How many teachers?

I don't agree with you that skills are easy. Skills are difficult. Lots of people think they can sing, because everybody has the skill to sing.

That is until they actually start singing. :shock:

There is a lot more to singing than just opening your mouth.

And guitar is more than skill anyway. It is also knowledge. It will only benefit you to learn to read music and understand theory. A teacher is invaluable for that. How can you teach yourself something you do not know?

I will have to agree with Wes and Dagwood, there is more to guitar playing than learning the "skill". It takes more than just practising a skill. Yes eventually you'll get somewhat good at it maybe even very good, but you'd never be as good as those who have a natural talent/ability and an ear for music.

I'm certainly not trying to dog you or anyone else.

For example, I'm an art school grad. Back in school their were those who put a lot of time and effort into learning how to design and no matter how hard they worked/practiced at it, they just were not getting it. Anybody can hold a paintbrush and put color on a canvas but that doesn't make them an artist.

How's this relate to guitar? Eric Clapton is gifted, Jimi Hendrix is gifted, Johhny Cash is gifted. These guys are way more than just skill...

Okay, I'll get off my soapbox...

The problem is, for every player you say is 'gifted' there will be someone that disagrees with you. Also, some of these 'gifted' people were practice freaks.

I personally, have never been impressed by Clapton or Hendrix. I've never thought they were gifted and nothing anyone says will really change that. Likewise, I think Kurt Cobain was gifted, but a lot of people would disagree.

I don't believe in the impossible. And if I were to tell myself "I'll never be as good as <insert guitarist>" then I would be limiting myself.

ricola,

i totally disagree with you, she can be as good as she wants to be, thats up to her,
nobody is born a guitar god, and an ear for music is developed, not either you have it or you don't.

owa,

way to go girl, you have what it takes to be a great guitar player, and thats determination, and you definatley have it, keep it up, you are on your way 8)

Thanks rocker. You make a good point. Ear for music does get better with time.

Ricola, I do see what your saying. Knowing how to form such and such of chord isn't enough. But just like there is more to guitar than skill, there is also more to music than just guitar. Hence why I'm also looking into lessons for voice. I also want to be good at songwriting, which is something that can be applied to any instrument.

ricola,

i totally disagree with you, she can be as good as she wants to be, thats up to her,
nobody is born a guitar god, and an ear for music is developed, not either you have it or you don't.

owa,

way to go girl, you have what it takes to be a great guitar player, and thats determination, and you definatley have it, keep it up, you are on your way 8)

rocker, I was never implying that OWA was not good or could be good. My point was that it takes more than "skill" to become a musician. With that said, OWA, my apologies if I offended you. I absolutey wish you the best. :)

maybe i'm getting into something here that I shouldn't but i think you (ricola) have missed the point. yes, it takes more than skill to become a musician but the thing that it takes is not natural talent. i don't belive in natural talent. i figured that out a long time ago in art school when i studied painting. musicianship takes a lot of knowledge as well as experience. you also have to be prepared take a lot of risks, and big risks to, to go out into the world with your guitar. i live in new york city and there's a lot of talented people here in all areas of the arts. how come they're not all known? some aren't interested, some don't get the break they need, some are held back by financial concerns or health concerns, some make poor decisions, some lose interest when they find out how hard it is, the list goes on and on.

pearlthecat, well said 8)

Well, pearl, I looked back through my posts and I dont see how I could have "missed the point". Never in my post did I say that it takes Only natural talent. My "point" was that it takes more than just skill to become a great musician. It takes perserverance, hard work, lots of practice, and natural ability to put it all together.

I will respectfully disagree with you. I DO believe in natural talent. Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron had "a little" a natural talent...

Again, my apologies to OWA for getting off topic.

Shying away from the current debate (cause I agree somewhat with both), I would also like to add that you'd never find out if you have any of that natural talent without first pursuing the basics and picking up the guitar, getting the teacher (or not if you choose that route), and banging away at a few chords. My guess is that Hendrix, Cash, or Clapton had no idea whether they had a natural talent or not until they first got through the same struggles we all face.

Rock on OWA

Cant wait to hear how the lessons go. I LOVED voice lessons. Lots of fun for me.

Geoo

Well said Geoo!

I just started lessons OWA and I'm loving them. They are really making a difference.

Best of Luck!
Rock on OWA
I'll second that! 8)

Hi - jumping into this one late but I agree with both.

BUT - I can't believe that some of you would suggest that there is no such thing as natural talent. That simply amazes me. Only the people with natural talent say that (kidding!).

Seriously, if you took 10 distinctly different people of the same age and gave them a guitar, and lessons, and a practice schedule in 6 months you would have 10 very different levels of playing ability. Some can be attributed focus and attention the detail, but the rest is the natural ability of some of the 10 taking over. Some people just "get it" right off the bat, while others have to work at it.

Look at life... how many people are just "good" at math, while others are better in the arts? Naturally. I don't disagree that hard work can close the gap - or maybe even remove it - but there are definitely some people who are given a head start naturally.

Hey, I'll never be able to throw a baseball 90 miles per hour. It won't happen. No matter how long I practice, how many excercises I do, how much I workout in the gym, I'll NEVER be able to throw the ball that hard. Same thing goes for any physical activity. I'll NEVER be able to run a 4.4. NEVER. It just isn't possible. If I practice real hard I might get faster, and I might get close, but it will NEVER happen. Just a fact of life.

What do you think guitar playing is? Well, it is a mental excercise, it is a spiritual experience, and it is a PHYSICAL manipulation of your fingers and hands and wrists. Some people have better control over their physical extremities. Just a fact of life.

This is not to say that I don't think that we all can be as good as we can be... we can. If we all practice hard we can all get better. But there is a ceiling to how good you can get. I know the "politically correct" mantra is "you can do it"... but the fact remains that we all have limitations. This is not to say that a normal person cannot be a proficient guitar player - we all can be - but to get to the "gifted" level means that you need to be gifted...

OWA - love the thread. Hope you continue. I don't agree with your thoughts on the "gifted guitarists" though. And not in the way you would expect. I don't think Clapton or Hendrix were any more gifted than Cobain. In fact, I think all three are by-products of the "right time and place" phenomenon. None of them are technically any better than other guitar players. Cobain had a gift for songwriting and rhythm. Clapton helped bring blues to the masses at the exact right time. Hendrix changed the way we thought of guitar playing. He wasn't better than other contemporaries (in my mind) - he just played differently and brought a spirituality (or drug haze) to the music. Plus, he and Cobain died young so who knows - maybe they didn't even have more quality music in them? We all assume that they would have continued to produce great music... maybe they were tapped out?? I mean the Beatles churned out 100 amazing songs in 10 years, and I can count on ONE hand the amount of good songs from Paul McCartney in the last 35 years.

Ok... with that the Dali bows his head, steps down from the podium, and lightly treads away...

Dali Lima, well put...

Interesting read.

Personally, I don't think techniques and skills are difficult to learn. They are just practice and dedication. I can (and have) taught kids under 10 to do anything on the guitar that I can do. The difference between them and me is not in terms of being able to perform the individual skills, but in having the experience, training, and developed musical sense to use them in combinations that are musically pleasing.

Experience comes with time, you can't short-change that. Hendrix was as good as he was in large part because he spent so much time practicing.

"Natural talent" exists, but I don't think it's some mystical unexplainable thing. Some things come easier to some people than others. But without training and experience all the natural talent in the world won't matter one bit.

When ricola says that "there is more to guitar playing than learning the "skill". It takes more than just practising a skill. Yes eventually you'll get somewhat good at it maybe even very good, but you'd never be as good as those who have a natural talent/ability and an ear for music." I think he's just wrong.

Nothing Hendrix ever played is beyond my capability. I can faithfully reproduce anything he played, even his mistakes, at tempo reliably time after time.

Nor do I fail to understand why, from a musical point of view, he did what he did.

I have met guitarists who are incredible musicians and who are virtually unknown outside of their small select communities. I've also met guitarists who are world famous for their music who I was completely unimpressed with as musicians.

I'm not saying that Hendrix was just another hack, he was a very talented guy. But he wasn't some God decended from on high to grace us with his presence either. He was just the hard working talented musician of his day whose style and ideas caught the public attention.

He got that way by hard work and dedication.

Anyone who practicies 12 hours a day with purpose and concentrated intent will get the same results in terms of playing ability.

But only the roll of the dice gets you the record sale numbers.

When ricola says that "there is more to guitar playing than learning the "skill". It takes more than just practising a skill. Yes eventually you'll get somewhat good at it maybe even very good, but you'd never be as good as those who have a natural talent/ability and an ear for music." I think he's just wrong.

Okay, so if I'm a pitcher for a baseball team and I practice pitching everyday, 12 hours a day, eat, sleep, breathe baseball, read eveything I can, strength train, etc... I'll be able to throw just as fast as Nolan Ryan, whose fastball was "officially" clocked by the Guinness Book of World Records at 100.9 miles per hour in a game played on August 20, 1974. Uh no....That would be more than skill, that would be natural ability and talent. I don't care how hard I worked at the skill of throwing a baseball, I would never be able to throw a ball 100.9MPH.

and if you still disagree then we can just agree to disagree...

Your analogy is flawed.

Throwing fast isn't the mark of being a great pitcher. It CAN be a component of being a great pitcher, but it does not define pitching.

Any particular skill or technique alone isn't the mark of being a great musician. Some people will be better at some aspects of musicianship than others, that is true of everyone. Being a great guitarist isn't about mastering every skill, but abo

Musculature and skeletal physiology is genetic and has nothing to do with talent.

You can work as hard as you want at basketball, but if you aren't the same size as Shaq, you'll have a hard time trying to play the game just the exact same way he does.

But, if you work that hard, there's no reason you can't be just as effective a player. But if you're 5'8" you won't be playing center because you aren't 6'8". But that has nothing to do with your talent as a ball player.

But being a talented guitarist isn't a matter of physiology, just as Django.