#3
It was great, gonna keep an eye out for his books.
IMO the reason why it's inspirational is because of the 10000h theory, it gives you something to aim for as opposed to just practicing forever.
#4
I actually wrote a paper in college on whether virtuosity is the result of natural talent or whether it can be learned. The evidence seems to point towards many, many people having hidden potential.

Someone might say 'oh i played guitar for a bit once but didn't have the talent for it' - i don't believe that. I believe that if you did practice for many thousands of hours you would gain a huge amount of skill - whether it be virtuoso style skill i don't know, but you'd definitely possess an incredible amount of knowledge on whatever subject it was. The only way the 'natural' talent theory can be proved is by measuring a large group of people in the exact same routines after the same amount of time and comparing the results.

In short, i just believe people don't practice enough. Think about it - if you spent 10,000 hours practising throwing a ball into a bucket from 10 yards away, you're going to be pretty damn good at it.

Take note people - practice is key!
#5
I havent watched it yet, but I think the natural talent or gift isn't in the execution but in the ability to think outside the box being able to creatively apply the skills they have built up.

Putting in the practice time will certainly make you good but not brilliant and game changing; that's where the talent comes into play.

You can see that in sports and in music really well. Like in a professional sports league everyone is good and put their practice time in, but the really good ones like Jordan and other athletes are the ones completely change the way the game is played. 10,000 hours of practice alone will not give you that.

This is a matter of opinion, but I think a person like Steve Vai fits the role of someone who has achieved technical prowess but really never took it beyond his level and I think he would admit to that. That's why people like Hendrix and Duane Allman and many others are head and shoulders above him regardless of his technical prowess.
#6
This is a matter of opinion, but I think a person like Steve Vai fits the role of someone who has achieved technical prowess but really never took it beyond his level and I think he would admit to that. That's why people like Hendrix and Duane Allman and many others are head and shoulders above him regardless of his technical prowess.

Technically he's taken it miles further than both of them.

However, were Jimi to come out now he'd be regarded as a nobody - it's all about historical context in relation to nostalgia and media, and also the fact that he was groundbreaking FOR HIS TIME. I don't think that necessarily equates to virtuosity, which is what i was talking about. Musicality however is a completely different thing, and past being able to identify and apply intervals, musicality is entirely subjective.
#7
Quote by GilbertsPinky
I actually wrote a paper in college on whether virtuosity is the result of natural talent or whether it can be learned. The evidence seems to point towards many, many people having hidden potential.

Someone might say 'oh i played guitar for a bit once but didn't have the talent for it' - i don't believe that. I believe that if you did practice for many thousands of hours you would gain a huge amount of skill - whether it be virtuoso style skill i don't know, but you'd definitely possess an incredible amount of knowledge on whatever subject it was. The only way the 'natural' talent theory can be proved is by measuring a large group of people in the exact same routines after the same amount of time and comparing the results.

In short, i just believe people don't practice enough. Think about it - if you spent 10,000 hours practising throwing a ball into a bucket from 10 yards away, you're going to be pretty damn good at it.

Take note people - practice is key!



Practice is essential, but it's not everything. You can practice alot and still suck.

I've found that if a person wants to play/practice alot...... they will. And they'll probably sound great because they are into it for the music.... not just for the sake of getting "good".
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Sep 7, 2010,
#8
Quote by GilbertsPinky
Technically he's taken it miles further than both of them.

However, were Jimi to come out now he'd be regarded as a nobody - it's all about historical context in relation to nostalgia and media, and also the fact that he was groundbreaking FOR HIS TIME. I don't think that necessarily equates to virtuosity, which is what i was talking about. Musicality however is a completely different thing, and past being able to identify and apply intervals, musicality is entirely subjective.


I'm talking about where the natural ability comes in to place. Your example of the guy throwing the ball in the bucket: sure he'll make every shot but then some other guy will go "Hey check this out motha****a" and make the shot by bouncing it off the wall at an angle.

Musicality is subjective but what is virtuosity? You couldnt even define it in that thread you had some time ago. It's baloney, anyone can get the skill to play anything eventually, but the Paganinis arent the ones who just do that though. Paganini was a master at improvisation who took the compositions of his time light years ahead and through that changed the way the violin was played completely.

Whether you think Paganini was groundbreaking FOR HIS TIME or whether you like the music or not it doesn't matter. What separated him from everyone else in his time is that he took his skill and used it to push ahead.

Anyone can achieve something, but then there are the Over-Achievers who push it.


EDIT

Practice is essential, but it's not everything. You can practice alot and still suck


+1000

Thats the other side of the coin as well. Practicing the major scale or a number of patterns from 10,000 hours won't make you a "virtuoso."

It's like people who spend a year to learn a complicated song and consider themselves good until you ask them to play something else...
Last edited by Pillo114 at Sep 7, 2010,
#9
Hendrix was getting into fusion and prog right before his death, though. He jammed with Miles, and they were supposed to record, but he died before they could. He also was supposed to be the guitarist in ELP, which was originally going to be called HELP.

What I'm trying to say is that perhaps he wouldn't be considered so overrated if he were alive today, since he may very well have advanced considerably musically.
#10
Quote by Holy Katana
Hendrix was getting into fusion and prog right before his death, though. He jammed with Miles, and they were supposed to record, but he died before they could. He also was supposed to be the guitarist in ELP, which was originally going to be called HELP.

What I'm trying to say is that perhaps he wouldn't be considered so overrated if he were alive today, since he may very well have advanced considerably musically.



Well, he's only considered over-rated in a very small self-righteous crowd..... who if they're lucky will mature past that phase.

What he did was legendary...... period.
shred is gaudy music
#11
Quote by Holy Katana

What I'm trying to say is that perhaps he wouldn't be considered so overrated if he were alive today, since he may very well have advanced considerably musically.


Each person that changes something slowly raises the bar and the people that follow build up on it.

It's like saying the MVP of the first Superbowl is overrated because he wouldnt be good in today's football.
#12
Ah the topic wasn't even about Hendrix's skill. People loved/love his music.

Musicality is subjective but what is virtuosity? You couldnt even define it in that thread you had some time ago. It's baloney, anyone can get the skill to play anything eventually, but the Paganinis arent the ones who just do that though. Paganini was a master at improvisation who took the compositions of his time light years ahead and through that changed the way the violin was played completely.

I don't remember the thread. And virtuosity can be defined as being extremely technically accomplished at your craft.

In relation to guitar this would mean being able to alternate pick really strongly, to be in complete control of your dynamics, to be able to pull legato off all over the place, to be able to change chords lightening quick - mastering the majority of techniques so you can pretty much do what you please with them. These are the bare robotics of 'virtuosity' as far as TECHNIQUE goes, which is what i was talking about.

You put your hours in, and you're gonna be a fúcking good guitarist, regardless of whether you can make music anyone is going to like. That's the point.

The point in posting the video was to help people perhaps being discouraged from quitting guitar and stuff because they're 'not good enough' - it's to inspire them to work their arse off and see where it takes them.

Whether they can then make the music of Hendrix is another topic altogether.

Oh, +894108 to what GuitarMunky said.
Last edited by GilbertsPinky at Sep 7, 2010,
#13
Quote by GilbertsPinky

You put your hours in, and you're gonna be a fúcking good guitarist, regardless of whether you can make music anyone is going to like. That's the point.

The point in posting the video was to help people perhaps being discouraged from quitting guitar and stuff because they're 'not good enough' - it's to inspire them to work their arse off and see where it takes them.



That I agree with you. I think all these new age books like effortless mastery are totally bogus because of that. There's no mystical or philosophical secret other than hard work.
#14
Quote by Pillo114
That I agree with you. I think all these new age books like effortless mastery are totally bogus because of that. There's no mystical or philosophical secret other than hard work.



Hard work always wins.

Always.

There is quite simply no substitute. Use a different analogy, it becomes clear.

Some people might be naturally gifted with their hands, but that doesn't mean they could just build a house and understand all the wirings and currents and rules of laying foundations and stuff.
Don't tell me what can not be done

Don't tell me what can be done, either.



I love you all no matter what.
#15
Yeah. =D

Obviously it won't make your mind musical, it will just help better equip you with the tools to allow yourself to play what you hear in your head.

I just relate it on a scale:

If X has the inner potential to reach a goal with 200 hours practice,

But A has potential to reach the same goal with only 50 hours practice (some form of natural aptitude for the subject)

Then to excel X needs to put a lot more time in.

I believe EVERYBODY, barring physical/mental disability, has the potential to reach a level on guitar where they could play with other people, in key, at a relatively quick speed, cleanly and precisely. Some just give up when they realise how much hard work it's going to be and then palm it off as a lack of talent.
Last edited by GilbertsPinky at Sep 7, 2010,
#16
Quote by GuitarMunky
Practice is essential, but it's not everything. You can practice alot and still suck.


Can you point out just one person who has practiced a lot and still sucks?

Hendrix would be a nobody? What would have music sounded like today if he hadnt come around? How many guitarists would never have picked up the guitar had he not inspired them?

Follow that argument to its logical breaking point, and tell me what music would actually sound like from the myriad of people who listed these guys as influences.

If they aren't around, who's influencing these guitarists...and would our music sound worse as a result. (SRV nice knowing you) I think its one of those head in your ass propositions, because theres NO way to justify how he'd be regarded as a nobody...today or ever.

Chances are he'd be just what the doctor ordered.

This case is closed! (gavel bang)

Sean
Last edited by Sean0913 at Sep 7, 2010,
#17
Quote by GilbertsPinky
Yeah. =D

Obviously it won't make your mind musical, it will just help better equip you with the tools to allow yourself to play what you hear in your head.


I also think that "being musical" is largely a matter of work.

Some people are better at following patterns, some people are born and just live to break and bend rules.

Both are great for music, but you have to learn to harness them, most people fight against their natural tendency, this is good to though, it's progress.

The brain is basically like a big rock, and when we do things and repeat things, it's like we are blasting water through that spot in our brain. Over time, that passage way becomes more likely place for the water (thinking) to traverse. this is why bad habits are so hard to break and sometimes when writing music we end up doing the same old stuff and dont know how to break out. It takes someone who is always challenging themselves to build up a sufficient enough command of music to have a shot at making truly personal works.
Don't tell me what can not be done

Don't tell me what can be done, either.



I love you all no matter what.
#18
^Oh i definitely agree that being musical can be taught/learned.

I had a guitar tutor that used to help me be creative when playing. It brought my musicality on loads. I think it's the breaking boundaries and taking it to the next level yourself is where the creativity aspect comes in.

However, the vast majority of solid songs (whether you like the style they may or may not be in) are written by people who've been constantly writing. The process of making a musical work can be learned to some degree as well, although there are people who it doesn't come to.
#19
Can you point out just one person who has practiced a lot and still sucks?


That one is easy, Sean.

You probably see it a lot with people that come in to your courses. People that have been playing for some years but have never really gotten anywhere. Some people, especially those who have never had a guiding hand to help them tend to float around till you point them in the right way.

I see it all the time, the people that come here and say they've been playing for four years, are stuck in a rut, and are wondering what they should do because they only learned and practice a dozen songs without ever really expanding it anywhere.
#20
Watching now, very interesting.
Only play what you hear. If you don’t hear anything, don’t play anything.
-Chick Corea
#21
Quote by Sean0913
Can you point out just one person who has practiced a lot and still sucks?


well, none of them are famous (for obvious reasons), it's not like you would know them personally.

You're not implying that it's impossible for a person to practice and still suck are you?


Quote by Sean0913

Hendrix would be a nobody? What would have music sounded like today if he hadnt come around? How many guitarists would never have picked up the guitar had he not inspired them?

Follow that argument to its logical breaking point, and tell me what music would actually sound like from the myriad of people who listed these guys as influences.

If they aren't around, who's influencing these guitarists...and would our music sound worse as a result. (SRV nice knowing you) I think its one of those head in your ass propositions, because theres NO way to justify how he'd be regarded as a nobody...today or ever.

Chances are he'd be just what the doctor ordered.

This case is closed! (gavel bang)

Sean


^ I'm assuming the rest of your post wasn't directed at me, correct me if Im wrong. (I'm asking cause you only quoted me, though this seems to be a rebuttal to someone elses point)
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Sep 7, 2010,