Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
Talent vs hardwork
- Thread starter icarus88
- Start date
Probably not absolutely necessary, but it can't hurt.
Sometimes talented people know they're talented and don't work hard which can be a bummer.
Sometimes talented people know they're talented and don't work hard which can be a bummer.
Hard work makes one more talented...or at least makes it appear so.
I think, at least in most situations, a better word than "talent" is "aptitude." For some people, hearing and playing music comes much easier than it does to others. But if someone has a high musical aptitude but never takes the time to learn an instrument, he will never be able to play that instrument. Someone can have a pretty low natural musical aptitude, but if he applies himself hard enough and long enough, he will almost certainly be able to play his instrument well.
But we can't say the same thing for "singing". Someone with a bad voice can't sing well even if they work hard,Can the same be said for the instrument?
JazznFunk
Supporting Member
Talent/aptitude AND a natural ear for music flattens the curve in a lot of ways. The ear thing is huge. I didn't come from a musical family, and didn't pick up bass (or any instrument earlier) until I was 16. No one in my household or immediate family played, but my parents both loved music and we had a great stereo. I had an ear early on for picking out bass lines and singing along with them, and other parts of the music. I was not particularly talented right off the bat, but I took to the bass pretty quickly and had a decent ear, and a teacher from day one who encouraged me to explore and play along with recordings. I put more time early on focusing on the physical aspects of playing and getting technique together than I did at developing my ear, because I already had a decent ear. Only through sounding bad, playing with people who were patient with me, and putting in the work did I get to the point where I am now.
There are some people who don't have an ear for music, pitch recognition, or the ability to physically get the coordination together physically to play well. I feel lucky that I had some of those things together from the start.... the rest has been all hard work.
There are some people who don't have an ear for music, pitch recognition, or the ability to physically get the coordination together physically to play well. I feel lucky that I had some of those things together from the start.... the rest has been all hard work.
I’ve known people who are so unmusical that I have a difficult time believing they could ever develop enough musicality for me to want to listen - no matter how much they practiced.
I see myself as an example of the difference between talent and hard work. Basically, I have no talent. So my ability to play is based on hard work. It makes a a sound technical player, but not a talented player. Example, given a piece of music I can learn it and perform it and do so reasonably well. I can adjust to most hiccups on stage without too much effort. But I can't compose and if you ask me to just jam I am very out of my comfort zone. I can listen to music and work out the bass line, but its a great effort. I am always jealous of people who have the talent
Guitarist Robert Fripp of King Crimson claims he has no natural talent and everything comes from insane amounts of practice.
Saxophonist Charlie Parker said in an interview that he practiced 12 hours a day every day during his formative years.
I think most “innate talent” is just a good ear for music. The actual playing is just mechanics, knowing what to play is what is important.
Saxophonist Charlie Parker said in an interview that he practiced 12 hours a day every day during his formative years.
I think most “innate talent” is just a good ear for music. The actual playing is just mechanics, knowing what to play is what is important.
You appear to have one very valuable "talent" - the ability to be honest with yourself about your limitations and to overcome or at least deal with them with applied hard work. So, you're never going to be a renowned bass player or even first call in your little circle of musicians. So?
The more important question is, "Do you receive enjoyment from playing at the level you're at?" If you do, soak it up and carry on
The more important question is, "Do you receive enjoyment from playing at the level you're at?" If you do, soak it up and carry on
I don't have a goal of becoming a famous bassist,I don't know if I have the talent, I just want to do covers of the bands I like, a kind of imitation, I am aware that this will not make me a real musician.You appear to have one very valuable "talent" - the ability to be honest with yourself about your limitations and to overcome or at least deal with them with applied hard work. So, you're never going to be a renowned bass player or even first call in your little circle of musicians. So?
The more important question is, "Do you receive enjoyment from playing at the level you're at?" If you do, soak it up and carry on
Yes.
A minimum amount of natural ability is required. The more ability you have, the less effort is required, but most people have to work at it to some degree. Also a lot of people should put in more work than they do, rather than relying on above average talent to fake it.
I'll give you an example related to your question: One of my peers in music school was washed out. She made it through one or more semesters of ear training, but eventually was not able to perform required exercises related to pitch perception.
The class was ear training. In this class we learned to use Sol Fege to sing written melodies, and we also learned to hear and notate rhythms, intervals, chords, and melodies. She struggled with quite a few of the requirements, but in particular she could not hear a pitch played on piano and match the note with her voice. At some point the professor took her out of class room for a conversation, and I never saw her again (in any of our shared music courses).
I thought it was a bit of a shame. Her goal was to teach general music classes in elementary school. She played piano which does not require good pitch perception. Also she had the perfect personality for working with young children.
I'm not sure that's entirely true for singers. Plenty of people have improved their singing voice with training and practice. I suppose if someone has an absolutely AWFUL voice with no sense of pitch, it is highly unlikely that they will ever become a good singer.
That said, the analogy doesn't really hold with instrumentalists. EVERY violinist sounds terrible when he first starts playing. He has to learn how to make desirable sounds with his instrument, and that only comes with proper instruction and time practicing.
I wouldn't disagree. But those are folks at the extreme end of the spectrum. There are people to whom learning an instrument comes with greater difficulty than it does to most who still end up being solid musicians.
Does this make me talented now? No.
