If I was to practice the piano (self-taught) 8 hours a day every day of the week, how soon would become a virtuoso?

They looked at violin players. The only talent they found was that the best had players the most hours. So called gifted musicans got famous because they already had played as many hours as most adults. The only thing training wont give you is perfekt pitch (which is not needed on piano) or creqtivity to compose.

Armstronglivs wrote:

muso, wrote:

He collaborated.

https://www.nature.com/articles/527298a

Plus his work, like any science and art, builds on what countless others have done before.

So that proves he wasn't a genius? Clueless.

It proves the idea that he worked alone to be unfounded. It also supports the notion that science comes about through collaboration with contemporaries and in building on the works of those that came before. Many of whom go unrecognised.

But I have a question for you:

What is a genius?

muso. wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

So that proves he wasn't a genius? Clueless.

It proves the idea that he worked alone to be unfounded. It also supports the notion that science comes about through collaboration with contemporaries and in building on the works of those that came before. Many of whom go unrecognised.

But I have a question for you:

What is a genius?

The point of the thread is not whether success is built on collaboration or individual effort but that hard work alone is sufficient to create exceptional skills - perhaps like those of a genius. It isnt.

Armstronglivs wrote:

muso. wrote:

It proves the idea that he worked alone to be unfounded. It also supports the notion that science comes about through collaboration with contemporaries and in building on the works of those that came before. Many of whom go unrecognised.

But I have a question for you:

What is a genius?

The point of the thread is not whether success is built on collaboration or individual effort but that hard work alone is sufficient to create exceptional skills - perhaps like those of a genius. It isnt.

I agree it isn’t. There’s also a lot luck involved among other factors. On the musician’s side as BILL SLOWDER earlier pointed out: ‘The group performance hours are also not optional. They are an essential part of developing as a musician.’ Non- collaboration is not an option even to build basic let alone exceptional skills.

You mentioned genius again but you didn’t answer my question. What is a genius?

SLOWSKY

muso: wrote:

What is a genius?

Someone with an amazing ability.

muso: wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

The point of the thread is not whether success is built on collaboration or individual effort but that hard work alone is sufficient to create exceptional skills - perhaps like those of a genius. It isnt.

I agree it isn’t. There’s also a lot luck involved among other factors. On the musician’s side as BILL SLOWDER earlier pointed out: ‘The group performance hours are also not optional. They are an essential part of developing as a musician.’ Non- collaboration is not an option even to build basic let alone exceptional skills.

You mentioned genius again but you didn’t answer my question. What is a genius?

Genius is being able to reach further than others have and sometimes further than others have conceived. That was Newton. That was Einstein. In whatever field it is encountered it shows that those who demonstrate it have made an achievement uniquely their own, even if it has been undertaken in concert with others - as the very best concert pianist literally shows when performing with an orchestra.

‘uniquely their own’ despite being a team effort?

Ok, so the issue is with individuals being credited with much more than they were capable of. Hence the premise of the OP, that someone could work away at something alone for years on end and actually get somewhere. If they just put the hours in. I mean, I guess this is a running site afterall.

The other criteria you’re describing is a ‘uniqueness’ or ‘originality threshold’.

If met the exceptional person (who more often then not worked with others building on a pre-existing body of knowledge) earns the title of genius.

All great but who decides who qualifies?

Back on topic. Quantity of hours is the wrong metric. Quality is more important. Many professionals say they spend as much or more time mentally playing than physically playing.

They envision a difficult piece, or section, and mentally prepare for how to properly execute when playing . They also spend more time listening to recordings of their practice to perfect it.

I have played for a few years and can impress people with little or no music background. A trained ear will notice my tempo issues and inconsistencies in my dynamics. To them I am fingernails on a chalkboard.

You are wrong to assume that all great accomplishment must be a team effort, or that where it is collaborative it isnt possible to determine the greatness of an individual contribution to that effort. Those who know what it takes will know the value of what has been achieved.

But all that is a diversion: what this thread presupposes is that hard work alone will produce brilliance. It won't. Not without giftedness.

“By availing myself of previous knowledge and working out theories already formulated I did nothing but follow in the footsteps of Howe, Watt, Edison, Stephenson and many other illustrious inventors. I doubt very much whether there has ever been a case of a useful invention in which all the theory, all the practical applications and all the apparatus were the work of one man”

Marconi

Or to put it another way, not without luck, persistence, opportunity, information, a good teacher, a thriving community, a ready market, a functioning society etc. All the things that make ideas of natural talent virtually meaningless.

And of no use to the OP.

In the world of competitive gaming (counterstrike, lol, rocket league) a lot of guys play 8 hours a day and are utter trash, also, a lot of guys play 8 hours a week at a very high level, you either have it or you don't.

Never. I don't think it is something you can master if you pick it up in your adult life. As a former classically-trained concert pianist, not playing for 5 years has made my wrists stiff and weak - adults who try to learn can become OK but never very good.

stephen santiagoog wrote:

I am talking about practicing 8 hours a day and not one day off a week. How long would a newbie like me take to become good, very good and ultimately a concert pianist?

1) Is "concert pianist" really what your goal is? I mean seriously, do you enjoy classical piano music more than other forms?

2) Can you sing?

3) I was classically trained on piano and stopped playing for the most part during high school because I didn't like classical music. Fortunately for me, I started jamming with a guitarist after college, and he taught me a ton of things that classically trained musicians don't typically learn. I then took some blues lessons from a great Detroit blues keyboard player and got even better.

My advice is to learn to play the kind of music you like. If it's really classical music, more power to you, but is it really?

FiJa wrote:

The only thing training wont give you is perfekt pitch (which is not needed on piano) or creqtivity to compose.

Well, that's not true. There are different levels of dexterity, and no amount of playing can get everyone to the top level. The main component though is the brain...beyond just perfect pitch (or perfect spelling) and creativity. Takes more than just practice to be a virtuoso or even just a great piano player.

Only those without talent consider it meaningless. No amount of the other criteria you list will create a concert pianist - or any kind of virtuoso - without it. You might practice 10,000 hours but you will never be Daniel Barenboim without his gift, or you might put in 10,000 hours on the tennis court and you will never be Roger Federer. The performer genius stands out from those without their talent more than any other, because their genius is nothing if it is not displayed.

As far as Marconi is concerned, in your quote above, there are no "illustrious inventors" that he might recognize if they had not done what others hadn't done before them. Just as he did. Genius is not lesser because it builds on what went before; what it does is take us where we have have never been before.

I learn songs on the HD Piano website and just memorize how to play them. I'd say it takes about 20 hours to learn a song, so maybe three days if you're playing 8 hours each day. As you learn songs, you'll have to still take some time to practice the ones you already know. So I'll say you learn one song per week and then keep practicing the ones you already learned. For you to play for an hour straight you'd need to know 12-15 songs. So I'd say 4 months of practicing 8 hours every week day you'd be able to play pretty well for a group of people for near an hour long duration. Of course this wouldn't be any of your own music, to create your own music you'd have to actually know a lot about what you're doing, probably years and years.

Here's a real answer wrote:

I learn songs on the HD Piano website and just memorize how to play them. I'd say it takes about 20 hours to learn a song, so maybe three days if you're playing 8 hours each day. As you learn songs, you'll have to still take some time to practice the ones you already know. So I'll say you learn one song per week and then keep practicing the ones you already learned. For you to play for an hour straight you'd need to know 12-15 songs. So I'd say 4 months of practicing 8 hours every week day you'd be able to play pretty well for a group of people for near an hour long duration. Of course this wouldn't be any of your own music, to create your own music you'd have to actually know a lot about what you're doing, probably years and years.

You've described quite well how to become mediocre. You missed the concert pianist part.

runnerchef wrote:

Never. I don't think it is something you can master if you pick it up in your adult life. As a former classically-trained concert pianist, not playing for 5 years has made my wrists stiff and weak - adults who try to learn can become OK but never very good.

At the end of the day playing piano is a brain learner. You can learn that at all ages, as the brain is very flexible (assuming you are healthy and willing).

However, there are age related issues involved, like for a runner, which makes it difficult to get world class if you start playing piano as an adult.

Most of the piano skill is just hard work. Listen to Johann Sebastian Bach, one of most famous composer world wide. He said 'its all hard work' ...