This is an interesting topic in relation to music. You used a lot of sports-related analogies. That’s only related to music PERFORMANCE. The most SKILLED musician doesn’t necessarily have good musical taste for composition. I have to assume then that you’re strictly referring to “talent” as it relates to musical performance. Often, people who are looking for success in music are not looking for the guy on a stage in a tuxedo playing other composers’ music. I.e. performance. Many do, but probably not most. Most are probably looking for success in the creative/composition space (Purely speculation on my part). That success, as typically defined, wrong or right, by popularity, is a function of taste. You can learn how to make something that others will enjoy, but you can’t force your own taste through practice.
Love this comment because I agree and disagree. This is definitely a gap in the video that you've brought to light. I agree that the most musical gifted performers aren't necessarily the best musical creatives. When I was in college the classical players that could sight read anything on the first pass were generally useless in a jazz improve. (I was neither, lol). I like the sports/exercise analogy because everybody understands that if you lift weight, then you get stronger. If you run, then you can run longer. But I don't think the concept is limited to "performance" in the way that you're framing it. I'd for sure say that the way a great songwriter comes up with lyrics or melody, or an engineer makes an EQ or compression choice is as much a metric of performance as speed and intonation on a violin is. Your brain is still firing some kind of nerve impulse, it's still building the myelin for that skill. Even if it's a thought skill. What about traditional writers? That's purely a thought exercise, connecting ideas and creativity. I hope what people take away from the video is that if you put the work in you'll make progress. You can't quit because your peers are better than you can currently imagine being. Re: your other comment about "god given talent"... When you mention "success defined by popularity, being a function of taste." I think it's interesting to tie those together. Is it somebody's taste plus their practice that combine to look like "god given talent"? Taste obviously plays a huge role in creative fields and that would be developed from your experiences and influences over time. Maybe when somebody who has great taste in a particular field and becomes a high performer in that same space then they do have "god given talent." Sorry for the crazy long response, but you got my brain going. haha. Thanks for the conversation!
I do think the quality of practice is pretty much overlooked in this discussion. It supposes that "talent" is the only variable that would influence how fast you progress and how far you get. Long story short: I do believe that talent exists, but I have tried to prove this assumption without succes. The possibility that "talent" as most people understand it does not exist is real. What is definitely real from my personal experience is that people on average grossly overestimate the influence of talent and grossly underestimate the effect of practice, and that is why I really support the basic message of your video. Thanks.
There is such a thing as built in talent. Then there are people who practice with that talent to become skilled. You can teach me how to play the guitar and teach me the notes. What you cannot teach me is how to be musical. I hate to burst your bubble but saying someone is talented is not a defeatist attitude. People are not robots their brains are wired differently. To deny that peoples brains are wired differently is to deny the human experience.
A maxim I picked up in my college drawing and painting classes: "Creativity has to find you working". You've got to be doing the thing, going through the motions, so that when inspiration hits, you've already got the tools in your hands... you're in your work space and ready to apply that inspiration.
You are so right about the practice makes perfect ...my wife got Alzheimer's so I had to quit everything to take care of her for 8 years... to keep me from going crazy I started singing again ...at my home studio only...now I can sing literally anyone... my my vocal range absolutely exploded after 6 years... People have heard me and they think I'm lip-syncing it is so accurate the phrasing everything it's a it's a shame cuz I'm 66 years old and I can literally whoop anybody right now... Over 150 different artists...plus my own... My first comeback audition made me come back the next morning because they thought I cheated it was too good...😂😂😂😂😂 They apologized and up to my pay right on the he spot... I want to see how far I can take this now...🎉
It highly depends on the type of musician that you want to be. If you want to be good at reading music and playing what other people wrote, this makes sense. If you want to improvise and create, feeling the notes and flowing while stretching your brain to create something of your emotions and state of mind is highly useful. Learning what other people have done can open up an instrument to new possibilities, however, it is using those ideas to flow into something new that is key.
This is a beautiful video. I hate when people say 'oh they're a natural talent' because if natural talent were that potent, children would be winning every major competition, in any field, across the globe. That's simply not the case, but I can't shake the feeling that there is maybe something there. Future snooker world champion John Parrott started hitting 50+ breaks after a few weeks where adults could maybe never reach that level. Future darts world champion Adrian Lewis was hitting 180s and winning tournaments after only playing around 8 months, again, something most would take years to achieve, if ever. It's like these top pros have a moment - like when the natural magical potential reveals itself in a mage or sorceress in the Witcher universe - a moment where it becomes clear they're better than everybody else or they've got something other people would only dream of. Does the person who's played an instrument for 5 years and only gotten marginally better really have the potential to win international competitions? We see the special survivors - the cream that rises - but most potential reaches a ceiling just out of view of the masses, that eventually crumbles back into obscurity. In my heart, I do believe the majority of us can do it. If you're willing to give it everything. To move to the 'hotbeds' or forge your own. To push your family and friends away and replace them with the greatest talents the world has to offer... The people we see at the top have made those kinds of sacrifices. The kind most people aren't willing to make.
This was great to hear, even if I already went into piecing this out by myself over the years. The part I most needed to hear was the last one. I thought I was missing a mentor, but if we fragment that role between the masters on the internet for insight and guidance and your peer group for engagement and feedback we should be pretty much set. Great video!
The best part is those peer groups don't even have to bee in your own town anymore. I'm part of a couple masterminds with people all over the world. The internet has really changed learning and growth so much over the last 5 years. Glad you enjoyed the video. Thanks for watching!
It's gotten to the point when someone says "but before we get into that", or something, I start going negative thinking a commercial is coming. Thanks for not doing that.
Its quite clear that not everybody has the capacity to excell or become equal to peers. I have found this to be universally agreed upon by tutors all over. Plus the science backs it up.
@@johannalvarsson9299 Without posting links, Hambrick et al showed only a modest correlation between deliberate practice and skill aquisition. Plus its just blatantly obvious that some people are just naturally gifted and progress in ways which are impossible for others. I routinely spend hundreds of hours to learn what gifted peers learn in a few minutes.
@@johannalvarsson9299 Hambrick et al. Yes talent has a very significant genetic component, plus early life experience plays a big role. Not much can be done in adulthood to develop talent.
I'm going to check this out. Thanks for sharing. I found Dan's book to be inspiring in "get to work" kind of way. I hoped to for this video to come off in that way. My ultimate goal is to inspire people to start their creative endeavors and to not feel like they can never compete. There are definitely people with deeper understanding of neuroscience, like yourself and a few others in the comments. I appreciate the comments and the added value for anybody willing to read them.
I don't think I can convince younger self to climb the mountains I've climbed in terms of mastering skills, they just seem impossible from that perspective but so easy from where I am now. The biggest roadblock is the fear of the unknown. I now approach that fear the same way. Everyone is human, and humans master this skill all the time. Background: I am a hobby guitarist of 20 years, my dayjob is Automations Engineer (working more with AI lately) Feedback: I almost skipped watching this based on the intro / thumbnail. But once I realized there was neuroscience involved I knew it was going to be helpful.
If you believe a lack of “god given talent” or luck will prevent you from achieving something, then you’re wrong. If you think they don’t play a role, then you’re also wrong.
Nice! The book is really well done. Lot’s of the science angle, but plenty of interesting stories to support and keep you into it. Thanks for watching!
Agree! Rick did a great job with that book, he managed to make the ideas pretty applicable to people even outside obviously creative fields. Thanks for watching!
Just simply wholly and completely absolutely fundamentally wrong. If the basic fabric, the physical infrastructure is 'wrong' then there's scant hope of the function being 'right'. Viz. if someone is born with, say, PMD and the PLP1 mutations disrupt the normal development of myelinating oligodendrocytes, leading to dysmyelination then the individual will almost certainly end up with severe learning disabilities. No amount of self-help books is going to correct the mutation and thus potential for learning. Yes, this is an extreme example, but it's there is illustrate the point that not everyone is born equal and no amount of "hard work" can change their potential to attain a specific level in a given skill. To grfit otherwise is disingenuous at best and down right immoral at worst.
@@Jerry-j1i Well if you say being untalented and being disabled mean exactly the same then yes. It really depends on how you define talent and what you count as being a part of it. Motivation and the quality of practice play a big role for example. Are those included? Second thing: The topic is not really about "talent" itself, but is adressing that many things that people usually think are only aquireable by talent are actually learnable. Many of these skills take years to learn. If person A is practising something 8 hours a day for 10 years, they will outperform a more talented person B that only put in 2 hours every weekend for 10 years. Especially when you start out with something, it is extremely difficult to judge what you can learn and where your limits are. That is why I think that the basic message of this video is useful.
Good video! Subscribed. You just showed up in my suggestions. I'm a beginner, but I'm practicing every day. I'm 35 years old, and through life experience, I've learned that practice and repetition is the foundation of any skill. And that consistency is more important than intensity.
Glad you enjoyed! I like the science backed approach to explaining that practice makes you better. I think it helps people throw out the idea that some is better than them because they were “naturally talented” Thanks for the sub!
![DDG & G Herbo - Nosey [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/I9Ra0Zc2NlQ/mqdefault.jpg)
This is an interesting topic in relation to music. You used a lot of sports-related analogies. That’s only related to music PERFORMANCE. The most SKILLED musician doesn’t necessarily have good musical taste for composition. I have to assume then that you’re strictly referring to “talent” as it relates to musical performance.
Often, people who are looking for success in music are not looking for the guy on a stage in a tuxedo playing other composers’ music. I.e. performance. Many do, but probably not most. Most are probably looking for success in the creative/composition space (Purely speculation on my part). That success, as typically defined, wrong or right, by popularity, is a function of taste. You can learn how to make something that others will enjoy, but you can’t force your own taste through practice.
Love this comment because I agree and disagree. This is definitely a gap in the video that you've brought to light.
I agree that the most musical gifted performers aren't necessarily the best musical creatives. When I was in college the classical players that could sight read anything on the first pass were generally useless in a jazz improve. (I was neither, lol).
I like the sports/exercise analogy because everybody understands that if you lift weight, then you get stronger. If you run, then you can run longer. But I don't think the concept is limited to "performance" in the way that you're framing it. I'd for sure say that the way a great songwriter comes up with lyrics or melody, or an engineer makes an EQ or compression choice is as much a metric of performance as speed and intonation on a violin is. Your brain is still firing some kind of nerve impulse, it's still building the myelin for that skill. Even if it's a thought skill. What about traditional writers? That's purely a thought exercise, connecting ideas and creativity.
I hope what people take away from the video is that if you put the work in you'll make progress. You can't quit because your peers are better than you can currently imagine being.
Re: your other comment about "god given talent"... When you mention "success defined by popularity, being a function of taste." I think it's interesting to tie those together. Is it somebody's taste plus their practice that combine to look like "god given talent"? Taste obviously plays a huge role in creative fields and that would be developed from your experiences and influences over time. Maybe when somebody who has great taste in a particular field and becomes a high performer in that same space then they do have "god given talent."
Sorry for the crazy long response, but you got my brain going. haha. Thanks for the conversation!
I do think the quality of practice is pretty much overlooked in this discussion. It supposes that "talent" is the only variable that would influence how fast you progress and how far you get. Long story short: I do believe that talent exists, but I have tried to prove this assumption without succes. The possibility that "talent" as most people understand it does not exist is real.
What is definitely real from my personal experience is that people on average grossly overestimate the influence of talent and grossly underestimate the effect of practice, and that is why I really support the basic message of your video. Thanks.
There is such a thing as built in talent. Then there are people who practice with that talent to become skilled. You can teach me how to play the guitar and teach me the notes. What you cannot teach me is how to be musical. I hate to burst your bubble but saying someone is talented is not a defeatist attitude. People are not robots their brains are wired differently. To deny that peoples brains are wired differently is to deny the human experience.
A maxim I picked up in my college drawing and painting classes: "Creativity has to find you working". You've got to be doing the thing, going through the motions, so that when inspiration hits, you've already got the tools in your hands... you're in your work space and ready to apply that inspiration.
I agree! Total "War of Art" vibes!
You are so right about the practice makes perfect ...my wife got Alzheimer's so I had to quit everything to take care of her for 8 years... to keep me from going crazy I started singing again ...at my home studio only...now I can sing literally anyone... my my vocal range absolutely exploded after 6 years... People have heard me and they think I'm lip-syncing it is so accurate the phrasing everything it's a it's a shame cuz I'm 66 years old and I can literally whoop anybody right now... Over 150 different artists...plus my own... My first comeback audition made me come back the next morning because they thought I cheated it was too good...😂😂😂😂😂 They apologized and up to my pay right on the he spot... I want to see how far I can take this now...🎉
It highly depends on the type of musician that you want to be. If you want to be good at reading music and playing what other people wrote, this makes sense. If you want to improvise and create, feeling the notes and flowing while stretching your brain to create something of your emotions and state of mind is highly useful. Learning what other people have done can open up an instrument to new possibilities, however, it is using those ideas to flow into something new that is key.
This is a beautiful video. I hate when people say 'oh they're a natural talent' because if natural talent were that potent, children would be winning every major competition, in any field, across the globe.
That's simply not the case, but I can't shake the feeling that there is maybe something there. Future snooker world champion John Parrott started hitting 50+ breaks after a few weeks where adults could maybe never reach that level. Future darts world champion Adrian Lewis was hitting 180s and winning tournaments after only playing around 8 months, again, something most would take years to achieve, if ever.
It's like these top pros have a moment - like when the natural magical potential reveals itself in a mage or sorceress in the Witcher universe - a moment where it becomes clear they're better than everybody else or they've got something other people would only dream of.
Does the person who's played an instrument for 5 years and only gotten marginally better really have the potential to win international competitions? We see the special survivors - the cream that rises - but most potential reaches a ceiling just out of view of the masses, that eventually crumbles back into obscurity.
In my heart, I do believe the majority of us can do it. If you're willing to give it everything. To move to the 'hotbeds' or forge your own. To push your family and friends away and replace them with the greatest talents the world has to offer... The people we see at the top have made those kinds of sacrifices. The kind most people aren't willing to make.
This was great to hear, even if I already went into piecing this out by myself over the years. The part I most needed to hear was the last one. I thought I was missing a mentor, but if we fragment that role between the masters on the internet for insight and guidance and your peer group for engagement and feedback we should be pretty much set. Great video!
The best part is those peer groups don't even have to bee in your own town anymore. I'm part of a couple masterminds with people all over the world. The internet has really changed learning and growth so much over the last 5 years.
Glad you enjoyed the video. Thanks for watching!
It's gotten to the point when someone says "but before we get into that", or something, I start going negative thinking a commercial is coming.
Thanks for not doing that.
haha! Luckily there wasn't a RUclips ad break there.
Its quite clear that not everybody has the capacity to excell or become equal to peers. I have found this to be universally agreed upon by tutors all over. Plus the science backs it up.
Can you link some studies?
@@johannalvarsson9299 Without posting links, Hambrick et al showed only a modest correlation between deliberate practice and skill aquisition. Plus its just blatantly obvious that some people are just naturally gifted and progress in ways which are impossible for others. I routinely spend hundreds of hours to learn what gifted peers learn in a few minutes.
@@johannalvarsson9299 Hambrick et al. Yes talent has a very significant genetic component, plus early life experience plays a big role. Not much can be done in adulthood to develop talent.
I'm going to check this out. Thanks for sharing.
I found Dan's book to be inspiring in "get to work" kind of way. I hoped to for this video to come off in that way. My ultimate goal is to inspire people to start their creative endeavors and to not feel like they can never compete.
There are definitely people with deeper understanding of neuroscience, like yourself and a few others in the comments. I appreciate the comments and the added value for anybody willing to read them.
I didn't find this video. It found me.
What a surprisingly deep and educational video.
Really appreciate you brother!
I don't think I can convince younger self to climb the mountains I've climbed in terms of mastering skills, they just seem impossible from that perspective but so easy from where I am now.
The biggest roadblock is the fear of the unknown. I now approach that fear the same way. Everyone is human, and humans master this skill all the time.
Background: I am a hobby guitarist of 20 years, my dayjob is Automations Engineer (working more with AI lately)
Feedback: I almost skipped watching this based on the intro / thumbnail. But once I realized there was neuroscience involved I knew it was going to be helpful.
Fear of the unknown holds so many people back. I'm glad it didn't hold you back from watching the video 😂. I appreciate the feedback!
Thanks Travis!
This one’s a bit of an extension to the intro from your first time on the podcast back in the day!
If you believe a lack of “god given talent” or luck will prevent you from achieving something, then you’re wrong. If you think they don’t play a role, then you’re also wrong.
Boost
Wrong
Wunderbar! An interesting topic. I just added Coyle's book to my reading list.
Nice! The book is really well done. Lot’s of the science angle, but plenty of interesting stories to support and keep you into it.
Thanks for watching!
nice vid, The Creative Act by Rick Rubin is great book to help find ignition
Agree! Rick did a great job with that book, he managed to make the ideas pretty applicable to people even outside obviously creative fields.
Thanks for watching!
Just simply wholly and completely absolutely fundamentally wrong. If the basic fabric, the physical infrastructure is 'wrong' then there's scant hope of the function being 'right'. Viz. if someone is born with, say, PMD and the PLP1 mutations disrupt the normal development of myelinating oligodendrocytes, leading to dysmyelination then the individual will almost certainly end up with severe learning disabilities. No amount of self-help books is going to correct the mutation and thus potential for learning. Yes, this is an extreme example, but it's there is illustrate the point that not everyone is born equal and no amount of "hard work" can change their potential to attain a specific level in a given skill. To grfit otherwise is disingenuous at best and down right immoral at worst.
Man you are so incredibly gifted that you understand what oligodentrocyte means, I cant believe it...
Yeah, and he's correct about the different natural abilities
@@Jerry-j1i Well if you say being untalented and being disabled mean exactly the same then yes. It really depends on how you define talent and what you count as being a part of it. Motivation and the quality of practice play a big role for example. Are those included?
Second thing: The topic is not really about "talent" itself, but is adressing that many things that people usually think are only aquireable by talent are actually learnable. Many of these skills take years to learn.
If person A is practising something 8 hours a day for 10 years, they will outperform a more talented person B that only put in 2 hours every weekend for 10 years. Especially when you start out with something, it is extremely difficult to judge what you can learn and where your limits are. That is why I think that the basic message of this video is useful.
lies
Good video! Subscribed. You just showed up in my suggestions.
I'm a beginner, but I'm practicing every day. I'm 35 years old, and through life experience, I've learned that practice and repetition is the foundation of any skill. And that consistency is more important than intensity.
Glad you enjoyed! I like the science backed approach to explaining that practice makes you better. I think it helps people throw out the idea that some is better than them because they were “naturally talented”
Thanks for the sub!
Algorithmic boost comment.
🫡