It’s the exact same as Mary had a little lamb and all its other variations such as Mary had a little (rest)camel, Mary had a frog frog, Mary had a giraffe…all of whom have fleece as white as snow I guess

My son has been gleefully requesting “Mary had three little baby shark cars vroom vroom” at bedtime 🤯

The walrus was Paul. Barefoot.

How about the next best (read: worst) thing, the Happy Walrus Song

What you should do is basically find some sort of way to set up an in ear monitor for yourself (I have one that I can bring anywhere I need to that goes in between my mic and whatever it’s plugged into and has a headphone jack for the ear piece) when I was a kid I used to set my computer settings to basically feed the mic through the headphones. The point is that you improve by practicing when you can hear yourself properly

Don’t worry there are:

7 guitars
1 bass
Wind instruments of various capacity
Keyboard
Synths
Organ
Mandolin nobody plays
2 ukuleles

We will be disappointed if she wants to do sports (jk)

Lots of people don’t realize that having a good aptitude for singing or playing music doesn’t necessarily translate to being a recording artist. There’s a relation, but they’re different beasts.

Back when I would watch American Idol, you could tell that come people were very talented singers but in over their heads as a recording artist. The luxury of performing a recorded song means that all of the musical intricacies have already been figured out. It’s just on the singer to have the technical chops to execute. There are other problem within the music industry, but I have a feeling that this is why we rarely saw more than two albums out of most winners yet quite a few top 8 placers had great careers.

I'm with you man. Loved music but when I asked for a saxophone got a clarinet. Years later saved up to buy my own guitar but could not afford lessons. Music is a gift.

I have twins, boy and girl. My daughter's first check up the pedestrian said, "this one's a mover, be careful she's going to start rolling super early." She did. From then on, she was just always really, really good at physical activities while my son was clumsy, slow, and uncoordinated. They eat the same. Spend the same amount of time outside. Do basically everything together. Get the same screen time. My son wants to be better at physical stuff and is more driven with sports and whatnot from cultural pressure. He certainly tries harder and is more determined. He just starts every new physical activity at a much lower starting place.

I used to think there was no such thing as talent, but… I’m not sure I agree anymore. I volunteered for a number of years as a coach for 16-year-old boys’ team. It was extracurricular, so the vast majority of the boys there were interested in what they were doing. And most of them were good kids who worked hard on self-improvement etc. But sometimes you’d get a kid and like… I don’t know how to describe it. They just had *vision*. They always made the right decision, instinctually. They just “got” the game - and were able to imbue their teammates with that understanding. And it had nothing to do with how long they’ve been playing - I actually recruited a boy who had absolutely no formal playing experience, just saw him goofing around with friends (who were experienced, but played on a different team). The coach who ran the program was like “yeah sure, bring a kid in off the street - guess he can sit on the bench and learn, that’s always useful”. This kid came in made himself a starter within a week and blew him away too. Made playoffs this kid’s first real season playing with him in a pretty vital role. I had one other kid with similar “vision” in my three years of coaching, but he had more playing experience, so it was easier to say “well he’s just had time to figure it out” if one was so inclined. But both times it was honestly incredible to see, because their understanding of what needed to happen and how they were going to make it happen really did seem supernatural.

The thing that people don’t get/don’t want to get because it’s a convenient excuse for their fear of failure, is having that “vision” doesn’t guarantee success - nor is it necessary. In my professional life, I’m an artist (and librarian, but that’s less relevant. How I ended up coaching teenage boys is a boring story). I don’t have artistic talent/vision. I know I don’t, because I’ve seen what it looks like when someone does. I’ve practiced and studied and failed and sucked for a long time, and got to a point where I can do pretty serviceable art (even good, sometimes), I can get work and people take me seriously. But talent? Nah. The same is true for pretty much every aspect of life. “Vision” helps, and when you get to the intersection of “vision”, interest and hard work, that’s where genius lives. But I feel like that intersection is pretty rare, even in top echelons of every skill, because getting there is pretty much all about hard work and sustained interest. Having those two will take you a lot farther than vision.

To an extent. I had a friend growing up that was half Native American Indian and the guy had amazing genetics. He put on muscle very easily and was naturally very coordinated.

Any sport he got into he was amazing at and could have been a professional at. Not to say it still doesn't take hard work and training but he was a natural.

Unfortunately he also had a very addictive personality and drugs and alcohol took him too early.

…and then at the other end of the scale, LG stands up to the mic and hammers out heavy metal with Metallica.
She is one of the most talented and versatile vocalists of our times.

The best part about Lady Gaga is she definitely can sing not only incredibly well, but in so many different styles and modes. I always contrast this in my mind to other pop stars, like Ariana Grande whose every songs is that same simpery sugary quality that makes her songs hard to tell apart unless the hook is really distinctive.

That was amazing I had no idea.

I say this a lifelong Madonna fan: her live singing has always been bad. I think part of it is how active she is on stage - it's hard to sing well and do energetic and complex choreography at the same time, especially when your singing voice is only passable to start with. But with Madonna it never really mattered that much, she puts on such a show that it usually makes up for the poor vocal quality.

Her whole Tiny Desk Concert is pretty good.

> Most artists have to UnSuperSaiyan themselves and perform at a lower level than they can.

To be fair, performing at 150% is alienating to most people. This is technical wizardry. I'm a jazz drummer and this dude (Matt Garstka) is a **fucking genius.** He does shit that takes an absurd amount of practice to even get *okay* at, completely flawlessly. The lead guitarist there, Tosin Abasi, is also out of this world, but since I'm not a guitarist I can't speak to specific things other than "guitar man play fast with weird and complicated rhythms!"

I can also tell you this kind of music - djent-y instrumental prog metal - is super off putting to most people because it's not very catchy, it's very complicated, and if you're not a musician you probably don't really *get* what's interesting about it. It just comes off as a wall of impenetrable pretention and noise.

And that's okay! I think everyone should try learning an instrument because music is fun, but not everyone will vibe with everything. Any kind of popular music - and that's not just the genre we call "pop," that's everything from hip hop to rock to blues to country to funk - is inherently going to be basically some kind of dance music and dance music *cannot* be very complicated because random bars of 7/8 and spicy 9ths and crazy dissonance are liable to make people trip and fall.

You are mistaken about the history of Nietzsche’s popularity. He was immensely popular and influential within his lifetime inside and outside of Germany.

lol I was confused by that too but I think they meant the album 1989 that came out in 2014, though afaik I thought she only recently started training in these past couple months, or maybe years I’ve gotten pretty bad with keeping up with celebrities even though I’m a fan

The acoustic went from a brighter tone, perhaps recorded with the mic at the 12th fret, to a stronger low-mids sound recorded at the soundhole. I liked that change.

Dear John was clearly meant to imitate/ parody Mayer's songwriting/ tone, sort of Taylor going "bitch I could do this too", so the old guitar was very distinctly a strat-style guitar on the 4th position. I think I could hear a tube-screamer set on low - gives a mid boost much like Mayer's tone for Continuum... had a lovely bite to it. The newly released one is far more quiet, first of all, and has a lot of treble rolled back. It's also definitely not the same pickups, and a different drive pedal.

Drums are tuned differently too but I liked that change the snare is niiice.

Yeah don’t overthink it. I’m alluding to the fact that they’re all hot.

Yea…. That would be subjective

That analogy makes great sense, thank you.

I think you mean upper stomach/diaphragm instead of chest, but ya the rest would make sense

This is wonderful to hear! I play the drums but can't sing at all and my partner is a multi-instrumentalist (not a singer but can sing well) from a very musical family. It would be lovely to impart that because musicality is such a beautiful thing. Glad to know I can be of some help even with my lackluster abilities.