Neither. I was posing a question.

I was wondering... espy since Viktoria Mullova said earlier, in this month's Gramophone mag, something abt TALENT not seeming to matter in music-making nowadays, but MARKETABILITY. She was taking a swipe at her previous record company, Philips! Vik herself is unanimously acknowledged worldwide amongst music critics and fans alike, to be hugely TALENTED and yet, she has to foot her own recording costs with her performance revenues!

An example is Maksim. Even if he's not a bad pianist, he's not as good as many. But my friends, who had never known or listened to any classical music before Maksim still thinks he's the greatest pianist in the world. His music sounds great, but that's because it's combined with a lot of electronic stuff. I mean, look at his orchestra! It only has about 15-20 players but the sound seems like a full 60-player string section.

That's probably case and point then for not judging talent or even ability based on success. Vanessa Mae is not even in the same league as Mullova in terms of violin playing but she's certainly earning more money.... It's a shame that marketing has come into it so much now, but it is true, so perhaps we need to start telling young children to make it in the music world they need to do their marketability practice as well, we'll have to start making up some exercises!

...It's a shame that marketing has come into it so much now, but it is true, so perhaps we need to start telling young children to make it in the music world they need to do their marketability practice as well, we'll have to start making up some exercises!
[/quote]

HE HE HE! I like that - I mean, your reply!

So I GUESS, the answer to the question - Is talent important for music playing? - is:

No, not really. The main thing is, just to ENJOY playing music however low/little your standard/talent may appear to be.

HOWEVER, if you want to make a living out of it, well, a little talent IS necessary provided it is peppered with loads of marketability! HE HE HE

Exercises in marketability indeed!

I don't think talent is needed. I think it helps, but how many poeple can claim to be 'naturally talented', and even those who are don't get anywhere without as much practice as the rest of us. i think somepeople take to things more naturally than others, but after the first few grades, thing start to get tough, however easily you first found it. I managed really well learning piano upto grade 5, and I never had any problems at all, I was able to go without practicing, except once a week (well 2 - 3 times for grades 4 and 5) but after grade 6 I found it really tough, because I just couldn't do that anymore, and eventually I gave up. (not saying that I'm talented or anything). i think if you like something enough, that equals 'talent', and certainly makes you more motivated than a more 'talented' person who doesn't like it as much. Everything has to be kept in perspective, playing music comes naturally (kind of) to some, but it's harder to understand for others, that doesn't necisarily mean they're not talented, but that it takes a bit more time to grasp things, but they could play even better than a 'telented' person who took their 'talent' for granted. Even Mozart didn't just play, he practiced a lot, and all the great 'genius'' didn't just sit down on a piano stool, they just found it easier to understand. Don't worry too much about talent, for all you know, you could be 'talented' and not realise until much later in life.

In my personal point of view, I will treat it as additional bonus point. True enough, perhaps others may take a longer time to finish practise a piece and whereas for talented people, they may take a shorter time. But most importantly, it is the effort that you have put in & the correct learning method. Another factor will be the teacher. It really makes a great different between a delicate & non-delicate teacher.

I believe being talented in music will let you progress faster (^^which saves you money as lesson fees are so high... ).
However if you ain't talented, it does not mean that you're hopeless in music, all you need to do is to work harder than anyone else.^^

Not too sure about the saving on lessons fees.
Isn't it likely that the more talented might actually continue lessons for longer because they are more aware of how much they still need to learn?
Also they may be needing to go to much more advanced level teachers whose fees are usually quite a bit higher....

Then they will probably need more expensive instruments too.

Well...yes and no, because if they learn fast, then it 'll take them less time to get to the top grades.^^

And if they ARE very talented then getting to the top grades is only the beginning....

Yes exactually! SO they can save their money for even higher grades

The law of diminishing returns must apply. The more talented you are the less lessons you'll need as that's the nature of being talented, and the people available who can effectively teach you decrease in number. Then, as you go through the diplomas aren't you supposed to become more independent (as a talented person)? Doesn't it become more 'advice' than teaching?

But I read a post the other night from a diploma student who couldn't decide what to play now so I suppose some students never do get independent and there will always be a demand for 'teaching' at that level.

It must be possible to make up for lack of talent with hard work to some degree.