Using Troy Grady's Findings, How May Years Would It Take

Playing Technique
#6

Shawn Lane said that one he was a kid he was super fast but sloppy. From 10 to 14 years old he cleaned up his picking technique to where he had very good technique and by the time he was 16, he had all the techniques refined to the level he had them at at his peak. That’s incredibly fast progress and without any help such as CTC. I’m not sure CTC would have helped Shawn Lane simply because I don’t see anyone developing that level of technique any earlier than 16 years old.

So, I suppose the more talented you are, and the more natural feel you have for the instrument, the less CTC would help you. Otherwise what are we supposed to believe? That Shawn Lane would have had reached his peak by 13 or 14 years old? Or that Paul Gilbert could have had the necessary technique to have recorded his first Racer X album at 15 or 16 years old? Or that Yngwie could have had the technique to play anything on his Rising Force debut album by 14 years old?

#7

Two years.

Any longer and you don’t have it.

3 Likes
#8

@milehighshred answered that on his YouTube channel a couple of time. And to him, it’s not about the years you put in it, but the actual time you put in it.

Noa Kageyama, who’s been interviewed by the CtC team also speaks about how you should be practising to get the most efficiency out of your time on his blog.

Lesson 2: Accepting defeat…

:stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

3 Likes
#9

The rational part of my brain is sure you’re joking and is having a laugh!
The irrational part (which developed a certain attachment to the CTC team and instructional material), is crying a little. :smiley:

(Have been MIM member for >2years if I remember correctly).

1 Like
#10

I’m joking - mostly! In reality this is a non-question. The players being mentioned here are not even remotely similar, and there is no single level of skill that represents “Warren DeMartini” and “Zakk Wylde”. Neither guy, either then or currently, could play each others’ solos, so what does that tell you? Their techniques are totally, completely different. The abilities of the people being listed here are totally, completely different. And they are legends for a pile of reasons like songwriting and general creativity which don’t really relate specifically to guitar playing. Remember there were lots of technically great players back then - in unremarkable bands with no songs that went nowhere. There is no single level of skill, either then or now that really represents greatness and no amount of time it can be said it takes to attain that level - since again, there is no “level”.

But if I’m translating into '80s speak, when we really didn’t know what we didn’t know about guitar technique and argued endlessly about things like who is “faster”, I can provide a glib answer. Two years is how long it would have taken any decently talented kid to become a local hot shot, and have people walking around thinking they were next Eddie Van Halen. Given today’s level of vast technical awareness, combined with your turbo charged rapid-learning teenage hormone brain, and piles of free time, that is how long it will take to get awesome at… something! Anything more than this, again, this question is too vague to be answered.

3 Likes
#11

I don’t know of any guitarists who were able to develop their technique in a straight forward fashion. Its always trial and error. Try technique 1… plateau, switch to technique 2… plateau… continue cycle.

However… I think knowing the strategy of clearing the pick over the string, etc would certainly help speed cycle up a bit.

2 Likes
#12

Paul Gilbert, as I mentioned before started when he was 5 but started working on complex picking exercises at 13. So even though his debut album was recorded 6 years later when he was 19 years, old, you believe that had he had access to all the now available CTC information back when he was 13 and started seriously applying himself to learn alternate picking, it would have cut the amount of time he needed from 6 years down to 2 years?

I realize this is a question which can only be answered with an educated guess, as there is no objective method for determining a factual answer, but I stand by my opinion that the more talented the kid, the less CTC would help him, as we see that in the cases of extremely talented guys like Yngwie and Shawn Lane, they were able to achieve great alternate picking technique in a relatively short amount of time. Shawn developed such great technique by 16 years old after only 6 years of work that I don’t see how much quicker he realistically could have achieved his peak level of technique no matter how much information he hypothetically would have been able to access.

After all, with an instrument which doesn’t have any mystery surrounding the right way to develop virtuoso level technique such as the piano, you could give an incredibly talented kid the best teacher I’m his entire county or state and still two years would certainly not be a reasonable amount of time to expect him to reach his genetic potential regarding the level of technique he is able to reach. The 6 years it took Shawn Lane seems to be a much more reasonable estimate.

#13

That’s different from learning how to pick relatively fast. Gilbert also had to learn music: learn how to write music, read music, develop his ear among other things. Then he had to earn enough recognition to have the ability to record an album, and the list goes on. That’s something that was touched upon in the Li-Sa X interview: she can play about anything, but that doesn’t mean she would’ve been able to write what she’s been covering. Same went with Mozart and many other “wonderkids”, no matter which field we’re talking about.

Anyway I do think it’s reasonable to say that by putting in the right amount of hours of deliberate, great practice with the information available to you nowadays, you can learn how to pick fast in a couple of years. That alone won’t make a good musician out of you, but a guy able to move a guitar pick back and forth quickly? Definitely.

#14

Perhaps if one with moderate natural talent ( as stated in the OP) devoted all his practice time to technique work, 2 years enough would be enough to play what most people consider “fast.” Not Yngwie or Gilbert level “fast” but George Lynch or Vivian Campbell level of speed. Now, if and I stress if it was implied that what it took Gilbert 6 years to achieve in picking technique, he could have reached the same level in 2 years with access to all the CTC information, then I have to say I seriously doubt it. If it was implied that what it took Shawn Lane 6 years to do with his technique he could have done in 2 years with access to CTC, again I seriously doubt it. I think CTC would have the most dramatic effect on cutting down the time it takes to become reasonably fast in players whose level of natural ability for guitar (talent) is moderate at best. Players who spend decades figuring out on their own how to alternate pick efficiently would potentially have had the most to gain from access to CTC as opposed to players with the God given talent of guys such as Yngwie Malmsteen and Shawn Lane; wouldn’t you agree?

#15

Not really because there isn’t thousands of ways to pick biomechanically speaking, regardless of your talent. In other words regardless of your level of talent and ability to pick fast, good technique is good technique for everyone. Gilbert himself said that after eight years of holding the pick with three fingers and picking with the trailing edge, he switched around. I’m not making this up, he says it right there.

So he could’ve cut an awful lot of time if he had switched around or never practised that way. It doesn’t mean you can’t do cool stuff by picking with the trailing edge: Misha Mansoor does it, Ola Englund does it; but that much is obvious.

1 Like
#16

Didn’t he still pick that way (trailing edge) on the Street Lethal album? I’m fairly sure I recall that he did. He already had a successful career when he switched around to leading edge.

#17

It’s hard to define “reasonably talented”. There are literally thousands of talented guitar players that aren’t shredders. Just because they may not pick past doesn’t diminish their talent level.
And one could also argue that picking fast is a result of perfecting a mechanical motion and talent has little to do with it.

#18

Eight years could be from when he started playing too. So who knows: maybe, maybe not. But that’s not the point I was discussing. That said, it goes back to what I’ve said earlier: there’s more to picking fast to become a good musician, and that stuff also took a lot, LOT of time that wasn’t spent on trying to pick fast.

It also links into a video CtC put on their channel about Paul Gilbert and inside and outside string changes. The (very quick) summation of that is that it’s not certain string changes that are hard, but that switching from UWPS to DWPS is hard to figure out. Now we know this and that knowledge is condensed roughly 15 minutes. 15 minutes of your time instead of spending hours, days if not longer figuring a way to work around that. I do think a lot of players, regardless of their level of talent would benefit from knowing that; and Gilbert is no exception.

So I disagree with that players with “God given talent” wouldn’t have benefited as much as an average guitar player from that knowledge. I’d even dare to say the other way around: they would’ve been able to make a lot more of it and quicker than John Doe because they’re insanely talented, extremely dedicated and able to push those techniques to the limit.

#19

This was told to (in words as close to these as I can recall 29 years later) me by Dallas Perkins who taught hundreds of players while he was making name for himself as an elite level guitarist: There are just a few people who have come to me for lessons that seem to have an exceptional talent for music - they’re comparable to geniuses. On the other end of the spectrum there have been some people who have come to me for lessons that are basically musically retarded. They just can’t learn to play guitar. Almost everyone falls into the third category which is a group of people that have enough talent that if they work hard enough they can become good enough to play just about whatever they want to play.

The people in the big group are what I call "reasonably talented.They’re not musical geniuses but they’re not musically retarded either.

Sure, if you don’t consider having a natural feel for the instrument and the ability to develop the coordination to play technically demanding music as having much to do with talent.

Personally I’ve found that very musically talented guys like Yngwie Malmsteen, Shawn Lane, Vinnie Moore, Tony Macapine and Paul Gilbert also happen to become extremely technically proficient while still only in their teens. These are guys who can write memorable songs and have had careers as professional musicians who play music they compose themselves or with their bands.

Then there are guys with a moderate level of talent who play fairly well but not so well that they were ever able to progress in their careers beyond playing in a local cover band and sometimes have great technique but didn’t reach that level until their 30s or 40s as opposed to still being in their teenage years. The greats have a level of coordination and a natural feel for the instrument that has allowed them to achieve very high level technique despite never having had the luxury of having had the access to the type of information this forum provides.

1 Like
#20

Yup! I started playing in '82 and it took about 4 years to be able play Randy Rhoads and Vivian Campell Dio era solos, albeit with a bit of slop. Ratt stuff wasn’t too bad because there’s a lot of legato. Two years sounds right for a 15 year old with CTC materials to get the technique down for that era. For Paul Gilbert and Yngwie technique maybe another year or two.

Really it’s all about the amount of time put into practicing. At 15 you have the time to get 2+ hours of practice a day in.

#21

In the past guitar players have often had their progress slowed down by the fact that they didn’t know the difference between an efficient picking motion and an inefficient one. Most of these guys didn’t know the efficient technique even existed or they would have seen the difference in their playing in mere days after adopting it to their playing. So you’re saying without being hindered by literally not knowing how they were supposed to pick to achieve an efficient picking ability, a kid with moderate musical talent could become “awesome” in 2 years.

The reason I disagree with that is pretty straightforward. Substitute guitar for an instrument in which there is no mystery about the proper way to play - say piano for example. Would you say any moderately talented kid should be able to become an “awesome” pianist with two years of lessons? Would you say that after 2 years of lessons a moderately talented kid should be able to play like Tori Amos or Elton John? I don’t think so. Tori Amos is insanely talented; she’s the youngest person ever admitted into the Peabody Conservatory of music. Had she reached the peak of her playing abilities after 2 years at Peabody or even 4 years? No, not even close. Tori Amos spent 6 years studying at Peabody when at the age of eleven she was expelled for “musical insubordination.” That’s fine. The great rock musicians have always had a streak of rebellion within their souls. Still, the notion that after 2 years of instruction there or even after 4 years of instruction there she had reached the peak of her technical ability and from then on was just learning more musical pieces, but not necessarily musical pieces which required any more ability than the previous musical pieces she had been given to learn just is a notion with which I strongly disagree.

Besides, being incredibly talented, so talented she was accepted at The Peabody Conservatory at the age of 5 puts her well above the level of "moderately musically talented. If she hadn’t reached her technical peak after 2 years or even 4 years, it follows that after the same amount of time, students who were only moderately talented (or as close to that as you can be given that you’ve been admitted to Peabody), would have even less chance of achieving an awesome level of technical prowess after only 2 or even 4 years despite the world class instructors teaching them.

#22

I think you are looking way too closely at Troy’s comment.
Being awesome at something in no way means that you’ve peaked.
Troy simply meant that after 2 years, somebody reasonably talented could be a damn good player.
As we all know, in music there is no “I’ve learned everything there is to know” moment. The more you learn the more there becomes to learn. It’s a journey, not a destination.

#23

I think we may be overthinking this. :smile:

2 Likes
#24

image
D39E430E-0381-444C-B4CD-9C90AD44CB8B.jpeg606×639 51 KB

#25

Yeah, you’re probably right.

1 Like