i am often met with a response like "I have tried _________ so hard and so long and no matter how hard i practiced or tried I couldn't get good or even decent. I got better but I could never become proficient." The reason I believe many of these people are not improving is because they have poorly developed prerequisite skills and are approaching the activity the wrong way. Almost every activity or skill is not a single skill but is actually the coordination of many skills into one.
The phenomenon of people who work diligently for years and never succeed is real.
That in itself is already a "talent". A very intelligent person who is able to analyze his/her own intuition is a genius.
I think that many of the people who are trying hard but failing to improve at a normal rate are the 'toddlers trying to juggle when they should be learning how to throw and catch a ball'.
I just realized I forgot to delete the 's' in https so the YT link wouldn't show up.
The reason many people don't improve in classical music beyond a mediocre level no matter how many hours they put in is because they are too busy trying to be INCREDIBLE long before they have mastered the basics required to be just CREDIBLE. A common example of this would be a piano student working on a virtuoso concerto who doesn't yet have the skill required to earn $60 an hour accompanying hymns for a local church.
I am not so sure we know the answer, or that your example fits very many of the cases.
You don't think there are thousands of pianists learning Chopin Ballades, Beethoven Sonatas, and Rachmaninoff Concertos who cannot competently sightread hymns? Reading hymns at sight with 200+ people singing along takes quite a bit of musical skill, that few 18-20 year old piano majors possess! Many hymns are quite fast, with four independent voices. You have to be very quick to play them well at sight.
However, this does not really fit your example of people who do not succeed while struggling with works beyond their ability. These are successful players who never bothered to learn the specific skill of playing hymns.
Playing hymns isn't a specific skill. If you are really good at sight-reading, you can play anything. Many people aren't really good at sight-reading, but still think that they can play anything, with enough 'old fashioned elbow grease'. Like I said, these are the folks who are busy trying hard to be incredible, long before they are actually just plain old 'credible'.
@ cwjalexP.S.: It also takes humbleness on the part of both the over-ambitious teachers/parents and the desperate student to admit that they are not ready for the repertoire they are "playing", even if they can manage the material quite easily on a superficial level.
P.S.: It also takes humbleness on the part of both the over-ambitious teachers/parents and the desperate student to admit that they are not ready for the repertoire they are "playing", even if they can manage the material quite easily on a superficial level.
@ cwjalexWhat if the problems people have are not directly related to coordination and dexterity? There are many, many young people who have an abundance of that, but who are still unable to actively process, shape, and follow more than 1-2 simple layers of music. That's only one of the reasons their playing sounds dull and uninteresting when they start "playing" (rattling off on auto-pilot that is) the core concert repertoire, notwithstanding the enormous "technical" reserves and tiger mom "guidance".
I think if your technique is good, your playing will sound good. I'm guessing part of why 'great' musicians sound so good in a 'talented' way, as in 'this person has a special gift that transcends the physical abilities of everyone else' is just psychology. Your preconceptions of a renowned performer will probably lead you to pay closer attention to all their musical details and interpret them with more effort, which of course will lead to a better listening experience. And when you hear someone else without a reputation who sounds really, really good, you will be inclined to subtly discredit them, i.e. even though you acknowledge they are good, because they haven't achieved 'legend' status yet you feel like you can't place them on the same level as the 'greats.'I believe this supports the hypothesis that assuming brilliant musicality to be the result of inborn talent results from your own preconceptions.
i have had this discussion many times and i believe that with the correct practice that anyone, besides for medical reasons, is able to reach a very very high level of skill. Of course people learn faster than others and not everyone is going to be able to be world class, but I believe the skill level that we are all able to reach is much much much higher than most people think. i am often met with a response like "I have tried _________ so hard and so long and no matter how hard i practiced or tried I couldn't get good or even decent. I got better but I could never become proficient." The reason I believe many of these people are not improving is because they have poorly developed prerequisite skills and are approaching the activity the wrong way. Almost every activity or skill is not a single skill but is actually the coordination of many skills into one. the way I think about it is imagine you asked a toddler to juggle. no matter how hard or long a toddler tried, 10,000 or 100,000 hours, they most likely would never be able to juggle. the reason is juggling requires many prerequisite skills: -need to be able to accurately throw a ball with your left hand-need to be able to throw a ball with your right hand-need to be able to catch a ball with your left hand-need to be able to catch a ball with your right hand-need the hand-eye coordination to perform these actions simultaneouslyi believe that many people who have extreme difficulty at learning something, like the toddler, have poorly developed prerequisite skills that are needed. Some people are unable to simply start juggling, play the piano, or learn algebra. Maybe if they tried breaking down the activity into components of required skills and work on developing those skills they might be able to finally succeed.the reason I believe so strongly in this is because of myself. I have done a lot of competitive activities and played a few instruments and often have been able to compete nationally in many things. People think I am naturally gifted but that couldn't be farther from the truth. Every activity that I started I was bad in the beginning. Not only was I bad, i was worse than just about anyone I knew who was also starting. Gradually I improved, put in a TON of practice and was able to succeed. Furthermore once you get good at one thing it becomes easier and easier to get good at other things considering many things require the same skills of hand eye coordination, speed, and dexterity. When I was younger I entered a lot of video game and karate tournaments and also learned to type at about 150 words a minute. During highschool I spent 3-5 hours a day playing guitar for years. I just started playing piano a year ago and my teacher thinks I am some amazing talent but I'm not at all, I just already have developed a lot of the skills necessary to play the piano. I am not trying to brag and say how awesome I am. I am trying to say the opposite and that I am the most ordinary person and I just put in a TON of practice and set out to master many things. I strongly believe that if people approached whatever they were trying to master in the correct way they would most certainly be able to reach an extraordinary level of skill.
i believe the biggest thing that prevents most people from succeeding is themselves. they hold the view that because they are not born a certain way or have enough talent (whatever that means) that no matter how hard they try they won't succeed. if they hold that view then there is no way they are going to put in the required effort since they believe it won't accomplish anything and will be a waste of time.
Please be aware that it is very easy to talk that way when you have already acquired the necessary pre-requisite skills yourself. I find it rather disturbing that whenever the question of "hard work" vs. "genes" comes up, that people often start blaming the less gifted for their own shortcomings. Purportedly, they don't "will" enough, they don't work "smart" enough, they don't work "hard" enough. It doesn't work that way, even if we exclude medical problems completely.
I already wrote that sometimes, it takes a genius to determine what way is right for what person.
I added something to my previous post. "Ideally" is "utopia" in most cases. So sorry.
You are more optimistic than I am. Good for you, and I won't try to ruin that optimism. Let's wait for the post/thread Tim promised on the topic. He seems to know people that don't give in to any tried methods, "hard work", "smart work", etc. at all, although the wish to succeed is there.
@ cwjalex You assume too much.Let's take a VERY well-known example: Sergei Rachmaninoff. He had everything anyone could ever hope for in all the elements you mentioned but he felt he wasn't capable of anything. In his situation, he had two choices: either start drinking vodka or have the courage to get pep talk from a psychiatrist. Luckily for us all, he opted for the latter, came out of the depression and wrote his second Concerto. This is just one single unexpected element that hampers success. There are more. That's what the first sentence of my signature is all about.
Their mindsets, their guiding philosophies may be hampering them, even if objectively, they do everything "right".
Why Your Mind-Set Affects SuccessYou can find other links to see how and what in the mindset may hamper success, even in trying to play "Für Elise".Question remains: how do we determine what the problem really is - lack of craft or something else? It may take a genius for that kind of self-analysis, or it may even take a genius that may not be directly related to piano pedagogy.
Winners have a certain mindset that makes them win all the time, even if competitors may have far better skills. You can learn a lot by observing them. Important is not so much WHAT they do, but HOW they do it; the attitude they have while they do what they do.
thoughts about the 10,000 hour rule (Read 2350 times)
