3 ms·
> And yet, any professional musician will claim that practice is an essential part of the craft, required for learning difficult sections and tightening up loos
by haberman 9y ago
> And yet, any professional musician will claim that practice is an essential part of the craft, required for learning difficult sections and tightening up loose licks.
It absolutely is. Practice is necessary but not sufficient for high-level musical performance. The study talks about musical ability in terms of rhythm, melody, and pitch discrimination -- mental skills around music -- and finds that these are not changed with practice. These two statements are not in conflict.
- limaoscarjuliet 9y agoAnd, perhaps, cause and effect are reversed: people who are gifted see increase of satisfaction (but necessarily skill) when practicing. Then they report that practice is crucial.
- haberman 9y agoThis is easy to falsify by having someone else evaluate whether a musician's performance improves with practice. This is very easy to double-blind: just record "before" and "after" performances and don't tell the evaluator which is which. I would be willing to bet that the effects of practice on a musical performance are very easily measurable.
- mannykannot 9y agoBut if practice is necessary for high-level musical performance, then that implies it has a causal effect on it. This paradox seems to be resolved by noting that where the paper uses 'music ability' it means scoring well in certain traits (rhythm, melody, and pitch discrimination), not being able to perform well.
- haberman 9y ago> This paradox seems to be resolved by noting that the paper uses 'music ability' it means scoring well in certain traits (rhythm, melody, and pitch discrimination), not being able to perform well. Exactly. I think the paper is trying to establish that there is some kind of inborn talent that is not affected by practice, even if other things (like performing ability) are.