Comments on: Too Much Practice!? http://www.musicteachershelper.com/blog/too-much-practice/ Tips and Resources for Private Music Teachers and Performers everywhere! Thu, 02 Feb 2012 22:26:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: David Motto http://www.musicteachershelper.com/blog/too-much-practice/comment-page-1/#comment-120493 David Motto Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:00:31 +0000 http://www.musicteachershelper.com/blog/?p=847#comment-120493 The 10,000 hours rule is interesting, but your comments about lowering the amount of practicing by 30 - 40% with a changed mindset are even more interesting. Most young musicians can accomplish a great deal more than they're used to just by clearly defining their goals and expanding their ability to focus in the practice room. Focus creates an expanded mindset, makes practicing more enjoyable, and accelerates learning. I'd like to hear more about your advice to music students for increasing their attention. The 10,000 hours rule is interesting, but your comments about lowering the amount of practicing by 30 – 40% with a changed mindset are even more interesting. Most young musicians can accomplish a great deal more than they’re used to just by clearly defining their goals and expanding their ability to focus in the practice room. Focus creates an expanded mindset, makes practicing more enjoyable, and accelerates learning.

I’d like to hear more about your advice to music students for increasing their attention.

]]> By: Joe Schmoe http://www.musicteachershelper.com/blog/too-much-practice/comment-page-1/#comment-120300 Joe Schmoe Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:08:08 +0000 http://www.musicteachershelper.com/blog/?p=847#comment-120300 The 10,000 hours idea has been around for a while. I believe the seed for the idea come from psychology studies of chess. I haven't read the original studies so the 10,000 hours maybe a pretty gross distortion of what was originally said. The overall message of these studies was that "gifts" and "talent" were mostly hard work. For a good pop reference you could read Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers. It explores the background of many "greats" in different fields. What the simplicity of simple numbers miss is the other side of why some folks are chess masters and others are contenders. The other side is abstraction. How do we store what we learn. We can only know so many things. The "masters" know more by seeing inter-relationships between things. Thus when they encounter something new, it isn't really completely new. It is a permutation of things they already have seen. This helps them "know" more. The most commonly study of "masters" is in chess (since there is a clear scoring and ranking system). Thus the chess master can see the layout of the board and see it is one of say 50 layouts type A. She also knows that type A layouts are one of 10 layout that are of type X. Here A maybe layouts without a rook. Type X might be defensive layouts (studies are finding the mind is best with about 5-7 levels of abstraction). This is where the mental mastery comes in. What are the layers of abstraction that your mind uses to group things? Different ways of abstracting what you learn can require more or fewer layers. These internal models determine how efficiently we store knowledge. Thus two people with 10,000 hours can know vastly different amounts. If these theories are true, this can explain large differences in how two human brains can have such differently levels of competency from the same "10,000 hours". Consider the math of it. If at each level of abstraction I had two categories (like offensives setups and defensive setups) and I had 7 level of abstraction I could identify 128 chess layouts. If I had 7 categories at each of 7 levels it would be over 82,000. Again this is a gross simplification of it all, but is gives the idea about the power of how we think about things. The 10,000 hours idea has been around for a while. I believe the seed for the idea come from psychology studies of chess. I haven’t read the original studies so the 10,000 hours maybe a pretty gross distortion of what was originally said. The overall message of these studies was that “gifts” and “talent” were mostly hard work. For a good pop reference you could read Malcolm Gladwell’s Outliers. It explores the background of many “greats” in different fields.
What the simplicity of simple numbers miss is the other side of why some folks are chess masters and others are contenders. The other side is abstraction. How do we store what we learn. We can only know so many things. The “masters” know more by seeing inter-relationships between things. Thus when they encounter something new, it isn’t really completely new. It is a permutation of things they already have seen. This helps them “know” more. The most commonly study of “masters” is in chess (since there is a clear scoring and ranking system). Thus the chess master can see the layout of the board and see it is one of say 50 layouts type A. She also knows that type A layouts are one of 10 layout that are of type X. Here A maybe layouts without a rook. Type X might be defensive layouts (studies are finding the mind is best with about 5-7 levels of abstraction). This is where the mental mastery comes in. What are the layers of abstraction that your mind uses to group things? Different ways of abstracting what you learn can require more or fewer layers. These internal models determine how efficiently we store knowledge. Thus two people with 10,000 hours can know vastly different amounts.
If these theories are true, this can explain large differences in how two human brains can have such differently levels of competency from the same “10,000 hours”. Consider the math of it. If at each level of abstraction I had two categories (like offensives setups and defensive setups) and I had 7 level of abstraction I could identify 128 chess layouts. If I had 7 categories at each of 7 levels it would be over 82,000. Again this is a gross simplification of it all, but is gives the idea about the power of how we think about things.

]]> By: Ronnie Currey (Editor) http://www.musicteachershelper.com/blog/too-much-practice/comment-page-1/#comment-119787 Ronnie Currey (Editor) Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:10:24 +0000 http://www.musicteachershelper.com/blog/?p=847#comment-119787 Great article. I had a parent recently tell me about the book about the 10,000 hours. They also said the book referred to Beatles, and why their music was so great. While in Germany for a year or more, they had to play 7 days a week for 14 hours a day. They hit their 10,000 hours and the rest is history. What was the name of the book? Great article. I had a parent recently tell me about the book about the 10,000 hours. They also said the book referred to Beatles, and why their music was so great. While in Germany for a year or more, they had to play 7 days a week for 14 hours a day. They hit their 10,000 hours and the rest is history.

What was the name of the book?

]]> By: Mike Saville http://www.musicteachershelper.com/blog/too-much-practice/comment-page-1/#comment-119662 Mike Saville Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:35:18 +0000 http://www.musicteachershelper.com/blog/?p=847#comment-119662 Thanks for an interesting article. If we are talking about is pure instrumental ability I think much of what you say it true. However, here's the thing, being a professional player these days requires so much more than being a brilliant player. With so many graduates from music schools technical excellence is a given these days. Too much practice/teaching misses those other areas which make up the complete musician and which will elevate you above all your technically excellent peers. Things like marketing, business, social skills, conduct, conversation all help to a very large extent when trying to reach the very highest point of this business. So think yes, but a broader perspective is much better than one focused purely on instrumental technique. Thanks for an interesting article.

If we are talking about is pure instrumental ability I think much of what you say it true. However, here’s the thing, being a professional player these days requires so much more than being a brilliant player. With so many graduates from music schools technical excellence is a given these days.

Too much practice/teaching misses those other areas which make up the complete musician and which will elevate you above all your technically excellent peers. Things like marketing, business, social skills, conduct, conversation all help to a very large extent when trying to reach the very highest point of this business.

So think yes, but a broader perspective is much better than one focused purely on instrumental technique.

]]>