Is 30 minutes practice time enough?

[lermgalieu]

Down with the naysayers! If you've got 30 minutes a day, then it's enough. IMO it's more important that you have a good practice routine and stick to it. YMMV, but I get most o my stamina from playing in bands, so I would suggest you find a group situation earlier rather than later, something that rehearses regularly.

 

[JordiL90]

Just got a skype lesson from a guitar/bass teacher that I know for a while now so I will ask him how much I should be practicing to reach my goals, as for band playing, thats also something that I have talked about and may happen in the near future.

 

[BobDeRosa]

Hello, I want to introduce myself, my name is jordi and I just picked up the bass again for the first time after months of not playing it. I have decided I want to become a professional bass-playing musician, with the focus on bass playing cover songs and later on do some record producing for myself and other musicians. Is 30 minutes enough to get started? For more detailed information I created a Practice Routine and also a practice Log so I can notate what went right and what I should be changing, etc, here:

https://2056c4d3-5c1c-4db2-b7a5-8f7...d/b26b48_7d102f6a64204e3498ec1df9d7f2c4bb.pdf

please let me know if this is the right approach I am taking, or atleast moving in the right direction, is maybe a better way of saying it?

Please don't take this the wrong way, but most professional musicians practice all the time, mostly with their instrument but also without (ear training, silent singing, theory study, etc.). Their career is their life, and the pros I know never ask about minimum practice time. It's more likely to be: "How do I get more practice time and use it as efficiently as I can?"

 

[lfmn16]

Down with the naysayers!

It's not naysaying, it's being realistic. The OP is 30 years old, basically a beginner, with a goal of becoming a professional musician. He needs to have a realistic understanding of what he is facing to achieve that goal. If he isn't willing and able to put in some serious time practicing, learning theory, ear training, rehearsing, performing, etc. then he needs to re-think his goals. 30 minutes a day isn't even a downpayment on the time it will take to achieve that.

 

[lermgalieu]

It's not naysaying, it's being realistic. The OP is 30 years old, basically a beginner, with a goal of becoming a professional musician. He needs to have a realistic understanding of what he is facing to achieve that goal. If he isn't willing and able to put in some serious time practicing, learning theory, ear training, rehearsing, performing, etc. then he needs to re-think his goals. 30 minutes a day isn't even a downpayment on the time it will take to achieve that.

Down with the naysayers!

 

[lermgalieu]

It's not naysaying, it's being realistic. The OP is 30 years old, basically a beginner, with a goal of becoming a professional musician. He needs to have a realistic understanding of what he is facing to achieve that goal. If he isn't willing and able to put in some serious time practicing, learning theory, ear training, rehearsing, performing, etc. then he needs to re-think his goals. 30 minutes a day isn't even a downpayment on the time it will take to achieve that.

Ok I'll give you an actual reply, sorry. Depends what he means by "professional musician," I guess, but my point is you have the time you have. At this point in my life, I don't even have 30 minutes a day to practice (and if I did, it would be all spent on double bass). I have been playing for decades. I am not a "pro" but I have played many many gigs, and I do realize the importance of practice. But if you read my entire post instead of cherrypicking, you will see that my point is that consistency is more important than duration. It's a skill we can all get better at - focusing, being consistent and using your time wisely. Sure, if he can play 5 hours a day, great. That's simply not realistic for many people. I think OP can make a lot of progress by playing 30 mins a day and finding a group where he can do 3 hours 1-2 times a week.

 

[gln1955]

It's not naysaying, it's being realistic. The OP is 30 years old, basically a beginner, with a goal of becoming a professional musician. He needs to have a realistic understanding of what he is facing to achieve that goal. If he isn't willing and able to put in some serious time practicing, learning theory, ear training, rehearsing, performing, etc. then he needs to re-think his goals. 30 minutes a day isn't even a downpayment on the time it will take to achieve that.

The OP's goals sound so vague, I doubt he knows what he needs to be able to do, let alone how much work it will take. He says he wants to record at home, so maybe that's just laying down some simple bass lines to songs he's recording or playing with others. That may be doable with that amount of effort, but I wouldn't call it being a professional bass player.

 

[lfmn16]

Ok I'll give you an actual reply, sorry. Depends what he means by "professional musician," I guess, but my point is you have the time you have. At this point in my life, I don't even have 30 minutes a day to practice (and if I did, it would be all spent on double bass). I have been playing for decades. I am not a "pro" but I have played many many gigs, and I do realize the importance of practice. But if you read my entire post instead of cherrypicking, you will see that my point is that consistency is more important than duration. It's a skill we can all get better at - focusing, being consistent and using your time wisely. Sure, if he can play 5 hours a day, great. That's simply not realistic for many people. I think OP can make a lot of progress by playing 30 mins a day and finding a group where he can do 3 hours 1-2 times a week.

I didn't cherry pick your post. I don't care how efficient someone is, at 30 years old you don't go from beginner to professional on 30 minutes a day. If it's not realistic for him to put in 4 or 5 hours a day, then he needs to accept that his goals probably aren't realistic. All I'm saying is that your effort has to align with your goals and all the feel-good, rah rah, at-a-boy, motivational "can do" attitude doesn't change it.

What he REALLY needs to do is find someone who is making a living as a musician in his area and get some "boots on the ground" advice. I don't care if you're Nathan East, if the gigs aren't there, the gigs aren't there.

Hell, I hope he makes it. The best thing I ever did in my life was becoming a professional musician, even though I eventually got out of it. You learn lessons you'll never learn anywhere else and I have memories I wouldn't trade for another million in my 401K.

 

[lermgalieu]

I didn't cherry pick your post. I don't care how efficient someone is, at 30 years old you don't go from beginner to professional on 30 minutes a day. If it's not realistic for him to put in 4 or 5 hours a day, then he needs to accept that his goals probably aren't realistic. All I'm saying is that your effort has to align with your goals and all the feel-good, rah rah, at-a-boy, motivational "can do" attitude doesn't change it.

What he REALLY needs to do is find someone who is making a living as a musician in his area and get some "boots on the ground" advice. I don't care if you're Nathan East, if the gigs aren't there, the gigs aren't there.

Hell, I hope he makes it. The best thing I ever did in my life was becoming a professional musician, even though I eventually got out of it. You learn lessons you'll never learn anywhere else and I have memories I wouldn't trade for another million in my 401K.

I'm sorry, I just don't think you're right. If he can't put in 4 or 5 hours a day "he needs to accept that his goals probably aren't realistic"? He doesn't "need" to do any such thing. And yeah, you cherrypicked my post. You quoted the first sentence. You seem like one of those very strident "my way or the highway" types, so have a good day, and remember that people make their way in this world following all sorts of paths.

If he plays that much, there's still no guarantees. Succeeding as a bassist also has plenty to do with playing well with others, a positive attitude, and a willingness to listen and learn. You might perceive yourself as just being honest, but your honesty is only a product of your subjective and relative reality. I say play as much as you can, feed your passion, and find more time when you can. No one is screwed because they have limited practice time. They just aren't.

 

[lfmn16]

I'm sorry, I just don't think you're right. If he can't put in 4 or 5 hours a day "he needs to accept that his goals probably aren't realistic"? He doesn't "need" to do any such thing. And yeah, you cherrypicked my post. You quoted the first sentence. You seem like one of those very strident "my way or the highway" types, so have a good day, and remember that people make their way in this world following all sorts of paths.

You're right, he doesn't "need" to accept anything. But life doesn't bend to your rules just because you want it to. Next up, "Do I HAVE to obey the rules of gravity?"

Welcome to my ignore list. I'm sure all of your other posts are of equal value.

 

[lermgalieu]

You're right, he doesn't "need" to accept anything. But life doesn't bend to your rules just because you want it to.

Welcome to my ignore list. I'm sure all of your other posts are of equal value.

You're a real gem, and your posts are of incredible deep meaning for all of posterity. Welcome to mine as well.

 

[kevindahl]

The OP is asking for advice. Do you think it is appropriate to say that 30 mins a day is enough to become a pro? Or would it be more appropriate to offer that it takes way more time that he is probably willing to put into it?

Encouragement is wonderful but I think in the OP's case a more realistic answer from experience would be better for him in the long run, no?

If he wants to learn how to play the bass, that's great. When someone starts out 30 mins of practice is fine but when you begin your journey in your early 30's, your lack of ear training alone is a big enough negative to prevent you from becoming a "professional".

 

[lermgalieu]

The OP is asking for advice. Do you think it is appropriate to say that 30 mins a day is enough to become a pro? Or would it be more appropriate to offer that it takes way more time that he is probably willing to put into it?

Encouragement is wonderful but I think in the OP's case a more realistic answer from experience would be better for him in the long run, no?

If he wants to learn how to play the bass, that's great. When someone starts out 30 mins of practice is fine but when you begin your journey in your early 30's, your lack of ear training alone is a big enough negative to prevent you from becoming a "professional".

Maybe everyone should read the OP more carefully. He didn't say "is 30 minutes a day the perfect amount of time to achieve my goal of becoming a professional musician?" He said is it enough to get started. I say yes. The key to getting started is getting started. Will it suffice forever? No, likely not. I get the feeling y'all are accusing me of being one of those parents who wants every kid to get a prize. How about allowing different opinions instead of being so strident about things? A realistic answer takes into account that it's not realistic for everyone, not even all aspiring pros, to play 5 hours a day at the drop of a hat from day 1. A realistic answer might take into account that as a very beginning beginner, the most important thing by far is to establish a consistent routine. You can always expand the length of practice, but you can't always get consistency of practice back if you don't work on it from the start. Go take a look at the DB forums and see what they say about this if you think your answer is the end all be all; it's far better to play 30 minutes a day than one time a week for 210 minutes.

 

[lermgalieu]

when you begin your journey in your early 30's, your lack of ear training alone is a big enough negative to prevent you from becoming a "professional".

And so your advice is "it's not possible." Got it.

 

[kevindahl]

And so your advice is "it's not possible." Got it.

Nope, not my words. "Very highly unlikely". Got it?

 

[lermgalieu]

Nope, not my words. "Very highly unlikely". Got it?

No that’s not what you said. I quoted what you said in my post. Got it?

 

[gln1955]

No that’s not what you said. I quoted what you said in my post. Got it?

Let it go already.

 

[lermgalieu]

Let it go already.

I was simply answering a question. Not sure why you need to insert yourself or tell me what to do.

 

[kevindahl]

No that’s not what you said. I quoted what you said in my post. Got it?

*sigh* You quoted me as saying "it's not possible", which is not true. You have eluded to another meaning of my words and are wrong. I clarified my intention of my words in a following post. I did say on the previous page that he could become a pro but the odds were definitely against him. Maybe you should read that. That post proves that I never meant that "it's not possible". You must be fun at parties to nitpick the context of posters.

 

[lermgalieu]

*sigh* You quoted me as saying "it's not possible", which is not true. You have eluded to another meaning of my words and are wrong. I clarified my intention of my words in a following post. I did say on the previous page that he could become a pro but the odds were definitely against him. Maybe you should read that. That post proves that I never meant that "it's not possible". You must be fun at parties to nitpick the context of posters.

My turn to sigh, since you are deliberately mischaracterizing what happened.

1) Correct, you did not say "it's not possible," HOWEVER my post included your EXACT quote before that ("when you begin your journey in your early 30's, your lack of ear training alone is a big enough negative to prevent you from becoming a 'professional'"), and obviously I was translating it into "it's not possible," which is a hell of a lot closer to what you said than "it's highly unlikely."

2) Your ensuing post purported to quote yourself, but you didn't say that. Which is what I said in my reply. I get what you mean, but all my reply did was point out that I did include in that very same post what you actually said when I was, per #1, clearly giving you my interpretation of your statement.

3) Maybe you could read all of my posts too, and contextualize everything I say in light of everything else I've ever said. Sorry, I saw what I saw. It's not a personal attack, it's how that particular post read.

4) It's "alluded."

5) Love the old "you're nitpicking" complaint when I am just reading the words off the page. I don't know you; you don't know me. We only have our words here.