Have you done your 10,000 hours?

[DrXparaMental]

I went to a music based lecture yesterday, and one of the points mentioned was that the average amount of time you needed to spend practicing to be considered a 'master' of a certain craft was around 10,000 hours. The definition of master could be argued ad nauseum, so let's just assume for the moment it means pretty farking good.

Have you put in your 10,000?

Get out a calculator and really try and approximate, it's quite interesting when you get a final number.

Seems like before he retired a number of years ago it was Lee Iacocca that said, "If you do pretty much anything 5 hours a day, five days a week, for 5 years, you can legitimately think yourself an expert in that field.

Things is, just because you are an expert doesn't mean you can ever become more than the sum of your own natural talent. You can know all there is to know about something and never create anything truly exceptional in that field of endeavor.

I've sat down and played with people that had been playing for 30 years. I was playing better than them and their accumulative years in a year and a half. Some people just have no musical talent but love music tremendously. I've met guys with tremendous singing voices that could not play guitar to save their ass.

Music is art and everyone knows the best artists that ever lived were in and of them selves the best artists that ever lived. That had ZERO to do with training. Practice of course is not the same as training. Most dexterity and capable facilitation are the products of regular physical training. Those muscles don't develop on their own. Although certain individuals are built for the long hall far and away superior to others.

[glitchrock-buddha]

i think perfect practice makes your technique perfect - but that doesn´t necessarily means you are a perfect musician...

Well that goes without saying. There is no perfect art. Perfect in this sense clearly can only apply to technical ability and even then is rather abstract goal. Point is, perfecting technique reduces the obstacles to expressing oneself exactly as they want, and yes this takes time. If you spend 10,000 hours playing an E major chord with your thumb above the neck, your practice ain't worth shit.

[SubFunk]

I think this 10,000 hour rule has a grain of truth to it, but its not even vaguely the whole story - especially when applied to creative pursuits. 10,000 hours working on music will make you a more accomplished producer or composer, but it's not necessarily going to give you new ideas or inspiration.

It's almost a cliche for an artist (of the musical type, at least) to produce their best work near the start of their career. How does the 10,000 hour rule explain that?

yup!

[DrXparaMental]

i think perfect practice makes your technique perfect - but that doesn´t necessarily means you are a perfect musician...

Well that goes without saying. There is no perfect art. Perfect in this sense clearly can only apply to technical ability and even then is rather abstract goal. Point is, perfecting technique reduces the obstacles to expressing oneself exactly as they want, and yes this takes time. If you spend 10,000 hours playing an E major chord with your thumb above the neck, your practice ain't worth shit.

There is great truth in the old "hard work" theorem, but all the hard work and perfect practice can't give you a lick of pitch. You either got it, or you don't. All those goofy adds in music rags that guarantee you perfect pitch are just like all the miracle weight loss adds in tabloids. It's trinkets and trash that don't work. I've seen numerous serious shredders that could play violin scales all day long. They couldn't improvise or play by ear to save their life. They had no ear.

Remember back when you first started playing? It took me about 2 years after I first started to figure out how to tell if a musician was any good or not. the ones that were good and could truly kick ass were the ones that figured out the cover tunes note for note with no "reasonable facsimiles" in substitution. You'll never be shit if you don't have a good ear. That's a fact.

[gjm]

I have easily put in that time playing the drums - have been playing for well over ten years! I wouldn't say that I am a master, but I certainly have my area of expertise.

This numbers thing is interesting, I just chose logic_user99's numbers as an example. When I did my apprenticship as a Boat Builder, it was time based, you had to do 8500hrs and sit 2 final exams, plus night school and full time block course/day school each year on top of the hours. So doing it as a full time job meant you got through your time in about 4.5 years of FULL TIME boatbuilding. So...

If you are NOT a full time musician, and have to fit your beats/playing into your spare time, AFTER, work and eating and washing and family and sickness and holidays and exercise and.......etc, 10,000+ hrs = 3 hrs per day, every day of the year without fail, for 10 years in a row, of HANDS ON PLAYING.

I will hazard a guess that most people will OVER ESTIMATE their actual "Playing Hours" (just use that as a generic term for musical activity). I have a pretty busy life. Now, excluding the people who make a living at some sort of musical endeavor full time, I'd say most people would be hard pressed to fit it 1.5 hrs of actual HANDS ON attentive, quality time with there chosen instrument, every single day of the year, year in and year out, making up the time lost for sickness, or when shit happens and you just can't put your time in. That being the case, I would say 10,000 Hrs represents more like 20 years of a typical hobby musician/persons 'playing life'.

I would also further guess, using my typical muso example, that you would have to be about 35-40 years old to wear this badge, assuming you were dedicated to the task.

[glitchrock-buddha]

i think perfect practice makes your technique perfect - but that doesn´t necessarily means you are a perfect musician...

Well that goes without saying. There is no perfect art. Perfect in this sense clearly can only apply to technical ability and even then is rather abstract goal. Point is, perfecting technique reduces the obstacles to expressing oneself exactly as they want, and yes this takes time. If you spend 10,000 hours playing an E major chord with your thumb above the neck, your practice ain't worth shit.

There is great truth in the old "hard work" theorem, but all the hard work and perfect practice can't give you a lick of pitch. You either got it, or you don't. All those goofy adds in music rags that guarantee you perfect pitch are just like all the miracle weight loss adds in tabloids. It's trinkets and trash that don't work. I've seen numerous serious shredders that could play violin scales all day long. They couldn't improvise or play by ear to save their life. They had no ear.

Remember back when you first started playing? It took me about 2 years after I first started to figure out how to tell if a musician was any good or not. the ones that were good and could truly kick ass were the ones that figured out the cover tunes note for note with no "reasonable facsimiles" in substitution. You'll never be shit if you don't have a good ear. That's a fact.

"but all the hard work and perfect practice can't give you a lick of pitch"

No that's not a fact at all. That's why people do ear training. It's one of the most important things to improve on. Recognizing keys, intervals etc. Again, obviously some are more naturally inclined this way, some even have perfect pitch. But like any skill, with training it can be improved greatly.

[Tone Deft]

I only have a sense of pitch from playing. I wasn't born with it.

an hour a day for a year is 365 hours is just under 27 and a half years, scale accordingly. 2 hours a day (average) is ~14 years. given this every 30+ year old guitar/piano/whatever player who started in their teens (like a lot of us I'm sure) is a Master. me thinks not. (except in my home where I am God and rock the house!!)

this reminds me of the scene in Dead Poets Society where they learn to measure a poem's importance by graphing it.

[Lo-Fi Massahkah]

I find this highly interesting - partly because my teaching background. I strongly beleive that you get good at what you practice.

I read about the 10.000 hours in a running magazine recently and they were talking from an athletic perspective but made the comparison between a classically trained pianist and a long distance runner. To achieve master or elite level you'd need to put in the 10.000 hours of training - preferably before the age of 20! Also they were very distinct on the point of very goal-driven training. Speaking of for example fotball players (Ibrahimovic!). The training would not give results if you were just "playing" footy - you have to be practising with a clear objective.

.m

[DrXparaMental]

but all the hard work and perfect practice can't give you a lick of pitch

No that's not a fact at all. That's why people do ear training. It's one of the most important things to improve on. Recognizing keys, intervals etc. Again, obviously some are more naturally inclined this way, some even have perfect pitch. But like any skill, with training it can be improved greatly.

Two different things entirely. Not the same type of pitch at all. You can't teach a person to have an ear. That's something you are born with. Vocal pitch and pitch matching, that's what you are talking about.

Talent CANNOT be taught. No way.

[beats me]

Similarly it's been said that it takes roughly $5,000,000 to make somebody a star and I believe that is with somebody with little to no polished talent in the beginning. I'd really like to see the expense report on that.

Wasn't Duran Duran the first corporate created boy band?

[DrXparaMental]

I find this highly interesting - partly because my teaching background. I strongly beleive that you get good at what you practice.

I read about the 10.000 hours in a running magazine recently and they were talking from an athletic perspective but made the comparison between a classically trained pianist and a long distance runner. To achieve master or elite level you'd need to put in the 10.000 hours of training - preferably before the age of 20! Also they were very distinct on the point of very goal-driven training. Speaking of for example fotball players (Ibrahimovic!). The training would not give results if you were just "playing" footy - you have to be practising with a clear objective.

.m

The science of repetition is undeniable. The science of repetition cannot build creativity, style or natural inclination. Repetition perfects on itself. That self is apart, not a part, of you and the unique quality of your talents.

[Tone Deft]

DrXparaMental - funny, I disagree with every single one of your points.

what do you play? what's your routine? just trying to figure out where you're coming from.

[Lo-Fi Massahkah]

The science of repetition is undeniable. The science of repetition cannot build creativity, style or natural inclination. Repetition perfects on itself. That self is apart, not a part, of you and the unique quality of your talents.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Talk to me like I was a 5-year old.

.m

[glitchrock-buddha]

DrXparaMental - funny, I disagree with every single one of your points.

I was going to say the same thing actually.

I somehwat agree with this:"Repetition perfects on itself. That self is apart, not a part, of you and the unique quality of your talents."
although the preceding sentence:"The science of repetition cannot build creativity, style or natural inclination." - I disagree with this. If you repeat a set of guitar scales over and over, it can actually help your creativity and even inspire you. This used to happen to me all the time when I was a teenager. I'd have no inspiration or creativity to write music one minute, and then after practicing my scales or finger exercises for a while, suddenly I'd go on tangents and end up writing some cool licks or just feeling more creative. All of these sessions add up to expanding your mind in a creative direction.

You are not just born creative. Some people may be naturally inclined with right brain activity for example, but creativity can grow dramatically in people.

[DrXparaMental]

DrXparaMental - funny, I disagree with every single one of your points.

what do you play? what's your routine? just trying to figure out where you're coming from.

Perhaps you could start by naming the first point you disagree with.

I have been playing electric bass for 32 years. I have no routine of technical skill building any more. Back in those days I was into everything from Geezer Butler to Stanley Clarke. I played original music in various groups throughout the 80s and well into the 90s. In the late 90s I got heavily into Jazz/Rock fusion and various types of improvisational/experimental music something like you would hear if you cross Ozric Tentacles with Magma or Thinking Plague. They used to call it RIO, now I don't know what it is exactly. I really got into floor looping style much like Jonas Hellborg meets Michael Manring during the earliest part of the 2000 decade. For the last couple of years I have delved into Ableton and software with other floor loop bass facilitated midi controller synthesis. I just goof around but I am a damn good electric bassist.

I could send you some files of my playing in more traditional progressive metal or rock applications.

I have played with so many musicians TD. Literally hundreds. Most taught or technically trained musicians that I have played with were unable to grasp things by feel. Things with odd timing or groove based playing that had to be felt rather than explained were beyond most of these individuals. The best musicians I have ever played with were killer out of the shoot and were never technically trained or taught. Sure, they had lessons and some of them even went "back" just to learn some weird theory or what not. But fact is they had "it" long before they ever sought alternate teachings.