Jon C. Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 I'm with Anglo Irishman on the "talent" thing. It's a bit of a fairy tale (fostered by shows like the X Factor) that anybody can achieve anything they want if only they work hard enough. It's a bit akin to wealthy self-made types who feel that nobody needs to be poor, they just have to get off their backsides and work. Life ain't like that, unfortunately. I've worked really hard at playing the fiddle over the years, and I'm *still* rubbish... sorry to say you havent been working very well. dont blame anyone else, please. you can blame the situation, sure... you never had anyone hold you accountable for your attention, time committed, and approach to music. but then again, i'm sure you havent held yourself accountable either. it's not about working hard enough, it's about working well. please practice for 5 hours a day for 10 years, constantly pushing yourself past your competence (going far beyond your comfort zone all the time), and tell me if you're playing is still rubbish. until you do that, i wont believe that you are innately a bad musician. sorry to say, but i have every confidence in your ability as a human being to make beautiful, meaningful music. Your starting to sound like your Grandmother, David... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Hersh Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 I keep reading in various thread people mentioning other musical instruments...so how many other than the concertina can you play and what are they? Talented lot you all are. I play piano, piano accordion, hammered dulcimer, tin whistle and recorder fairly decently. I can also find my way around on clarinet, bassoon (though I haven't access to one in a few decades), Appalachian dulcimer and maybe some others. And I of course have a bodhran in my closet too... I also want to comment on the "talent" thread, where from personal experience I tend to agree with John more than with David and David. My wife and I are both musicians, good enough to have done a fair amount of performing together when we first got together a few decades back. We have two kids, an 18-year-old son and a 14-year-old daughter. Music has always come very easily for my son -- he was writing decent tunes on keyboard in elementary school without any training at all and has always been an exceptional player for his age on his primary instrument, trombone, while hardly ever practicing. But it's been much more of a struggle for my daughter, who has to practice hard just to stay at the pretty-good-for-her-age level. They grew up in the same family, exposed to lots of music, and my daughter had the extra inspiration of hearing her brother play (probably the reason that she plays brass too -- trumpet and now euphonium). I have to think that there's a difference in talent there, quite possibly genetic. I agree with the Davids that practice, especially properly directed practice, is hugely important in determining how close one comes to realizing one's musical potential. I see the difference that it makes in my daughter's playing, and in my own, and even in my son's on the odd occasion when he's been faced with a musical challenge that required serious practicing. But I think that talent makes a big difference in determining one's starting point, and possibly therefore in one's potential as well. Daniel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anglo-Irishman Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Sounds like a lot, but I started most of them very young, and I'm pretty old now. Cheers, John Did you mean that you are now old & pretty John .......... or just pretty old? No comment!!! (See my profile for date of birth and photo ...) Cheers, John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Hi I , currently, play guitar and English concertina (not at the same time ) and have played, in the past, and occassionally still play :- mandolin/mandola bazouki clarinet (Badly) oboe (painfully) flute dulcimer serpent (in west gallery music) french bassoon (in west gallery music) tenor horn, baritone, cornet (brass band) bodhran (embarressed) I 'collect' instruments (currently about 50 assorted) tho' I suppose it would be more accurate to say that I 'acquire' instruments (if they're cheap I'm likely to 'buy') my problem at the moment is that I can only consider odd shaped instruments (to fit in the bits of wall left uncovered by other instruments). My wife is firmly of the opinion that if more than one of an object exists then I will 'collect' it (14 cameras, 10 hats, various bags-camera etc) non of the above cost a great deal nor are worth a great deal. I also sing chris (struggling to fit into a 2 bedroom house with a wife (very understanding) and 2 cats) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebastian Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 I keep reading in various thread people mentioning other musical instruments...so how many other than the concertina can you play and what are they? I love to play every musical instrument I can lay hands on. At the moment I tend to prefer jug and kazoo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDT Posted October 16, 2008 Author Share Posted October 16, 2008 (edited) I'm going to be schoolteacher here: You should all know better to keep on topic....I don't want this turning into another 'argument' thread. Where you alternate discussion subverts the original question. Start a new thread for that new topic. Its simple forum ettiquette. I used the word 'talent' to mean 'Skill' OK...so stop fighting and get back to the question in hand. And for those keeping on topic well done Edited October 16, 2008 by LDT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Rogers Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 (edited) sorry to say you havent been working very well. dont blame anyone else, please. you can blame the situation, sure... you never had anyone hold you accountable for your attention, time committed, and approach to music. but then again, i'm sure you havent held yourself accountable either. it's not about working hard enough, it's about working well. please practice for 5 hours a day for 10 years Without wishing to get into a protracted argument with you and/or David Levine, I feel I have to say one or two things more on this subject. Firstly, I think that we're not comparing like with like. Both of you appear to be talking about top-flight professional musicians. I would guess that the majority of the people posting on this forum are (like myself) hobbyists. We have day jobs, families and interests other than music. It's unrealistic to practice for 5 hours a day. I play fiddle probably as well as the famous Morris fiddler Jinky Wells (pretty roughly, judging from the recordings I've heard, but he was getting on in years by the time he was recorded) and my music is danceable-to, which is the most important thing for my purposes. I will never play well enough to carry a slow air in a performance situation, but then I recognise that I'm not prepared to "practice for 5 hours a day for 10 years" in order to achieve that. And I'm not seeking to blame anybody else. I'm sorry if anything in my original post suggested that I was. I have never had a violin lesson in my life. Why? Because I'm strongly left-handed and no violin teacher is prepared to teach a left-hander as they'd look "wrong" in an orchestra (no matter that I don't want to play in an orchestra or indeed to play classical music at all). I've no doubt picked up all sorts of bad habits, but playing the fiddle is not the main focus of my life (or of my music, since acquiring an Anglo concertina!). On the question of whether or not evidence exists for innate musical talent, there is (as in so many other things) no *definitive* evidence one way or the other. Googling "myth of musical talent" is obviously going to retrieve articles that support that side of the argument. A search of the Psycinfo database reveals as many academic papers in favour of "talent" as the opposing view, e.g. Gagne, Francoys Nature or nurture? A re-examination of Sloboda and Howe's (1991) interview study on talent development in music. Psychology of Music, 1999, vol./is. 27/1(38-51) Abstract:Comments on the article by J. A. Sloboda and M. J. Howe (see record 1991-30071-001) examining the backgrounds of promising young musicians. Gagne demonstrates that the authors incorrectly interpreted their data because they did not acknowledge the role of musical giftedness as a significant determinant of the large differences observed in their sample between exceptional and average students. Gagne intends to show that their results cannot be correctly interpreted without introducing musical aptitudes as a significant causal factor. In other words, the answer is not as clear-cut as both Davids would have us believe. In case you're wondering how I've accessed a database that isn't freely available via Google, I'm an NHS Clinical Effectiveness Librarian by profession (unfair advantage!) and have the appropriate passwords. Apologies to LDT for inadvertently subverting what was originally a perfectly innocent question! Whoops - I've "crossed" with LDT's last post - If any Mod wishes to make this into a new thread on "Talent", please do... Edited October 16, 2008 by Dave Rogers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDT Posted October 16, 2008 Author Share Posted October 16, 2008 Apologies to LDT for inadvertently subverting what was originally a perfectly innocent question! Whoops - I've "crossed" with LDT's last post - If any Mod wishes to make this into a new thread on "Talent", please do... I've made you a nice new thread for posting the discussion on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anglo-Irishman Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 (edited) ... it's not about working hard enough, it's about working well. please practice for 5 hours a day for 10 years, constantly pushing yourself past your competence (going far beyond your comfort zone all the time), and tell me if you're playing is still rubbish. until you do that, i wont believe that you are innately a bad musician. sorry to say, but i have every confidence in your ability as a human being to make beautiful, meaningful music. David, All this psycho stuff is just too monocausal for me, and I like it even less because of the intellectual sloppiness of the argumentation. The "hard work" fetishists do not examine the concept of "talent" as it is generally used, but instead set up spurious, monocausal definitions of their own, like genetics or early childhood environment. They then demonstrate that talent is not genetic, and conclude that it therefore does not exist. Or that it is not formed in early childhood, and therefore does not exist. They point to the correlation between the amount of practice and the excellene of achievement - but they neglect the factors that motivate some people to practise more than others. And now, if someone claims to practise a lot, and still isn't a top player, suddenly "it's not about working hard enough, it's about working well." The man in the street is well aware that excellence is never monocausal. Inherent ability (whether genetic or personal), opportunity to learn, a conducive environment, the prevailing attitude to the field of endeavour, self-motivation and the diligence that comes from it, are some of the factors that influence achievement. Practical educationalists - that is, teachers who stand in front of a class, day in, day out - have to explain why some children achieve a higher level of perfomance than others, even though they have spent several years in the same class with the same teachers and the same learning environment. And these explanations are never monocausal! We've all been through school, and we know that. We've seen a friend scribble his maths homework in the break before class and get the same score as we, who have brooded over it the whole evening before, with help from our parents. And the other friend, who got a lower score because he brooded over it all evening, but got no help from his parents. But none of us got as good a score as the friend who did the homework in time and without help because he enjoyed maths. And he enjoyed maths because he noticed that the work he put into is came back as a sense of achievement. For us less mathematically talented ones, it did not. The New York cop has been cited - but you have to tell the whole joke: "A person with an instrument case asks a cop, 'How do I get to Carnegie Hall?' The cop replies 'Practice, practice, practice ...'" On the basis of the instrument case, the cop assumes that the person is already a musician - that is, he has enough musical talent to play in venues other than his own living-room. The same answer given to someone without an instrument case would not be funny. It's interesting that the "studies" correlating achievement with practice time compare excellent musicians with at worst mediochre musicians. They completely neglect the non-musicians, i.e. those who have realised that their talents lie elsewhere. And the statement that a talented musician who practises single-mindedly with the object of becoming a soloist achieves more on his instrument than a talented musician whose ambition is to open up the wide world of music to young people, is a truism. Such comparisons factor out the concept of talent, and can therefore say nothing about it. Talent is apparent everywhere. It would make more sense IMO to try to explain it fully than to try to explain it away. If anyone has a global psychological standpoint, I'll read it with interest. But I fear "global psychological" is an oxymoron Cheers, John Edited October 16, 2008 by Anglo-Irishman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Rogers Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Oi! Get this over onto the proper thread, NOW! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDT Posted October 16, 2008 Author Share Posted October 16, 2008 Oi! Get this over onto the proper thread, NOW! link to thread here.....(wishes she had mod powers for this forum :powerhungryemote:) http://www.concertina.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=8307 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDT Posted October 16, 2008 Author Share Posted October 16, 2008 I keep reading in various thread people mentioning other musical instruments...so how many other than the concertina can you play and what are they? I love to play every musical instrument I can lay hands on. At the moment I tend to prefer jug and kazoo. Jug? As in the thing you put beverages in? How do you play that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Evans Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 I keep reading in various thread people mentioning other musical instruments...so how many other than the concertina can you play and what are they? I love to play every musical instrument I can lay hands on. At the moment I tend to prefer jug and kazoo. Jug? As in the thing you put beverages in? How do you play that? After the contents of said jug are consumed, one purses one's lips and blows across the top and promptly passes out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirge Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 I keep reading in various thread people mentioning other musical instruments...so how many other than the concertina can you play and what are they? I love to play every musical instrument I can lay hands on. At the moment I tend to prefer jug and kazoo. Jug? As in the thing you put beverages in? How do you play that? After the contents of said jug are consumed, one purses one's lips and blows across the top and promptly passes out! Do you really not know LDT? You get a nice resonant gallon cider flagon or similar with a smallish neck, but not TOO small and blow 'in tune' raspberries into it to provide a bass line. The jug amplifies the farted-bass effect. It has Hillbilly connotations (empty moonshine jugs presumably?). And hence 'Jug band'. Only spoons compete as an instrument that allows you to have some fun when you didn't bring your 'real instrument' and want to join in with ad hoc music situations...you go scavenging in the host's kitchen and you're ready to join in the fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDT Posted October 16, 2008 Author Share Posted October 16, 2008 I keep reading in various thread people mentioning other musical instruments...so how many other than the concertina can you play and what are they? I love to play every musical instrument I can lay hands on. At the moment I tend to prefer jug and kazoo. Jug? As in the thing you put beverages in? How do you play that? After the contents of said jug are consumed, one purses one's lips and blows across the top and promptly passes out! Do you really not know LDT? You get a nice resonant gallon cider flagon or similar with a smallish neck, but not TOO small and blow 'in tune' raspberries into it to provide a bass line. The jug amplifies the farted-bass effect. It has Hillbilly connotations (empty moonshine jugs presumably?). And hence 'Jug band'. Only spoons compete as an instrument that allows you to have some fun when you didn't bring your 'real instrument' and want to join in with ad hoc music situations...you go scavenging in the host's kitchen and you're ready to join in the fun. I really didn't know. Is that like skiffle making instruments from what's around? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebastian Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Jug? As in the thing you put beverages in? How do you play that? Press your lips together, then blow through them (very lightly at first) to make them vibrate. Thats it. Than you hold a jug or something like that one-two cm before your lips (your mouth facing the jug's mouth) and direct the sound into it. It's not blowing across the opening, the jug is only to amplify the sound you create with your lips. You can, for instance, use a wine bottle for this, especially just after having emptied it. Sebastian PS: I like you being schoolteacher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Madge Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Well, I bought a guitar when I was 14 but still can't play three chords on it. Didn't try anything else until I was 29 when I started on Anglo concertina. after a few month of playing that I suddenly found that a few other instuments started to make sense, whistles, bombardes etc. Bohdran took a couple of days to click with and only gets used to accompany a few songs. I tried piano accordian and melodeon but found them too limiting on the chords. I can't play Anne's English concertinas. Moutache and mouthorgan can produce howls of pain. It's easy to make a nice sound on a hammer dulcimer but harder to play a particular tune. I've not got the best embrasure for flute or for brass. I didn't get on with bassoon, so got a baritone Anglo. We've still got several guitars, clarinet, mandola etc. around that the children were into but I'm happiest with the Anglo I'm still pondering a Midi concertina some time:) Robin Madge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fiddlerjoebob Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 ...so stop fighting and get back to the question in hand. Sheesh...I was enjoying the suberted thread.. fjb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now