What type of musician is the best?
 

yes///

I voted hard-working, but talented is good too. A musician needs to have musical genious, but also practice a lot and be willing to get better. He also needs to have a strong passion for the music he plays.

I voted hard working

I voted half and half because I work very hard but I am not musically inclined so you have better results when there's talent and effort present.

sure they have to work but mozart wasnt that studious and he was onee of the greatest pianists ever...so i voted for talented

how the heck do you change the heading under your name?

Go to edit profile,...but you shouldnt change it...you're a groupie

You should have NATURAL in your poll because they are the best.

honestly
 

i believe it takes a healthy mix, because without the talent theres just ahrd work going into nothing. but without the hard work, its a waste. you kno?

i had to work my @$$ off to be good or sumwhat good @ the piano i had no instant talent

I think that you need to be a very hard working and atleast somewhat talented......but that's just my personal opinion..... I am trying hard to get my band started but school wortk and chores and the wheather all seems to be getting in the way and i need help cuz its just really stressfull........buttt.........as soon as i get my job.....then i can sort out what days we can pratice and transportation and our drummer his equipment..... and we need another gutiar cuz th eones going to leave and its just very hell like lately........ I think you guys get the point...... Being the vocalist I try my hardest to get this whole thing up and running by myself........

I'd say half in half...I like hardworking people...but they also need tallent.

talented, talent far exceeds hard work.

i'm a go wit SUPA TALENTED

Music is a lot of interpretation and analysis. There is a craft to the art that requires a lot of work, regardless of talent level, to achieve. I can have the blazing fingers of Victor Wooten but not an ounce of the heart, and a beginner who pours his soul into his music will quickly produce better music than I.

I agree, It does take alot of work & dedication if one wants to achieve any kind of living as a musician. But without talent???? (I'm with the 'lazy but supa talented'). You either have it, Or you dont! period. There's an old quote I once heard, "Only a hillbilly would turn work into an art". And I am not hacking on any one else that has a post on this thread. So please dont take me wrong, I am just stating my opinion....Peace.

In the words of Shakespeare, some people are born great, some people achieve greatness and some people have greatness thrust upon them. While you do occainsionaly meet the guitarist who never practices but is insanely good its much more common (and generally they are better) to meet a guy whos been playing for 6 years and practices 8 hours a day. Stevie Ray Vaughan says that when they started his brother was far more talented, but he practiced way more. His brothers a good guitarist but the Fabulous Thunderbirds compared to Stevie Ray Vaughan is like Keith Richards compared to Jimmy Hendrix. Mozart was born a great composer, but Beethoven on the other hand slowly got better. Beethoven starts with his sonatas and first few symphonies but by the end you have his string quartets and symphonies 5,6,7,9 and his fifth concerto. Hard work overcomes talent any day of the week.

Thats a very good piece of info. Exodizer! But I am still with the same opinion I stated before. You are talking about great musicians that were born with a natural talent & gift for music. without the (talent), would've Vaughn, Hendrix, & Beethoven achieved success, by hard work only? explain to me ,if you would. How a musician could achieve such success without any talent. Your last statement 'Hard work overcomes talent any day of the week', Is hard for me to believe. I can understand your point that hard work with a natural talent can bring success as a musician, As I stated at the first of my last post. But without talent? I just dont see it. Still, I can see you have alot of knowledge I find very interesting concerning the classic's. I will add, Keith Richards is certainly not compared to Hendrix at lead guitar. But when it comes to rythm guitar, it doesnt get any better than the natural funk Richards possess's at rythm, as Hendrix did also....Peace Brother. (Great Post)!

Ugg I wrote the first response to this only to find out my internet went off and I clicked send. Here it goes again. First this was a very respectful response and I thank you for that. I'm not used to it (I'm new here so I don't know about these forums but on a vareity of other forums people are generally *******s). Secondly I didn't mean to insult Keith Richards, and I love the Stones it's just compared to Hendrix he's not the best. Also When I think Funk rhythm I think Eddie Hazel of Funkadelic. Yes Beethoven of course had talent, but when he started he was not even close to Mozart or even Handel or Vivaldi. If he died in his twenties we would know him as an above average romantic composer not Beethoven, and very fortunatly for us he got alot better. He worked his way up to Mozart and some people think beyond (I'm undecided on this one). Stevie's brother bought a guitar long before he did and due to sibling rivalry Stevie started playing. Stevie says his brother picked up the guitar and could play naturally while Stevie wasn't too good when he got his guitar. He practiced and practiced until he was who we know him as, the Texan who revived blues in the eighties. The single greatest thing you can be born with for music is absolute pitch, so it doesn't take you years to delevope it. There are some other things that talent goes along with but if you see a guitarist in the guitar center shredding like Batio, (terrible musician, probaly the fastest guitar player) their story is always the same. I locked myself in a room for a year and practice playing malmsteen (or some such sort) over and over again. Same goes with any intrument (epecially classical piano and jazz drums), so I really think hard work has more to do with it.

Thats your opinion and I can respect that. But funk is just not limited to R&B/Soul artist only. It is a feel that one may have, more so, than a word that describes any certain style. The question asked in this thread is, what is most important. Hard work, talent, or both? Hard work means nothing without a natural talent. Example: If someone wants to be a drummer, but just isnt able to keep a beat, are you saying with alot of hard work, he will become the next 'Bonham', 'Peart', 'Tommy Lee', etc.? Ive seen this often before. I would never tell someone they just dont have what it takes, I simply wouldnt hire them. Even still, I think everyone should enjoy playing music, in what ever form they choose. Regardless of talent. And I would be willing to always help them in any way that I could. So....If you believe hard work has more to do with it, that is your right of opinion. But I can not subscribe to that theory....Peace.

Yeah I get the Funk is not R&B/Soul and is more of a feel, but That's why I said Eddie Hazel, because that's what he seems like. The natural funk rhythm and loud guitar. Yes if your tone deaf or can not keep a beat you are not going to be a great musician (generally speaking). If you can keep a beat that's not talent, because that's average. You can even be below average as a musician and still keep a beat. Regardless of talent (except if you can not keep a beat or are tone deaf) if you practice your ass off at your instrument your going to be great at it. That's why I say it has more to do with hard work.

Fair enough Brother, 'FOR THE AVERAGE TALENTED (Garage/Bedroom) MUSICIAN'. Its been great to debate on this thread with you. Hope to talk to ya later. Peace, & have a great weekend Bub. Sincerely, VB.

the ones that are in screamo bands.

Theres no such thing as a musical "gift." Some people are better at music then others, because they started younger or have practiced more, or have had the right influences ect. However, no one is born musically gifted. Singing is a different story, unfortunately for me :P

Therefore, neither hard work or talent is important. A love of music, and a desire to get better is all you need.

Talent...it doesn't matter how hard working you are, if you dont have the talent, you'll never be as good

hard working takes the win for me. if you work hard you achieve greatness.

The best musicians are the ones that can stream their heart and soul through their instrument and lay it bare for all to hear.
I think that'll come under talent.

You are not born with a gift in the true sense of the word, however some people can naturally sing without any training or influences. The hard work will then improve this.

Im able to sing and i havent really had any teachings. I mean i've listened to a few bands like P.Wolf and Bright Eyes and i got my influence from that. Its more skill than a gift. BUt you can be born with a naturally amazing voice. i've seen it. i've heard it. its pretty interesting.

Talent definetly. Becasue what is music without talent?

Crappy music.

true, but it takes hard work to get some talent so i guess it could be half and half with hard working and talent

No... I may not be a particularly talented pianist or bassist, but if I spend time at either one I can come up with great things... I think you just have to have the interest in music and a good work ethic.

if you cant fill your music with emotion, than its not very good music. you need to have the talent to do that. there are just some people who could never ever do that, no matter how hard they tried, for they dont have the talent

IDK if I'd neccesarily call it talent though. I'd probably call that the "creative spark" which people are much more likely to have.

Half and Half, I like to believ i you work hard you can be great but sometimes unfortunately natural talent just prevails.

Yeah...

half and half...even if my dad spent 24/7 around music, he wouldn't be any good...lol

unfortunately in some cases, there needs to be some natural talent, but it's all a waste if you don't work hard.

super talented lazy people are good, but are so annoying, which is another reason i say half/half.

gotta be a realist...practice your ass of but find your own voice!!

Innovation is the key to "the best".

I voted talented because that's what the legends of music were. Of course you need to work at it, but you need somewhere natural where that music originates, ebbs and flows with ease, until the passionate fountain of notes and artistic expression gloriously displays itself, awing those to all that hear.

From my experience I would say HUMBLE. The music world is full of ultra-talented musicians who suck to work with because they have inflated heads. Give me a musician that's friendly, open to ideas, versatile, and just a little bit talented and I'm a happy person.