On Getting Better..,

Mark van Allen · Post by **Mark van Allen** » 2 Dec 2011 11:11 am

I've just read a great book, "Talent Is Over-rated", presenting very cogent arguments that most of what we perceive as "talent" in any field, but particularly music, is actually the result of deliberate (focused) practice. I'd appreciate hearing from everyone at all levels of ability and performance about their concerns and application of focus in their desire to become a better musician.

Beginners, for instance, often have burning desire, but aren't sure just what to study and how, and are (correctly) referred to mentoring from the more experienced to help guide them and eliminate bad habits. This assumes that the mentor knows what bad habits are, and how to teach...
The more experienced have probably had the experience of people coming up at gigs or sessions and saying something like: "You're so talented... I love steel but I could never do that." But know that anything we display as ability is the function of seat time and stage experience.
After 30 years of playing and teaching, I'm well aware of where my limitations are and pretty much what I need to do to improve, I'm only limited by time invested and level of commitment.

Your experiences, answers, questions? Thanks...

richard burton · Post by **richard burton** » 2 Dec 2011 11:44 am

Mark,
You say that you are only limited by time invested and level of commitment, unfortunately the absolute limiting factor is your level of inate talent.

Every player has a built-in ceiling to their ability, and no amount of practice will let you break through that ceiling.

Every player's ceiling has to be reached through practice, and every player's ceiling is different, but once that ceiling has been reached, it can't be breached, no matter how many hours/years are spent woodshedding $:\$

Mark Eaton · Post by **Mark Eaton** » 2 Dec 2011 12:20 pm

I should find that book, sounds interesting.

Even though there might be an inate amount of talent for everyone, don't you think that provided someone is of fairly "normal" intellect, that hours put in with fairly productive and organized practice can make just about anyone a strong musician?

If one is aspiring to be a Paul Franklin, well maybe that just isn't possible - there's the "inate" factor.

About eight years ago after a Jerry Douglas Band concert, a fellow dobro playing buddy said, "this makes me want to go home and cut my hands off at the wrist."

I asked him why? Saying something like that reminded me of going to a San Francisco Giants game in those years, and going home disappointed that you'll never be able to hit a baseball out of the park like Barry Bonds. It's great to aim high, but let's be realistic.

I could practice dobro six hours a day for the next ten years and still not be in the same "league" as Jerry, but I'm reasonably sure that I would still be an outstanding picker, even though there is a "ceiling" in terms of my natural ability.

Jerome Hawkes · Post by **Jerome Hawkes** » 2 Dec 2011 12:45 pm

great thread
i will have to side with richard on this - there IS a ceiling to ones talents that no amount of study / focus will overcome. i use to read a lot of OLD classical music pedagogy methods from violinist like Leopold Auer, and other european teachers whose names i cant recall or spell - but they were unanimous in that they could usually tell at a very early age (8-10) the ability of the student and whether they were suited to further study or it was a waste of money. now this was back in the day when the only children sent to music conservatory were the well to do (the rest went to work in factories). but it was often noted that the orchestras of europe at the time were filled with mediocre musicians, despite decades of playing and study with the masters.

You can also see this in players like Buddy Emmons - who was composing stuff like Four Wheel Drive and playing his @$$ off at the age of 17 (keep in mind he states he didnt start playing until he was 11 - and never really says he spent his early years in constant study or practice as he wanted to be a boxer)

the #1 factor in musical success, from my own observations (and i have been observant in that it always fascinated me) is.....how well developed your musical ear is and how "naturally" rhythmic you are (ok that was 2). i dont care how much you study, if you have a "tin ear" and a poor rhythmic sense you cant overcome these obstacles - that IS music and there ARE people that lack one, or BOTH. of course that DOES NOT mean you cant PLAY & ENJOY music (as i count many in this group who dont give a crap, they love to play and i'm all for that) - but 'dems the hard cold facts.

BUT - its like the great John Hartford said once - "when you reach your limitations, then you begin to develop your own style - it is FORCED on you by your limitations and cant be MANUFACTURED" - what he meant was that NO amount of study or focus can make YOU = Buddy Emmons, its only the ceiling that you hit which becomes your own style.

Ransom Beers · Post by **Ransom Beers** » 2 Dec 2011 1:33 pm

I agree about there being a ceiling but some (like Franklin,Green,White,Emmons,etc) have very high ceilings.

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 2 Dec 2011 2:11 pm

Good post, Mark.

I'm not sure where the truth lies. I've known Albert Lee for almost fifty years and I think that he'd reached the limits of his amazing dexterity all those years ago. Since then, of course, he's developed greater sense of musicality but I don't hear much gain in his technique.

So: do we reach an equivalent of a boat's 'hull speed' very early (I've heard this term applied to vessels that, regardless of how much power is made available, are limited by their design)?

Me? I think I have a very good 'ear' and a reasonably developed sense of rhythm - certainly enough to support me in what I aspire to do - yet steel guitar has all but defeated me while having a very solid technique on six-string. In my case I think I blundered on with PSG without any expert advice (I took it up in the '70s fifteen years after I'd started playing guitar); this approach hadn't harmed my progress on regular guitar but has, I feel, destroyed any chance of making any real strides on steel.

Don't misunderstand me - I continue to make my living playing principally steel guitar so I'm managing to pull the wool over some people's eyes(!), but I'm all too aware of where I fall short.

To me the ultimate goal is to be able to play anything you can hear in your head - I'm far closer to that level on six-string than I am on steel. PSG is a different animal!

I'm sorry if I've wandered from the thread's original thrust but those are the thoughts it inspired in me.

Bob Blair · Post by **Bob Blair** » 2 Dec 2011 2:59 pm

If, as Richard suggests, everyone has a "ceiling", I doubt that many people can honestly claim that they have reached theirs. I don't doubt the role of natural talent - some people have, as Ransom put it, very high ceilings. Most of my limitations as a musician don't come from my ceiling - they come from the fact that I've not spent the time and effort necessary to overcome them. (for lots of reasons, some of them good and some not so good).

David Mason · Post by **David Mason** » 2 Dec 2011 9:06 pm

I agree with RR about this to a large extent (our RR, not the "real" RR)

->

To me the ultimate goal is to be able to play anything you can hear in your head - I'm far closer to that level on six-string than I am on steel. PSG is a different animal!

But, the crucial Q: is WHAT do you hear in your head these days, because nowadays there is absolutely NO excuse for not unearthing great things to listen to. You're sitting in front of...

(Some of) you guys are treating this "ceiling" stuff as though what the guitar shred-heads call "typing" is the only aspect of musicality. How many 32nd notes can you play at 320 bpms? The steel guitar by it's very nature lends itself to slow and careful note choices, *(dear god save me - "TONE")*.... how do you even know whether you're listening to Buddy or Paul or Easley or Cohen? By their scores they got on the test administered to pedal steel guitarists to measure and compare their ceilings, sure.

I think the most personally distinct part of a steeler's style is how they get from one note to another, what they're doing in the in-between moments; the "air" in their playing, on top/behind/ahead of the beat, and how they vary that to create and release tension. It not just how many notes there are, or even what melody-generating "tricks", "cliches", "patterns", "pockets", "techniques" they know and use, which is my own personal biggest area of interest (these have no connection to speed, BTW).

I do know that the three very best musicians I know all started at quite a young age, before 10 at least, and there's abundant information that nerve plasticity at that age allows for quicker study. And as mentioned above, these three had already gotten their 10,000 hours in by the time they're out of high school, when most of my crew had just started to figure out that smoking bales of cheap kack-pot might, just might, not actually be a practice aid. And I do know that there's roughly a 15% to 20% variability in nerve conductivity speeds between people (hint: If you found the notion of hitting a baseball with a bat absolutely ridiculous in 4th grade gym, as did I, you're not ever going to play guitar as fast as John McLaughlin or Coltrane-derived "tone clusters" as well as Dave Easley.)

In my opinion this whole ceiling model simply can't account for some important things, the biggest being - What do you LISTEN to? Not 40 years ago, when you decided that learning every Poco solo was "success" - but now. Are you still even interested in learning music, not technique.... can some piece of new (to YOU) music still catch you off your cynical guard when you're alone and make you laugh out loud, even mist up a bit? If you're not even feeding anything to the largest organ in your body, who's built that ceiling?

Finding new music with the internet is fantastically-easy these days, in a half-hour maximum you can search and hit three or five websites and (arbitrary example) draw up a list of the four "best" middle-period and the four "best" late period Beethoven string quartets. When 92.5% of music critics agree that these, and his symphonies 3,5,6,8 & 9 are categorically among the greatest music ever, ummmm, it IS.

My favorite late 50's Miles David album (beside the obvious) is actually Cannonball Adderly's "Somethin' Else."

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the concept of the "ceiling", but even if we're age-drained of some of the testosterone, concentration, and even pride to break the ceiling - ALL YOU GOTTA DO IS GO SIDEWAYS TILL YOU'RE OUT THE WINDOW....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPHtQn1t1n4

http://www.cannonballjazz.com/Cannonbal ... 8-0309.pdf

Tom Stolaski · Post by **Tom Stolaski** » 2 Dec 2011 9:08 pm

Every time I go up north to visit my brother, we have the same discussion about being born with talent. He tells me that I am a good musician because I was given this gift. I remind him that I started reading music at nine years old playing the accordion, and have put in many hours of study on the steel guitar and other misc instruments over the years. I think it is easier for some people to learn music, but it is the musicians who have put in the endless hours of work into it that become the Emmons and Franklins that we all admire so much.

Jim Cohen · Post by **Jim Cohen** » 2 Dec 2011 9:20 pm

David Mason wrote: how do you even know whether you're listening to Buddy or Paul or Easley or Cohen? By their scores they got on the test administered to pedal steel guitarists to measure and compare their ceilings, sure.

That's easy. The one with the lowest ceiling is the Cohen guy.

But I have often felt that my so-called "style" comes from taking all my influences and technique and forcing them through my limitations. It's interesting for me to read someone else making the same point. I guess what I'm saying is that one can get to be pretty good at doing what one is capable of doing.

Joachim Kettner · Post by **Joachim Kettner** » 3 Dec 2011 2:01 am

Mark, sorry to be slightly off topic, but after reading your initial post I recalled when I was in my teens and starting on guitar while listnig to records and looking at songbooks with their chord diagramms. I was putting pieces together and got lucky to play what I wanted about 5% and failing about 95%. Two years later a classmate did almost the same, but he was better than me after only six months. He could figure out licks from records while I stood on my ears. I guess this shows that he had more talent than me. Since I don't see him anymore I'm left wondering why that was.
First of all I think that although we were at the same age he was more mature than me, which meant that he only bought one record instead of me buying ten and concentrating more on it. We were both were big fans of the Byrds and he would amaze me by, showing me a Clarence White solo he figured out, which I could never play.

Clete Ritta · Post by **Clete Ritta** » 3 Dec 2011 2:18 am

To me, some of the greatest music was written generations ago. I can still find inspiration in learning a snippet of Bach today that may turn out to be a whole new wing in my musical house by the new year. Maybe one's personal ceiling cant be raised, but the floor plan is constantly shifting and expanding. If you learned something today that you didnt know the day before, your musical house may have an addition in the works. My musical ceiling was probably reached at around 19, when I practiced round the clock, but knowledge and ability do grow outward, if not upward. Same ceiling of ability now as at 19, but its a much bigger place. The windows are wide open and the doors are too. Step outside where there are no ceilings and find musical inspiration. Bring back something that ties the whole room together. You might even raise the roof!

Clete

Ransom Beers · Post by **Ransom Beers** » 3 Dec 2011 2:37 am

I'm trying to add more tiles to my ceiling without making the room bigger,maybe that's what I'm doing wrong.I never wanted to sound like Buddy,Paul,Tommy,etc. but I would like to be able to play with the same abandonment they do............ah yes,back to the drawing board!!!

Allen Peterson · Post by **Allen Peterson** » 3 Dec 2011 6:44 am

I don't know about this ceiling business. The human mind appears to be limitless as far as capacity to learn is concerned. Ceilings might be self-imposed, although certain talents appear to be determined by the combination of mind and physical abilities. Playing a musical instrument might be one of those where no amount of brain capacity can compensate for lack of physical ability--hand-to-eye coordination, etc.

Allen Peterson

Barry Blackwood · Post by **Barry Blackwood** » 3 Dec 2011 6:58 am

Every player's ceiling has to be reached through practice, and every player's ceiling is different, but once that ceiling has been reached, it can't be breached, no matter how many hours/years are spent woodshedding

Richard, at what point does one know conclusively that they have reached their "ceiling?" To me, the ceiling concept has the unfortunate potential of becoming just another crutch...

Sam White · Post by **Sam White** » 3 Dec 2011 7:29 am

I may be off on this thread a bit but here goes.I have had a hard time trying to play the Pedal Steel Guitar.OK I was over to Ray Walker's home the other day and he was teaching a Steel Player how to use his knee levers. This mans name is Bob I don't remember his last name.He plays a great C6 on lap Steel and also on the pedal steel. He plays E-9th and he does not use his knee levers. Well Ray was teaching him how and went to use them in different songs.Ray told him that by not using those knee levers that he was losing a lot of the pretty sound in the Steel Guitar. I sat there and watched and listened and that is true. Sorry if I'm out of place here but maybe this is another problem why we have a hard time trying to play the Steel Guitar.I have started using them and I'm figuring out where to use them and where not to and it is starting to sound like I'm playing the Steel Guitar.
Sam White

Jerry Hayes · Post by **Jerry Hayes** » 3 Dec 2011 9:19 am

Mark, over the years I've always been more of a lead guitarist than a pedal steel player and always had a steel and played a little, just enough to do a couple of tunes a set if needed. While in SoCal I bought a ShoBud S-12 in '77 and set it up at home and practiced a bunch and got a fair amount of competancy on it. In Dec. of '78 I got my first full time 6 night a week steel job and played a minimum of thirty hours a week for the next seven years.

During that time I got pretty fair and comfortable on steel so that I could pretty much play most of what I wanted to do.... I left SoCal in Oct. of '85 and said goodbye to being a full time musician. I've played mostly guitar gigs since living here but do a fair amount of steel playing too. I've found that I've lost so much of my steel abilities, mostly from not using them. One band I was in, I played lead guitar for 4 years and never even took my steel out of the case and it's hurt. I can play tapes of old bands in SoCal and some things I hear myself playing, I can't even figure out how I played them.

I think that steel guitar needs to be constantly worked on to keep your chops up to par but I just don't have a practice ethic anymore and I really wish I did. The only playing I do is at a gig and the rest of the time my rig stays in the equipment van..........JH in Va.

Clete Ritta · Post by **Clete Ritta** » 3 Dec 2011 9:23 am

The only things that can lower your own personal ceiling are injury, illness, old age and death. We can all be careful about the first two, but the last two are inevitable.

Different instruments require different amounts of physical energy to play. From harmonica to drums, you have to have some energy to make sound. The ceiling is physical in the sense that, as in sports, you have a peak performance period in a career. Fortunately, playing music isnt a sport really, and many continue to expand their playing capacity well into their golden years if they are healthy.

Clete

Dave Grafe · Post by **Dave Grafe** » 3 Dec 2011 9:49 am

Being an amazing technical player means nada if the musical choices we make do not move the listeners. On the other hand, making great choices means nada if one cannot in fact execute them musically.

Practice is hard work, some of us enjoy this work more than others and some of us have the ears and nerves and muscular systems that just flat out work better than others for this particular set of complex tasks. Whether this is "talent" or not, we all must work with what we have and it is what we make of what we have that determines whether our playing is enjoyable or tedious, or horrid on occasion, to the ears of others.

I admire those who can really "burn it up" but have personally never been able to pick all that fast no matter how hard I work at it - Hal Rugg's recording of "Rocky Top" with the Osborne Bros. still leaves me in the dust after near forty years of effort on that one song - but the diverse musical experiences in my life have informed my choices sufficiently that what I CAN play seems to please others more often than not. Lucky me

they keep calling me back for more...

Regardless of "talent" level, everybody who plays this instrument for very long discovers that a sudden attack of nerves or lack of focus can undo the best preparation, and sometimes wonderful things happen with no preparation at all, but it is the practice time that instills in our motor memory the moves that we must be able to execute without conscious thought in order to perform with consistency and confidence under a wide range of circumstances and pressures. When we can persevere under the most difficult conditions and "get 'er done" with style and grace it will always bring that inner smile that we all ultimately seek.

David Mason · Post by **David Mason** » 3 Dec 2011 10:19 am

Compounding the whole mess is the well-known, perhaps even universal fact that your own "real-time" assessment of how well you're playing usually has absolutely nothing to do with how well other people think you're playing or how well the gig goes. When you get that feeling that you can't find the center of the beat all night, every little squeak and (ahem) "passing tone" seem magnified, to others it may sound like your best playing because you are concentrating well. How many pretty girls were in the audience at your last gig?

"I dunno - I'm the steel player..."

And there's another universal phenomenon I can surely see - Watch the Buddy videos, the Easleys, the Chalkers - as a dedicated C6th player, when a solo finally starts to uncurl the right way, everybody kicks the goddam pedals aside and chases the boog around the block with the bar alone. What if they invented an instrument that was so complicated only three players in each generation are allowed to smile when they play it....

John De Maille · Post by **John De Maille** » 3 Dec 2011 10:48 am

I think, personally, that, "getting better" is an acquired feat. The more you play, the better you'll get. Back when I was playing all the time, my progress kept getting better and better. Now, that I don't play as frequently my prowess has diminished considerably. I still know all the stuff, but, muscle memory has lapsed and putting it to the strings has gotten slower.
Then there's the subject of "what" you want to play. Given enough time with the steel and just about most of us can rip off quite a few notes like a machine gun, but, is that a goal? Playing slowly with a lot of feeling is an acquired talent, also. Smoothly playing from one phrase to another requires tact and talent, something that must be learned. A vast knowlege of chords and where to use them is another great plus, in my book ( I haven't finished that book yet )
You see.... The more you play, the better you'll get and playing with other people creates more knowledge than banging around on it by yourself. Tabs and rhythmn tracks are great, but, they won't give you the spontaneity you get from live playing and feeding off one another.
We all wish, that, we had the prowess of an Emmons, Green, Jernigan, Anderson, Hicks and all the rest of our heroes, but, think about how many hours of live playing they had. These are the guys who are writing the tabs for us and explaining how to do it. They learned it by being in the trenches and creating all those great sounds. I.M.H.O.- If you want to get better, keep playing, learn as much as your head can hold and then apply what you've learned in a live venue. Who cares if you make mistakes, believe me, you won't make them next time.

Dave Grafe · Post by **Dave Grafe** » 3 Dec 2011 11:32 am

Compounding the whole mess is the well-known, perhaps even universal fact that your own "real-time" assessment of how well you're playing usually has absolutely nothing to do with how well other people think you're playing or how well the gig goes.

I am reminded of a movie documentary I once saw in which a well-known guitarist commented on a show during which the whole band played so "terribly" that he and the bass player, both gentle souls by nature, got in a fight during a break and alomst threw each other down a flight of stairs. Months later they listened to the tapes of the same show and found it so electrifying and creative that they eventually mastered and released it as an entire live album.

Conversely, I can remember more than a few times that the band seemed to do no wrong, we all thought it was the greatest night ever, and then when the set was over and we stepped off the stage the wives and girlfriends were all over us with "what's wrong with you guys tonight, you can't seem to get it together!"

Jim Cohen · Post by **Jim Cohen** » 3 Dec 2011 12:15 pm

Yeah, it's a funny thing... once the adrenaline and endorphins kick in (or is it the beer?), we are often the in the worst position to judge our own playing in real time. Many times when I thought the band sounded terrific, I'd listen to a recording afterwards and... we sucked! What can I say? I'm just not a credible witness when I'm on stage. So best to fuggedaboudit and just shoot for the moon! If nothing else, people will appreciate your enthusiasm and wild abandon!

Bo Borland · Post by **Bo Borland** » 3 Dec 2011 12:28 pm

great thread !

Roger said,

To me the ultimate goal is to be able to play anything you can hear in your head

I would add....

..and play it in tune with great technique..etc..

I think you can practice your way into acceptable technique if you have someone to critique your early mistakes but I'm not so sure about ear training and tempo.

Mike Neer · Post by **Mike Neer** » 3 Dec 2011 1:36 pm

I believe that ears are really the guiding force in music. All music is essentially played by ear. Unfortunately, there are many people who don't have good ears for music. It's not so much talent, but ears.