• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Natural ability??

#161
Ant Wellington said:
I'm on a motorcycle vacation so I don't have too much time to respond. But here are some great books on this very topic. I'll add more as I think if them.

Right now I'm reading a book called Bounce.

Bit there's also the Talent Code, Outliers, This Is Your Brain On Music, Music, The Brain and Ecstasy and Musiciphilia.

I have many discussions with Daniel J. Levitin. He wrote 'This is Your Brain on Music. He's a musician and a neuroscientist.

The concensus is that it takes 10,000 of deliberate practice to attain mastery at any endeavor. That's what all geniuses have in common.

The book 'Bounce' discusses other factors that contribute to a persons devipement.


I've read all of these books and more and I've had many discussion with experts in this field. And I've attended many lectures.

When I make statements I like for then to be backed with knowledge. Not just how I 'feel' about something.

I used to think I had a gift from God. Now I realized that I just worked harder than most people. And having a neighbor who had an extra bass helped. So did growing during the time if Motiwn and Funk help.

Sorry, I got to get to my bike ride to Glacier Park in Montana!

peace,
anthony
Click to expand...


You've got a gift from God, practice has alot to do with it of course, but for example, I can shoot 10,000 baskets per day for 10 years but I'll never be Kobe Bryant.
 
#162
I am TOTALLY done with this thread. I'm too tired to repeat myself over and over again. And I have no interest in changing someone's opinion on this. I know what works for me. And I know what works for my students.

Kobe and have 'perceived' gift you can imagine but he's a great player because he's a gum ray, like Jordan, Bird and Magic before him. If you take away the fact that he practices like a madman you would have never heard of him.

peace,
anthony
 
#165
lfmn16 said:
It's amazing what people know they can't do without even bothering to try!

"If you think you can do a thing or think you can't do a thing, you're right." - Henry Ford
Click to expand...


Well...I'm 5'10 not NBA material, don't have and never did have the speed for PG :D...but I do take my musical practice very seriously and between ear training and bass practice I put in 4-5 hours a day weekdays and even longer on weekends, even if I'm home from work/gym at 9:00.

Wife complains, we just had a kid but I get it in somehow, even if it means waking up at 4 or 5 am to get in an hour, because I understand how important and crucial practice is to developing what talent I have.
 
#169
Great thread.

Practice does indeed make perfect. I can't remember who it was, maybe Itzhak Perlman, who had a guy interviewing him that said to him, "I would give anything if I could play like you", and Perlman responded, "I did".

I know I'll never be a prolific musician, because I enjoy being well rounded in many things. I make my living as an IT Consultant. I've had a computer since I was 10 years old (way back in 1982) and I spent 12 to 14 hours a day learning to be a computer expert when I was a kid. That's why I'm good at it.

But I'm also a dang good motorcycle rider. I spent many days on the racetrack to get as good as I wanted to be. I'm not the best or fastest rider, but I'm better than the majority of riders because I put in the time.

My goal as a bass player is to be a solid, functional, player. I started playing at age 38 (almost two years ago) and I practice about 3 to 4 hours a week. It's all I can squeeze in between work, family, and other interests. I don't expect to ever make a plug nickel playing. I do it because I enjoy it. Learning music is challenging. I enjoy being challenged.

On the flip side, I have a brother who started playing banjo at 14. He practiced day in and day out listening to slowed down records. He only took lessons for about 6 months. He can't read music and knows little theory. Yet he's able to play just about anything. Banjo, guitar, piano, etc. He also sings. A band wanted him to be lead singer, but they had a banjo player, so they asked if he played bass. He said, "Sure!", having never touched one in his life. He went to a pawn shop, bought a Jazz bass and and amp, and played a gig that weekend. Now, how can it be that he can pick up an instrument he's never even touched and play it? I don't know. I asked him, and he said he doesn't know either. But he did tell me that once he knows where the notes are on an instrument, he can play it easily.

What scalds my butt is that I've been playing bass nearly every day for almost two years, and my brother grabs my bass having not played in over 20 years, and just jams on it. Makes my playing sound like crap. It's infuriating.

So yes, hard work pays off, but there is no denying that some things come easier to some people. I am a good cook, and my wife can't boil water. Neither of us have ever been "taught" how to cook and I'd venture to guess my wife has prepared more meals than I have in her life, yet, I'm a FAR better cook. It just comes natural to me.

My brother is a great musician, but he can't work a computer for crap. :)

Damn, I gotta get off the computer and go practice walking bass. :D
 
#171
I'm...finding...myself...sucked...back...in...

In regard to the banjo-playing brother who seems to have a natural affinity toward music: I believe it's a matter of experience. Not just experience playing instruments. But the experience of many unknowns that influence how his mind works. None of us came out of the womb destined to be the master of a specific talent. It's our environment coupled with our hard-wired temperaments that seem to be the strings that are manipulating us. Once we can become aware of those strings, we can learn to manipulate them to a great extent.

I have one daughter who is of a mild temperament and things SEEM to come easier for her. The second daughter is strung a little tighter and shuts down when things become challenging. Over time, which one will appear to have a "natural" talent for learning?

The challenge is learning to identify our particular set of strings and how to best work with them. People have different learning styles. If someone tried to teach me only from written words (symbols), I would not be that bright. Once I understood that I was primarily a visual and aural learner, then my comprehension increased.

Here's a great read on the subject from this week's NY Times: Invalid Link Removed

And this guy, Cal Newport, is worth reading. He is deep, deep into the study of mastery: Link Removed
 
#172
Papa Dangerous said:
I believe that there is a "natural" ability. But what is making this natural is the DNA passed from parents to children. I do not believe there is a musical gene (so to say) but I do regularly see that musical parents can produce some type of artistic child. Perhaps there is no single musical gene but rather multiple genes that contribute to a persons ability to play, and perceive music. Perhaps they have a really good sense of hearing, or maybe they can understand patterns in a certain way that allow them to make appropriate phrases. These things will contribute to an increase in musical ability, and desire to play music.

As for child prodigies, there is always the important aspect of environment. A parent can play music everyday for a child when in the womb. Play them classical and perhaps they will be slightly more intelligent (I think this is part of the Mozart Theory) and play them punk, and they might be hyper active. (I heard this somewhere, but it can merely be correlational)

Its just another case of Nature Vs. Nurture.

Regardless, I do believe there are predetermined attributes that allow a person to be a better musician then others before and after birth.
Click to expand...

Papa Dangerous said:
Haha, I Have not read everyone's response, and even if I did, its sometimes a little ambiguous to fully grasps some of the people's point of views on what seems to be a pretty abstract concept.

I do see a major trend though. The comparison of skill, talent, practice and hard work. Your computer's definition is a bit misleading. It says the capacity to do something, then goes a head to give two meanings involving talent. Perhaps the word "ability" is misleading and not so much the computer definition. I have the ability (capacity definition) to perceive what we understand as "colors". When I say something is red, most people can generally agree that is red, or at least a type/shade of red. That is not a special skill or talent really. Although some people are deficient in this, it does not mean I have a special talent to understand red. I merely have the capacity to understand red, and other colors.

But TO understand red... is that "natural" ability? Well, maybe.. maybe not. I was born without being color blind. So my genetics say I am able to see color. However, "what is red" can be seen arbitrary, or scientific. I grew up being told that when I see a color of a certain characteristic, I was taught how to identify it by giving it a name (red, green, yellow). That was a learned ability (identifying red) based on genetics (I use genetics to describe my whole being without breaking it down by each system, like attributing credit to a functional occipital lope and cones of my eyes and what not.).

Think of this... Color (as a noun) is defined: "The property possessed by an object of producing different sensations on the eye as a result of the way it reflects or emits light." (Googled "What is color") So what if we have a can of paint... the paint is open and we clearly see what we perceive as red... but then we close the paint can... There is no light, and no eyes to see the paint... Is it still red? (If a tree falls, and nothing is around to hear it.. Does it make a sound?) Granted, I highly doubt the chemistry of the paint changed, but there is no light (or eyes)... So maybe an essential ingredient was removed...... (I put this scenario together because it seems to show that one can understand red as a color, understand red as a result of light, understand red because I was taught what "red" is, and because it shows I have the capacity to try and negate red really exists [in the absence of light] )

So back to topic here... Along with the sense of sight, I was fortunate enough to be born with a sense of hearing. Like seeing different shades of red, I can hear different sounds. Maybe I can see and hear differently, perhaps "better" then another individual based on my genetic make up. Perhaps I can see and hear worse then another individual.

But why? Well.. It can deal with my brain and how my sensory perception developed. This is nature.

But at the same time, at a very young age I was constantly surrounded by music playing on my grandmas radio. I now have a deep love for Irish/Celtic music. Also, on long car rides, I remember hearing certain songs. These songs left a permanent nostalgic feeling. Most times when I hear Billy Joel - Piano Man, I am taken back to a point deep in my memory where I was sitting in my grandpas blue car, I believe in Manhattan (I remember being in the right or middle lane of the road approaching/ about to go under the L. (To those not familiar: L means Elevated Train, frequently found in nyc) Then my memory jumps to being in McDonalds and something involving a man in costume dressed with a quarter moon as his head.. He was a piano player... (weird now that I try and explain it instead of thinking about it..) These are examples of the environment playing an effect on my understanding of music. If I hear that opening scale run of piano man, I can pretty much recognize it, even out of context. (As in, I can associate that pitch/ scale to that song, and then recognize it out of the song... Like I can it is played in C Major, and I can more readily identify C Major because of it. Well, that song and because C major is the easiest scale in music.. it "The People's" Scale as I once heard, and I played it so many times in my piano classes.) That is nurture having an effect on my understanding and perception of sound.

Thats mostly about understanding music, and hearing it and what not. I doubt a child is born with the ability to pick up a guitar and just start strumming what he hears in his head. He has to learn what noise strings make, and at what fret as well. However, that child can have a predisposition, such as good "muscle memory," and a body type that more easily build up strength, dexterity etc (general motor ability stuff, functional nerve impulses that dictate what the muscles are supposed to do and such). These together is what I think people are calling "natural ability" It does not have to mean a natural ability to play music, but it seems like inherent qualities that facilitate the understanding of to how to hear and manipulate certain sounds.

I hope I didn't bounce around too much... I was kind of just rattling off what the voice in my head is telling me to say....
Click to expand...

Yes, I am quoting myself. This was in the beginning of the thread and I still stand by it (although I would probably like to retype to make it more coherent, but I am too lazy for that at this time.)

To sum it up, natural ability may not be the ability to play bass, but having inherent qualities (via nature Vs Nurture) that facilitate a person to play.
 
#173
I agree with you on "how" you learn. I struggle to learn theory and such, but I can play by ear fairly well.

It's far easier for me to play something, then learn what it is I just played versus someone telling me to "learn the modes" and have me shed modes for days and not have a clue as to what they are and why I'm learning them.
 
#175
Marcus Miller on Natural Ability

"There's no doubt that natural ability plays a huge part in how succesful a musician becomes. Two cats who grow up in the same environment and are equally dedicated may end up very different musicians based on their natural talent.
But it's not that easy. I've seen many musicians, who are succesful now, who I know could never have impressed their music teacher when they were kids! Despite the fact that they have minimal technique, or sad rhythm, or sing out of tune, these people have found a way to make music and reach people (I won't mention any names). I think the main trait a person must have to be a great musician is an ability to figure out how to put whatever talent they have to best use in order to say something that people feel.

Now this is very difficult and some people do it easily and some can't, no matter how hard they try. Miles, in the 40's, first tried to play like Dizzy but eventually realized his was a different voice. He went with his natural voice and the rest is history. His voice involved much less technical prowess but was equally powerful. Miles realized he had a beautiful tone and could phrase his ass off. Instead of spending his whole life fighting this and trying to play blindingly fast like Diz he succumbed to his true self.

Most of the stars in school, the kids who we all agreed had innate talent, never became succesful musicians. A kid is praised if he can play with good technique and in tune, an adult musician is praised because he has a style and charisma. Now you can find adults who are praised for their technique and speed, but it's usually just in magazines for musicians. Real people don't care about sixteenth notes or triplets, they want to feel something. "
 
#176
Just stumbled across this thread and it caught my attention because of a book I'm reading called "Outliers: The Story of Success" by Malcolm Gladwell. It is super-interesting and really delves into some of the determining factors that contribute to individual success and how a lot of times, contrary to popular belief, success is heavily influenced by outside factors and community influence, etc. I think some of you may really enjoy it and get a lot out of it as I am. Check it out!
 

Attachments

  • 1318262806-picsay.jpg
    1318262806-picsay.jpg
    26.4 KB · Views: 58
#178
lfmn16 said:
Believing something does not make it true. However, I believe that everyone has a right to their opinion; just make sure not to mistake opinion for fact.
Click to expand...

Understood, I do not offer any proof in what I have stated, but I do not see how it is necessarily just a belief. I took many things into consideration that are outside of a practice regime, and included many things that could be present to define "Natural Ability," and how it could be applied to someone.

Do you happen to think otherwise? That perhaps people are just able to pick up an instrument and play it because they just can? Is it solely based on practice? Factors such as genetics and biological pre-dispositions are not so much accountable in defining natural ability?

Just curious of course :D
 
#180
cire113 said:
Do you believe some people have natural abilitiy to play music?
Click to expand...

Yes.

I've been teaching private lessons in guitars, bass, mandolin, and ukulele for the past ten years.

Some people have a faster and more natural predisposition to the concepts that make for good music.

However, everyone can learn. Perhaps at a different pace. But everyone can learn to be good musicians at some level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back