How's Your Practising?

[skankdelvar]

I'm feeling a bit contrary today, so feel free to ignore me.

This whole 10,000 hours or 20,000 hours or whatever looks fine on the surface. But consider the potential variables: duration of individual practise sessions, practise environment, learning materials, playing solo or with others, personal objectives, posture, hand size, pre-existing manual dexterity - not to forget genetic pre-disposition (if that's relevant) and whether your mother listened to Bach during the pregnancy.

Pretty soon it becomes clear that 10,000 or more or less is an entirely arbitrary figure. Once all the old bollocks is out of the way, we're left with a blinding bit of STFO. Practise is good.

No sh*t, Sherlock. Now let's turn it around. If I said "Practice is good. You need to spend x'000 hours on it to be great" you'd think I was an idiot or I had something to sell.

Just 1 hour a week and you too can have muscles like mine. Send $10 to Box 666, Greenville Tx and I'll tell you how.

[dc2009]

A mate of mine back at school picked up drums with a year and half left to go (of school), within 6 months he was good, within a year he was a fantastic drummer. Technically gifted, able to play paradiddles out of his ears etc etc, he started learning a lot later than many, and yet given he's probably bordering on the autistic side, he picked it up ridiculously quickly.
I have another friend who happens to be a very good guitarist and drummer, yet I know other guitarists, just as skilled, but they're even worse than me at drums. I think there's definitely a natural aptitude for all sorts of these things, not convinced by this book at all.

[Pete Academy]

I think there's definitely natural ability. Victor Wooten was gigging at five years old, and was part of an intensely musical family.

[Doddy]

[quote name='Pete Academy' post='1248380' date='May 28 2011, 04:13 PM']I think there's definitely natural ability. Victor Wooten was gigging at five years old, and was part of an intensely musical family.[/quote]

I bet they all seriously practised though. Victor has admitted staying up all night learning 'Portrait of Tracy',and I'd guess he's done that many times when he was younger.

[LawrenceH]

[quote name='Doddy' post='1248194' date='May 28 2011, 01:07 PM']I think that more important than the 10,000 hour 'rule' is what you practice. If you spend 3-4 hours a day
playing riffs and lines that you can already play and enjoy,you won't benefit as much as someone who studies
new material for an hour.
As far as the 'natural' talent thing is concerned,you still have to work at it.All these people that are call 'a natural'
at what they do have usually spent a lot of time working on it but all you ever see is the end result-you don't see
the hours and hours spent practising.[/quote]

+ many. The practice HAS to be meaningful, targeted, or the hours are wasted. That's why I'm so bloody crap

[Marvin]

[quote name='LawrenceH' post='1248407' date='May 28 2011, 04:35 PM']+ many. The practice HAS to be meaningful, targeted, or the hours are wasted. That's why I'm so bloody crap [/quote]
Come and listen to me play then you'll know what crap sounds like


Does reading a book on theory count towards practice? I suppose it doesn't really does it

[RhysP]

[quote name='Doddy' post='1248194' date='May 28 2011, 01:07 PM']I think that more important than the 10,000 hour 'rule' is what you practice. If you spend 3-4 hours a day
playing riffs and lines that you can already play and enjoy,you won't benefit as much as someone who studies
new material for an hour.[/quote]
This.
10,000 hours of pushing yourself with a properly structured learning schedule is going to have vastly superior results to 10,000 hours of noodling about playing the same old sh*te.

I've never properly practiced scales or anything like that, and that's why despite playing for over 30 years I'm bloody rubbish.

[gafbass02]

I just picked up a bass and could play it, still no knowledge of theory and almost 20 years later I've easily passed 10,000 hours long ago. But most of that has been practicing songs I needed to know, rather than honing any solo skills. Probably why I'm still 'meh'

[Pete Academy]

Wow, two pages in and nobody's mentioned the Daily Mail.

[ChTBoner]

What actually changed a lot of things for me is a French bass book called "Supertechnique in 50 weeks". Basically Hans Kullock, the author, gives you strengthening and coordination exercices (warm up, extension...), pure techniques (slap, vibrato, pull off, hammer ons, trills, rolls, flamenco, percussion, tapping, legato, and what not...) and some work on chords and scales (practicing in second, thirds, fourth, fifs... in different orders, etc...). and at the end of the book there working program day by day, for 50 weeks.

Not an esay book to handle, as you have to practice 1h30 a day 6 days a week, and not everyone as that kind of time... But it gave me a real work ethic, and a good way to practice pure technique.

He then made a similar book about music styles and their history and how bass is traditionnaly used, giving lots of exemples.

[Pete Academy]

[quote name='ChTBoner' post='1248595' date='May 28 2011, 08:06 PM']What actually changed a lot of things for me is a French bass book called "Supertechnique in 50 weeks". Basically Hans Kullock, the author, gives you strengthening and coordination exercices (warm up, extension...), pure techniques (slap, vibrato, pull off, hammer ons, trills, rolls, flamenco, percussion, tapping, legato, and what not...) and some work on chords and scales (practicing in second, thirds, fourth, fifs... in different orders, etc...). and at the end of the book there working program day by day, for 50 weeks.

Not an esay book to handle, as you have to practice 1h30 a day 6 days a week, and not everyone as that kind of time... But it gave me a real work ethic, and a good way to practice pure technique.

He then made a similar book about music styles and their history and how bass is traditionnaly used, giving lots of exemples.[/quote]

Sounds like a great book.

[Pete Academy]

I think there's a lot of us that have accumulated the 10,000 hour mark, especially with gigging for many years. However, it's the type of practise that's important. We all love to play our favourite riffs over and over because we enjoy it. But we're not progressing by doing that. You have to practise something that you can't already play in order to progress.

That's what has made world class musicians what they are.

[Pete Academy]

I recall having to learn Steely Dan's 'Gaslighting Abbie'. It wasn't easy, but afterwards I felt my playing had improved considerably.

[scottkincaid]

Some people are better or more naturally talented than others.

For example, i have learned to play bass within two weeks, and i could now, pretty much play whatever you wanted; Funk, Indie, Rock, Metal ect.

Whereas my friend has never had drum lessons, and he can play them better than most drummers i have seen.

It just depends how musically inclined people are.

[arthurhenry]

I've done way more than 10,000 hours practice in the last 24 years. The result? Pubs still pay me the same money they did 20 years ago and no one takes any notice of my playing. Still, at least I know I put the work in.

Edited June 2, 2011 by arthurhenry

[Eight]

There's no such thing as talent. There's no such thing as being "musically inclined".

Some people are maybe more interested in music than others; and this is important when comes to motivation and how much time you spend thinking about/understanding what you're doing instead of just going through the motions hoping to get better.

Someone mentioned earlier about related (or something unrelated) skills/experiences unexpectedly playing a part in your development of another skill - this is a point which is deeply under-rated.

And since we were talking about Wooten, think about what "born into a musical family" means. It's not that there's some code in his DNA which makes him a great musician, it's that from the moment he was born he was learning from other players... and he worked at it.

Edit: Me, I'm miles away from 10,000 hours. My practice routine is not as comprehensive as it should be... but I'm doing okish.

Edited June 2, 2011 by Eight

[Pete Academy]

[quote name='scottkincaid' post='1253441' date='Jun 2 2011, 04:34 AM']Some people are better or more naturally talented than others.

For example, i have learned to play bass within two weeks, and i could now, pretty much play whatever you wanted; Funk, Indie, Rock, Metal ect.

Whereas my friend has never had drum lessons, and he can play them better than most drummers i have seen.

It just depends how musically inclined people are.[/quote]

That's intriguing. To what standard would you say you can play those styles?

[tauzero]

[quote name='Eight' post='1253491' date='Jun 2 2011, 08:37 AM']There's no such thing as talent. There's no such thing as being "musically inclined".[/quote]
Explain Mozart then.

Everybody isn't equal. Some people will have not just better motivation but a higher level of ability at certain activities - not just playing an instrument.

[whynot]

Not proud to say I can't recall ever practising unless learning new songs.
Bass tends to only come out at gigs.
Keep promising myself to take this bass playing business a bit more seriously but 30 years down the line is a hard habit to break.

[arthurhenry]

The main difference I've noticed in players is not the amount they practice or varying degrees of natural ability: it's different levels of passion for music. Some people enjoy music and like the idea of playing it - it's a fun hobby. Others cannot live without playing music and expressing themselves in that way.

[ShergoldSnickers]

[quote name='skankdelvar' post='1248205' date='May 28 2011, 01:23 PM']Just 1 hour a week and you too can have muscles like mine. Send $10 to Box 666, Greenville Tx and I'll tell you how.[/quote]
Dear sir,

I would just like to express my sincere gratitude to your programme. Since you started this offer, my fitness levels have shot through the roof, my legs are like tree trunks and I find I can now lift huge weights of serious proportions compared with previously.

Yours, in deep gratitude

Hyram T Kandiman




PS – I'm your postman.

Edited June 2, 2011 by ShergoldSnickers

[fatboyslimfast]

I think there is also a tendency here to mix technical ability with musical ability. There's a big difference between being able to play notes like Wooten, and having the ability to compose/rearrange music so that it strikes the heart of the listener.

I also think music found me (I've been a music addict since a small child), but have never managed to compose anything that even warranted showing it to someone else, let alone doing anything else with it. I put that down to not really having a creative side, despite trying.

[Doddy]

[quote name='scottkincaid' post='1253441' date='Jun 2 2011, 04:34 AM']Some people are better or more naturally talented than others.

For example, i have learned to play bass within two weeks, and i could now, pretty much play whatever you wanted; Funk, Indie, Rock, Metal ect.

Whereas my friend has never had drum lessons, and he can play them better than most drummers i have seen.

It just depends how musically inclined people are.[/quote]

I thought I was a genius at 16 aswell.

[mcgraham]

IMO and IME it's your general traits, personality and attitude as a person that has a huge impact on your musical development (like anything in life I guess). Not saying it's isolated from those around you affecting your development or the like, but I think your own psychology is a huge factor.

For example, I'm naturally a very focused/obsessive/determined/motivated person, I approach things in life and work with reason and logic and always seek to better myself, but I am also a very emotional person at heart. I feel that these are key traits that have helped me in my musical development. For example, these traits mean that I really connect with music in general and am constantly bowled over by how it can stir emotions without ever having to engage people's intellects. But because of my personality, I am also strongly driven to understand logically why music moves me/people in the way that it does, and in turn I am driven to work obsessively at being able to execute that knowledge. I find it's a self-perpetuating cycle - I find/make something I like, I learn about it, I practice it, I get better at it, I find/make something I like it... etc etc.

To answer the question, I reckon I'm probably about the 10,000 hour mark now (been playing 9 years, not including rehearsals/band practices etc, just my own personal practice) - I see the benefits in my own playing, but it really does need to be pure hardcore practice to see the most benefit.

Edited June 2, 2011 by mcgraham

[ZMech]

After two years of playing I thought I was getting pretty good. Then I decided to go along to a jazz jam night...


[quote name='scottkincaid' post='1253441' date='Jun 2 2011, 04:34 AM']For example, i have learned to play bass within two weeks, and i could now, pretty much play whatever you wanted; Funk, Indie, Rock, Metal ect.[/quote]

A challenge to test yourself. Set the metronome to 160bpm. Play straight crotchets over it. Then stop, halve it to 80bpm, but start again playing 160 crotchets. Stop, halve it again so you've only got the first beat of each bar struck, then try again so that it's only playing one beat every two bars, and again to the first beat of every four bars (10bpm). If your still starting every 4th bar perfectly in time with the metronome, then you do indeed have perfect timing, one of the biggest roles of a bassist.

p.s. I thought I was naturally talented too, then I came to uni where there's lots of people better than you at whatever you think you're good at, and you have to start working for it.

Edited June 2, 2011 by ZMech