I know this thread has appeared a lot before, but I am still posting it

I have been thinking about the 'musical prodigies' who start piano lessons aged 5, and give their debut concert of Chopin's First ballade aged 10 etc. Is it really always natural talent?

Think about it... all the 'prodigies' are the ones who absolutely adore music and see it as a huge part of their life. If they felt like this from a young age, then surely this motivated them to practice for hours each day.

Many people say that it takes 10000 hours of practice to become a professional standard on an instrument and if we are to think that these young prodigies practice for 4 hours per day, for 5 years then that is about 7000 hours of practice... surely enough time to become a good enough standard to reel of a Chopin ballade...

So is it really natural talent? Or just that they love music so much they practice it enough to be as good as they are??? What do you think?

I have been playing piano since October 2008, and by my calculations, I've probably done about 800-1000 hours of practice in total, bringing me to around Grade 6 standard.

I don't think achievement is directly proportional to hard work, but rather that as time goes on, the achievement axis will push on faster than the hard work axis. (I'm sure there's a better way to put this, mathematically.) I think there comes a time when you can read it and you know what it's meant to sound like, and therefore the realisation of it comes faster*. If you have the technique. And if you have the musical awareness as to how to use it. There's no point in having ten thousand pounds and not having a clue how to invest it or spend it wisely. I think the 'talent' lies in this area, assuming we've got to this* point which certainly requires a certain love of music.

I don't think so.

That's the way I see it.

Hmm... I have to disagree at least partially. There IS, in my view, such a thing as natural talent, but I think in the long run it is outweighed by hard work and perseverance, because at some point "natural talent" isn't alone enough to cope with difficulties. These prodigies that you speak of are often naturally talented - some don't practice ALL that much - but if they don't really love music, they ultimately won't get far. On the other hand, some who don't have the "spark" at the beginning but are dedicated to music will steadily work their way up until nobody will care that they weren't always "prodigious".

Mostly hard work, I think, but also the right nurturing; encouragement, and having the right kit.... piano prodigies always seem to contrive to be born into families that posess a piano. When a baby is born to a couple of opera singers no one says "I wonder if he will be good at high jump".

Maybe lots of people have the potential to be good at something but they never get the chance to try it or the encouragement to pursue it.

I've found that those with "Natural Talent" tend to simply have an easy ride until the fith or sixth lesson. Then it evens out a little. After that those who practice more have the edge.



I've always thought that too.

I would like you to research chopins history

Now you saying 5 years to reach chopin ballade

Now I have been playing since around December 2008, and going for my grade 5 in 2 days.
I love to play, and have ambition to play, At the moment I have played in front of around 130 people. Really nervous, but I know I must do it if I`m to fulfil my dreams.
I have had a licentiate tell me that I`ll have letter before my name by the age of 26.. (personally doubbtful)
Another one who said I have a lot of potential, who quite insists of teaching me the drop n roll technique.
However, a 3rd one called me a piano basher.. said I`d be lucky to pass grade 3.. (which I got distinction for)
But also probably the best teacher Ive ever known and insisted on teaching me BA mus, standard. (He was also very unhappy that I was skipping grades)
.. oh and my full music teacher takes it as it comes.. with no real feeling towards slow/fast progress I have..

Now there was a point I was doing 10-12 hours a day.. Unfortunately it had a bad psychological effect on me.
The only thing I could speak about was "piano" ~ I would go to bed restless seeing piano notes when I had my eyes closed.
So I have re thought my strategy.. and decided to take a break, and enjoy company of people..

However, im 23 and I know of another issue which will hold me back the longer I leave it.. thats how fast I can hit the notes. Beethovens Pathetique mov.3 Requires a huge amount of velocity. ~ SO I know between grade 5-6 I will be studying intensive exercises to speed up my hands movements as well as intensive exercise to keep a legato feel.

Just thinking some of these children start when their 3, but many teachers dont teach 3 yr olds,
I did manage to get my 3 year old niece.. to follow me playing part of a scale But very rarely see her, and she has no piano

I think so too, but my previous post may have made it appear that I think otherwise. What I really mean is that the talent lies in musicality, and not just in reproducing notes and rhythms, which any reasonable brain will manage, given the knowledge and sufficient practice.

Whether there is or is not such a thing as "natural talent" is irrelevant if you are learning music and an instrument for the love of it. [It may matter to someone that only takes up pursuits at which they can excel].

You'll never have any more of it.

The only things you have any control over are:

1. What you study/practice
2. How you study/practice
3. How much time you put into your study/practice
4. The intensity of your concentration

... and (almost forgot)

5. Your state of health and fitness (sleep, nutrition, exercise, relationships, ... )

6. How closely you listen to the sound you produce. The rest may be wasted otherwise.

I thought this was part of:

2. How you study/practice

but it is important enough to have its own number

[it is also very difficult to do - which is why videos and recordings of ourselves (well of me) make such painful viewing and listening].

I took your number 2 to mean focussing on the right things rather than just mindlessly playing from start to finish. No matter how much I try to hammer this point home with pupils I'm still horrified at times (like with two weeks till an exam...) to learn that they're just starting at the beginning and playing to the end. While the bits that need most attention will get there eventually, this is not the most economical use of time. Economical use of time moves people's talents forward faster.

I think that "natural talent" does exist, but is not going to get you very far without practice.

The reason I think that natural talent does exist is because I haven't got any when it comes to drawing - I have taken several art classes and I still can't draw. I just do not "get it". Whereas I know people who haven't had any art classes and somehow just know how to put lines on paper in such a way that they look like the subject.

I think that what we might call talent is really just the benefit of particular genetic clusters. So for example the parts of the brain related to rhythm, or eye-hand co-ordination, or pitch separation might be more developed in the person we call talented.

However. Some of those brain regions are developed by the learning and playing of an instrument (including voice). So I don't agree with the idea of "talent" being a fixed entity.

Practice, determination, patience and self confidence are required to master an instrument. The genetics might give you a head start but hard work is the key to success.

I guess with real talent you know it when you see it, but separating talent from hard work is tricky!

I recall a girl at a school where I once taught and she was wonderful violinist. By far the best violinist I had seen perform in real life (by which I mean outside of concerts of videos). I think she was immensely talented, but she also practiced a lot too.

You can see the difference in kids who are talented at football but think their talent is all they need. They don't tend to do as well as talented kids who are not too proud to do some training in addition to their talent.

I guess the question should be: Is it possible to be so talented at music that hard work is not needed?

I can't think of many examples!

I believe somebody can have a natural talent for music/rhythm but I believe in order to be a pro, practice is key. Was it Valentina Lisitsa who said she practices for 6 hours a day or something crazy like that? I think people with a natural ear for music are at an advantage, but anybody can learn too play. At least 5+ of my friends play piano, and another 10+ play some other instrument. So too sum it up, you can't base playing purely on natural talent, even the greats (Chopin/Liszt etc) would have put hours, hours and hours into practice and technique, and they are considered to have the best natural musical talent.

I had no talent at all a couple of years ago (see my posts from 2009 ), but seem to be doing OK now. I don't think you have to be born with it, but a passion for music puts you at a great advantage IMO.

I have been wondering for a while if, in the world of amateur music-making, hard work at some point replaces talent.

A couple of months ago my oboe teacher made a remark about something being easy for me because of my "natural talent". I made some throw-away remark about it being the first time he had ever said I had any talent and his reply was that it had taken him a while to notice it My conclusion was that lots of work eventually pays off

I think what a lot of this means is that many people have more innate talent than is obvious, and in some cases hard work will bring it to the fore, whereas, sadly, in some others, and with the best will in the world and the determination to succeed, the results will be only mediocre.

And unfortunately you can't always tell.

(There, I've actually not really said anything helpful, have I?)

This is where we teachers need the ability to be patient. I have seen some rather mediocre young beginners become really enthusiastic and competent for their level a few years on. Only last week I looked at one of my boys hands moving over the keyboard with so much more assurance and said to myself 'I never thought he would get that far."

I once received a first year junior child into my class with the comment from his infant school teacher, who was a music specialist "This child shows no talent for or interest in music." He became a professional singer and has sung at Covent Garden, Glyndebourne and lots of other places and had the lead role in Prokofiev's "Love in a Monastery" at the Paris Op?ra Comique in January of this year. So we never know where talent may be lurking.

On the other hand whether hard work can entirely compensate for a lack of musical ability I don't know but I think it must go a very long way, particularly if it is intelligent hard work.

Gotta agree with that Kerioboe.

I get a bit defensive when my teacher talks about a couple of his "Hugely talented" child-pupils - because I take that as him saying I have no natural talent (over-sensitive? moi?) So it was greatly amusing to me when I turned up to a lesson and was asked to demonstrate my left hand position (violin) and play a few scales to one of the genius kids whose lesson was coming to a close. He has a "pan hold" position - despite teacher's best efforts.

As I said to teacher afterwards - the more I practice - the more talented I get.

I have musical talent, but I am not a natural pianist.

However I did from the ages of 8-20 manage to get from beginner to around grade 8 level on the piano. I state level, because although my instrumental exams at college stipulated this was the standard I was required to play at for my undergraduate second study exams, I never took grade 8 piano.

I still play the piano at a similar level and have not taken grade 8. I teach piano and have gained so much skill working as a page-turner in master classes as an undergraduate and through snippets gleamed from pianists, that my professional pianist friends were the ones who recommended that I took on beginners in the first place.

Every achievement I have gained on the piano has been through hard work. I can tell what I want to achieve through the musical ear that lent its self far better to learning the oboe and to my real first study singing. However the development of sufficient technique to achieve that has been slog and hours in a practice room.

Only really in the last few years have I felt truly happy at the piano, and only when I've done a lot of work on a piece.

I am always going to be stuck against the technical limitation of small hands. However through knowing how to get the best out of those small hands, how to get the piano to really sing, to bring out a sweet tone, to bring out delicate pianissimo staccato chords, and yet when I get my hands around thundering chords with full body weight behind them get that rich percussive attack out the piano, I can maximise what I comes out of those small hands.

Not exactly ideal for Lizst and Rachmaninov, however when the repertoire fits, I can make a very decent sound that I'm now at least reasonably happy with.

This is inspiring!
How far can you stretch your hands ?
Mine can hit a 9th, ~ hoping for a 10th in the next 2 years, Im doubtful but really hoping!
I do believe, that you can substitute another note instead of stretching.

It is interesting that you view yourself that way - I've always thought that you were someone with a lot of natural talent but it had not necessarily "manifested" until you started practicing the amount you do now. Please tell me if I am being offensive and I will remove this! I hope it's read in the right spirit as I realise I have only been on the forums for about a year now so I may not have that much to judge by.



Slightly OT - I have gone from an octave to a 9th in a year. I've hit my limit, but it's definitely possible with the right sort of practice. Blasted if I know what that is though...

I think its important to note however no matter how far you can reach, ~ that it shouldnt effect your ability to get to the next standard... or let it ruin your talent,
Dont be put off by what people say, << infact it encourages me..
I personally love some of rachmaninov`s works.. and wont be put off because I cant reach a note.. I know there are ways around it, but I do need some theory to work it out.

P.S im 23, pretty sure my fingers wont grow much more.. but my hand may get wider.. helping me hit that 10th.

I've always loved music; the music that I'm really keen on is always music that I have a deep, emotional connection to. This is why I have such a massive obsession with Schubert these days - I can't think of any other composer that has such a profound effect on me.

I only started taking piano lessons in earnest in March 2009 (which is why my join date is April 2009 - I joined after I was coerced into doing "ABRSM" exams and I looked it up online). I had a teacher who, looking back on it, gave me some ridiculously difficult stuff to study at the time.

I think that if I'm going to try to learn something, I want to do it justice (at least as best as I can within my ability). Whenever I've had a go at anything in my life up until now, I've always given it both barrels, so I don't see why piano should be any different. Why bother doing something if you're going to do it half-heartedly? I think the key issue is that if you truly love doing something, then the work that you do on it is going to be several orders of magnitude easier, and is going to pay bigger dividends in the long run.

As for manifesting - I think that when I was at school, I must have paid some attention in music lessons (but they wouldn't let me do music GCSE), and also having a logical programming/scripting kind of mindset, decoding music to learn never really seemed that difficult when I actually came to it in a formal manner (although sight-reading is still a different matter).

If I'm honest, I'm quite bitter about the fact that I was put off playing piano from a very early age. I'm sure I'd have learned quicker and wouldn't have had so many hurdles to tackle back then.

I've found a lot of this to be true - that I practice because I love music, more so now that there is no threat of failed auditions or grades. I did wonder if I ought to get a teacher just to motivate me to practice. Now I still think I ought to get a teacher but because I want to improve faster, not to kick me into practicing.



I used to feel this way about horn - I started lessons at 19 and most of the other horn players in college had had ten years of lessons by then. I used to have a massive chip on my shoulder about this (not saying you do, just that I did) in the sense that I felt I'd missed out and had to struggle really hard to catch up. It is true that for the first year or two I did struggle to make up for lost time.

However after that I noticed that I was learning faster than the others in general, and I think that this was because I had to think harder about it than they did. I believe that the end result was the same. I wasn't better than them, but I was as good as them.

Also as a "very early age" piano student, I definitely did not learn quicker than I do now. I just didn't know how to learn when i was little - I couldn't analyse the music to find the best way of playing it. I could follow what my teachers told me but that was about it. I suppose where it did help is that it feels like I've "always" known music - got all the scales, arpeggios, aural etc before I got too self-aware to think about how tedious it all was It was good training. I don't know if I could have the stomach to learn 36 major and minor scales now!!

I dread every lesson that I have. Sometimes I wish I didn't have the pressure that comes from having a teacher, but at the end of every lesson, I'm glad that I'm doing it. It's easy to vastly overrate your own judgement. Being shown the error of your ways is really important. I feel guilty about not practicing enough, no matter what the circumstances are, and that's something that I need, otherwise I'd just stagnate.



Oh, I definitely harbour a certain amount of anger about it. If the guy who put me off was still alive, I'd probably shove dog poo through his letterbox.

What (or who) do you think it was that put you off it?

I meet adults all the time who say they wish they'd had the opportunity to learn, at which point I try to say it's never too late - but I also meet many who say they started when they were young but gave it up and now regret it. My family had a sheet music shop many years ago and I thought I could divide equally those adults in this sub-set into those who said "I was pushed into doing it, which I hated, and that was why I stopped" and "I wish I'd been pushed a bit harder and stopped from giving it up" - so there's no answer there

What happened in your case? I sometimes find myself struggling to prevent young pupils from falling off the track, so any input is always helpful

Simple: Cantankerous old man as a first teacher when I was 12. I still remember him being impatient and pulling my fingers around into position. Suffice to say this only went on for a few weeks before I told my parents I didn't want to learn anymore.

I did try to take it up several years later but never continued beyond a month or so with the two other teachers I tried. I gave it one last go a couple of years ago and found a teacher I really got on with but have since changed because she was a bit too "nice" and let me get away with murder; she did a great job of getting me through to Grade 3 in six months or so though, which I'm really grateful for.

The "too nice" reason is ironic really, considering the first sentence above. I now have a very demanding teacher and am happy. I wasn't very thick skinned at 12, though!

It's amazing the effect a teacher can have. My first teacher was quite firm and demanding, and I did well with him. Some might have found him too strict but it worked for me. I enjoyed playing and just did what I was told! When he moved away I was at about Grade 3 standard and went to a very highly qualified and easy going lady who made few demands, but who, at the same time, wasn't overly enthusiastic or encouraging. I achieved very little from the lessons, partly because I never practised what she gave me and just played my own thing without ever showing her how that was going, because I felt I was doing something wrong to be playing my own choice of music. I left this teacher at about the age of 16, didn't touch a piano for years, and only made measurable progress again as an adult. I picked up again on my own and went to a teacher for Grade 8 and ALCM. At that point I actually cared again about my progress, and, like others, felt nervous about lessons for quite a while, but this passed in time.

I honestly think that, yes if you do lots of practice you can possible become good or very good, or as you say reel of a chopin ballade (but does not necessarily mean that you will be good, as it is not the only deciding factor) . But i really believe this is not at all the same thing as a prodigy. I cannot explain in words, but, there are many very good musicians, but are not prodigies, as we know. You mention about yourself reaching grade 6-ish, but a prodigy will most likely have got 100% in all their exams! Yes, i believe, that it is natural talent - not merely hard work. Also, i think that the part of the brain to do with music/creativity --- or what ever you call it is somehow highly functional in that particular area. Similarly you get other people who are highly functional in art/maths for example in some autistic children.

http://www.gladwell.com/2008/2008_10_20_a_latebloomers.html

I think this is an excellent article about talent and genius. Its tagline is "Why do we equate genius with precocity?"

i think that people misuse the word genius/prodigy, because of what you said. --- i mean if a child starts playing the piano at an early age and developes passion and devotion to it, resulting in him/her practicing many hours a day then he or she will naturally become a good pianist. that is the result of hard work and not a sign of genius. ---
i have only one example from real life: i have been playing the piano from an early age on and am quite good at it. then there's this one kid from my school who started playing the piano a year ago and is already at the same level as i am now and even beyond. THAT is imho a sign of genius. and it's actually really frustrating xD.

It probably depends how you define talent. I think it is useful in this context to define talent as natural aptitude. Even then . . .

Talent without practice gets you nowhere
Practice without focus gets you nowhere
Focused practice without enthusiasm gets you nowhere
Enthusiasm without teaching gets you nowhere

In the pursuit of excellence in almost any field, enthusiastic focused practice under the supervision of a skilled teacher will get you a very long way;

To get to the very top I think you need to have all of this, plus talent, plus starting at an early age. However, as Mad Tom has pointed out, I can't turn the clock back and start again at the age of 5, nor can I change in any way whatever natural aptitude I may have - I can only be enthusiastic and attempt to focus when I practice and believe I have a skilled teacher. Provided I enjoy it, that is enough. If I didn't enjoy it what would be the point?

In any case I believe that the pursuit of excellence is a transferable skill that is valuable in it's own right: The attitudes, discipline and techniques of learning can be transferred to other fields, possibly areas where the natural aptitude is greater.

I am definitely in pursuit of excellence

...did anyone see which way it went?

It didn't come this way......

May be not, but it is the pursuit that is the transferrable skill, not necessarily the achievement (if any).

A wise thought succintly put. How the blazes do I translate that into effective and understandable French? I have some parents who could benefit from that idea!!

The best thing you can do for your kids is sing to them when they are babies! That will instil a good sense of pitch and rhythm, and may give them a love for the music right when their brains are developing the most.

You have to choose a time when they are most receptive to the music ie bedtime or family time.

Only problem is, one needs to want to sing to them, or they won't get sung to!