|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Dec 11, 2015 10:35:56 GMT -6
One told me of a study showing maximum musical learning ability happens at age 16.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,934
|
Post by ericn on Dec 11, 2015 12:59:52 GMT -6
One told me of a study showing maximum musical learning ability happens at age 16. So your saying I'll never learn to play Guitar? Well the left hand with no thumb a permanently bent 2/3 finger and no sensation in 2 more might have something to do with that !
|
|
|
Post by mobeach on Dec 11, 2015 13:13:37 GMT -6
This is just some stupid word playing but did you notice "Hendrix" rhymes with "Kendrick"? Speaking of breakthrough talents in the '60s vs. the '10s. Hendrick Motorsports!
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Dec 11, 2015 14:11:43 GMT -6
I think he meant it's harder to learn after 16. I certainly learned an immense amount in my radio drama class while I was 16. My burning desire to work in a control room at that age is a lot of why I had the career I've had.
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Dec 11, 2015 14:45:49 GMT -6
I must have done thousands of gigs, like many of us here on this group.
Most of those gigs, are 4 hours long, and you play around 40- 50 songs...
Thats a lot of playing time over more than 25 years!!
I reckon I only got any good, after about 20 years of doing it... 8) slow learner obviously.
cheers
Wiz
|
|
|
Post by formatcyes on Dec 11, 2015 14:51:50 GMT -6
I think he meant it's harder to learn after 16. I certainly learned an immense amount in my radio drama class while I was 16. My burning desire to work in a control room at that age is a lot of why I had the career I've had. The latest studies say no. Cannot teach an old dog new trick's does not really apply. The problem is you need about 10,000 hours to get good at something as you get older you have less 10,000hours available. I took up drums about 2 years ago along with my nephew I am 43 he's 14 no question straight up i was better but I have been a muso for as long as I can remember. Now he has got really good BUT the drum stick's don't leave his hands he is tapping beats when doing other thing's it's his thing at the moment and you can tell. Me I play twice a week and while I can hold a beat I am not going to get any gig's playing drum's in this case it is simple the level of commitment. I have seen a older lady(50's) take up the piano in the same way my nephew did with the drum's 10 years on she is awsome and still practices 1 hour a day. It's not age but level of commitment. I train working dog's age is no impediment it really come's down to whether you get enough work back from the older dog to justify the training. B.T.W learning the drums has made a huge difference to my guitar playing so much so I think every aspiring musician should at least learn how to play some basic drum beats..
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Dec 11, 2015 15:29:26 GMT -6
I think he meant it's harder to learn after 16. I certainly learned an immense amount in my radio drama class while I was 16. My burning desire to work in a control room at that age is a lot of why I had the career I've had. The latest studies say no. Cannot teach an old dog new trick's does not really apply. The problem is you need about 10,000 hours to get good at something as you get older you have less 10,000hours available. I took up drums about 2 years ago along with my nephew I am 43 he's 14 no question straight up i was better but I have been a muso for as long as I can remember. Now he has got really good BUT the drum stick's don't leave his hands he is tapping beats when doing other thing's it's his thing at the moment and you can tell. Me I play twice a week and while I can hold a beat I am not going to get any gig's playing drum's in this case it is simple the level of commitment. I have seen a older lady(50's) take up the piano in the same way my nephew did with the drum's 10 years on she is awsome and still practices 1 hour a day. It's not age but level of commitment. I train working dog's age is no impediment it really come's down to whether you get enough work back from the older dog to justify the training. B.T.W learning the drums has made a huge difference to my guitar playing so much so I think every aspiring musician should at least learn how to play some basic drum beats.. I can totally relate to that. I have added bass, drums, and piano to my repertoire much more seriously in the past 2 or 3 years and they all seem to help each other out, I can generate new ideas on each instrument when I go back to one or the other. My guitar playing is the oldest thing, that seems to be somewhat refreshed by adding these other things. I would recommend spreading your instrumentation around to anyone at any age, even if only to an intermediate level. You never get bored that way.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,934
|
Post by ericn on Dec 11, 2015 15:55:09 GMT -6
One told me of a study showing maximum musical learning ability happens at age 16. In general and from my prospective of pretty much relearning every thing at 30 I think we are easier to teach under 16, but we are better equipped to learn what we desire to learn over 16. Not trying to get zen.
|
|
|
Post by mobeach on Dec 11, 2015 18:21:31 GMT -6
I taught myself Piano very quickly after being a Bassist for several years, I took to it naturally at around the age of 30. Knowing theory and being able to stretch definitely helped. If you can do a Cm9 on the Bass you can do it on the Piano.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2015 3:24:49 GMT -6
What an exciting thread. I think Bob is spot on with his comments. The thing that turns me down nowadays from playing in a band is the live playing situation (maybe it's the same in europe and US). You need Facebook clicks more than talent to get gigs. Pay for play. While this may have happened occasionally to promote bandslast century, today this is totally common on all levels. It's disgusting. Lots of younger musicians don't want to hear that it is a trap and that i never (!) played without getting any money, and if it was only for strings and travelling. (Exceptions were beneficial gigs or party gigs that were free or self-organized...) Those who pay or play for free ruin the situation for the others. Bands are compared to the youtube videos of insanely talented musicians all the time when playing live. This is a huge change in comparison to last century. And there are talented musicians in every era of mankind.... While it is harder to get live gigs for younger musisians and beginners, live gigging seems to be *the* income for professionals, because you can not earn enough to make a living from selling media. (With the exception of the top percent....) These trends have very negative influence on the development of musicians, i have lots of respect for musicians who make it despite of it. (But maybe they just have no choice - if you are a musician, you need to make music like to eat or drink or breathe, so you do however...)
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Dec 12, 2015 5:10:57 GMT -6
(But maybe they just have no choice - if you are a musician, you need to make music like to eat or drink or breathe, so you do however...) +1. Back before there were recordings you had a piano in the house and someone knew how to play it. And if you didn't, you went next store. The money was in Tin-pan alley. Popular music was played and enjoyed by the people who actually had to sing it order to hear it. The advent of professional popular musicians changed that paradigm - and in some ways for the worse. Most popular music is shit now because people are no longer musicians. Find your random typical music lover who knows the lyrics to a few songs and ask them to clap a steady beat for 20 counts or sing a melody in tune and they can't. It's not part of our culture to make music any more. People only listen to it, and worse, they listen to what the industry decides they want to listen to, based on lowest common denominator principles, which are pretty low because most people aren't musicians ..and the cycle continues. Yes, there will alway be bands and musicians who rise above the fray, but I think I proved my point in a previous thread where I posted the top 50 from 1975. I don't doubt I could do that for ANY year from 1950 to present and most of it is crap. Back in the "Golden Age" of recording you all speak of, quality recording was the bastion of the few. That is finally changing with the advent of the DAW etc. The irony is, because we know live in a culture of 'listeners' who have access to this technology, most music is beat machines and loops.
|
|
|
Post by mobeach on Dec 12, 2015 7:13:10 GMT -6
The thing that turns me down nowadays from playing in a band is the live playing situation (maybe it's the same in europe and US). You need Facebook clicks more than talent to get gigs. In my area (south east Massachusetts) you have to play what the youth wants to hear, which is all dance crap and this new genre where the singer talks rather than singing. So there's all these 50 + year old guys trying to impress kids. It's a joke. I'm trying to start up a dinner music project doing Sinatra and Sammy Davis Jr
|
|
|
Post by rocinante on Dec 12, 2015 10:57:09 GMT -6
I might have been more of a sponge at 16 (i had just gotten accepted to music school and left high school early to go) but i definitely didn't have the patience i did when i was in my early twenties and even more now. I could barely sit still back then but i was kind of a late bloomer and it would be years before things clicked (id eventually leave music school to hop freight trains and travel for the next 8 years) but when things did click i went from an alright musician to a pretty damn good one and was able to understand the whys of music as much as the whats. I also became more open minded (especially considering the arrogant elitest position i had before) although ill never love any laptop made music. I like the real McCoy too much.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Dec 12, 2015 11:36:56 GMT -6
There has always been plenty of crap but there used to also be lots more that wasn't than I see today.
The "few" who recorded were performers who had proven people would go out to see them and certainly some of it was crap but at least almost all could give a better performance on stage than their recordings. That's no longer true and there is a lot of lip syncing on stage while that was unheard of outside of some television appearances.
|
|
|
Post by porkyman on Dec 12, 2015 14:30:22 GMT -6
(But maybe they just have no choice - if you are a musician, you need to make music like to eat or drink or breathe, so you do however...) +1. Back before there were recordings you had a piano in the house and someone knew how to play it. And if you didn't, you went next store. The money was in Tin-pan alley. Popular music was played and enjoyed by the people who actually had to sing it order to hear it. The advent of professional popular musicians changed that paradigm - and in some ways for the worse. Most popular music is shit now because people are no longer musicians. Find your random typical music lover who knows the lyrics to a few songs and ask them to clap a steady beat for 20 counts or sing a melody in tune and they can't. It's not part of our culture to make music any more. People only listen to it, and worse, they listen to what the industry decides they want to listen to, based on lowest common denominator principles, which are pretty low because most people aren't musicians ..and the cycle continues. Yes, there will alway be bands and musicians who rise above the fray, but I think I proved my point in a previous thread where I posted the top 50 from 1975. I don't doubt I could do that for ANY year from 1950 to present and most of it is crap. Back in the "Golden Age" of recording you all speak of, quality recording was the bastion of the few. That is finally changing with the advent of the DAW etc. The irony is, because we know live in a culture of 'listeners' who have access to this technology, most music is beat machines and loops. ahhh. i see what youre saying. its the audience that arent musicians anymore. thats why theyre buying crap. they have no appreciation for musicianship because they have no understanding of what musicianship is. i think youve nailed it, and theres probably a direct correlation between the decline of popular music and the schools dropping music out of the curriculum. i know i had know appreciation for classical music until i studied it in college.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Dec 12, 2015 18:47:33 GMT -6
Young people aren't exposed to quality live music. They don't need to be musicians to tell the difference.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Dec 13, 2015 8:47:39 GMT -6
My 19 year old sis-in-law professes to be a huge music fan, but she only experiences it via youtube. She looks really confused when you ask if she wants to go to a show, no interest, doesn't see the point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2015 9:25:19 GMT -6
My 19 year old sis-in-law professes to be a huge music fan, but she only experiences it via youtube. She looks really confused when you ask if she wants to go to a show, no interest, doesn't see the point. Wow. She is not able to imagine the difference, and maybe the difference in every performance and beeing right there to get it? There are still young people with very high interest in music, handmade music, from ground up, under better preconditions than there were at my time at this age. I just got facebook friends with a humorous 17yrs. old girl who learns several instruments, is highly interested in classic rock of the 70s as in classical music, she just gets into piano playing, guitar and upright bass. Pretty impressing. Also only possible because instruments did become less expensive as at my time... But the disinterest in music, especially live music has something to do with the motivation we might have had with the popular music of our time and now. In my youth music was a tool for rebellion still, for identification (or the opposite!) with groups and subcultures. You needed to meet people in person to hang out with them. Now they communicate with SMS or Whatsapp and stare into their smartphones instead of talking to each other. And the worst thing about this is: This is what they learn from their parents, the second or 3rd TV/modern media raised and brainwashed generation. If they don't talk with each other or discuss what they just saw in the paper or the tv and instead silently and passively consume media and stare in their smartphones as well and don't show any interest in arts, music and going to shows, how could anyone make their kids any allegations. In the opposite, i sometimes wonder why it is not worse! That speaks for young people and their curiosity. I don't envy the teens and young adults that grow up now at all...
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Dec 13, 2015 10:57:34 GMT -6
My 19 year old sis-in-law professes to be a huge music fan, but she only experiences it via youtube. She looks really confused when you ask if she wants to go to a show, no interest, doesn't see the point. Now they communicate with SMS or Whatsapp and stare into their smartphones instead of talking to each other. And the worst thing about this is: This is what they learn from their parents, the second or 3rd TV/modern media raised and brainwashed generation. If they don't talk with each other or discuss what they just saw in the paper or the tv and instead silently and passively consume media and stare in their smartphones I had a guy come into my studio who was thinking about doing some recording. He played me his songs, which were Green Day clones . I said to him, "there's already a Green Day, why would you want to sound like them?" He told me he was hoping that the Google algorithm would help him when people Google "Green Day" , with the algorithm placing his band on the search page prompting Green Day fans to click on his video. That was his marketing strategy and he thought he would make money. I tried to tell him that it was a losing strategy, but I could tell he didn't quite believe me. It does not help that there are very few live bars/clubs in town, and no bands coming to town even though we have a 2,000 seat auditorium and a 10,000 seat basketball pavilion that were once booked weekly all year round.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2015 11:06:21 GMT -6
Wow. What a strategy. The worst thing is - i am not even sure if it could not really work out like this nowadays. I mean - i really think about if it is possible today to get known as a musician with SEO internet principles. That's creepy...
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Dec 13, 2015 11:35:04 GMT -6
I guess he doesn't realize you have to pay google for placement in that pecking order, and the old democratic internet is long gone.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Dec 13, 2015 12:31:49 GMT -6
This is just some stupid word playing but did you notice "Hendrix" rhymes with "Kendrick"? Speaking of breakthrough talents in the '60s vs. the '10s. SHAZBOT!! That moment when you realize the decade you were born in was 50 years ago!!
|
|
|
Post by formatcyes on Dec 13, 2015 13:44:55 GMT -6
My 19 year old sis-in-law professes to be a huge music fan, but she only experiences it via youtube. She looks really confused when you ask if she wants to go to a show, no interest, doesn't see the point. This is my experience to. Trying to run community fee events like music in the park, open mic's. The demographics are pity much under 10 over 30. Young children always look amazed at good live music something breaks them over about 10.
|
|