared to their counterparts playing electric guitar simply miles away in terms of everything.

Iam not interested in those who dont really want it or get bored in the process.Iam interested in those who actually do what they are told like an actual student not a spoiled brat.Yes they are leaps and bounds better(talented or untalented) than the electric guitarists that try to do the same(talented or untalented).Go at a conservatory and check people who learn violin or piano or even classical guitar and then check electric guitarists.....its not even a contest in ALL levels.

Electric guitar is relatively new,has no real curriculum ,plan or structure thats why we see such fluctuations...So talent is like fairydust....nothing to worry about,nothing to make or break you.Its all about the serious hard work following a good plan .
__________________
Dreamdancer11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2013, 04:11 PM   #40
Dave_Mc
Chirp and Swirl
 
Dave_Mc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Northern Ireland
so if you self-select out all the dossers and those without natural talent (as classical training at conservatories has done), they're better than electric guitarists where that same self-selection hasn't happened?

Got it.

Probably don't send off your nobel lecture just yet.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blew1
I've seen some great videos on YouTube e.g The Tone King


er....



Quote:
Originally Posted by Roc8995
Rob Chappers would tell you he couldn't tell a cat from a dog if it would get him more hits on youtube.
Dave_Mc is offline   Reply With Quote
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:33 PM.

Forum Archives / About / Terms of Use / Advertise / Contact / Ultimate-Guitar.Com © 2014
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.