# Starting an Instrument Late in Life - Any Hope of Becoming a Virtuoso?



## maestro57

Are there real-life examples of people who pick up an instrument and start learning it, say, at the age of 30 and then have gone on to become successful musicians by playing with symphony orchestras, receiving record label offers, etc.? Do you know someone or have you heard of this?

"You can do anything if you work hard at it" hardly seems appropriate in this case. I'm asking because I'm thinking of taking up the cello. I'm not wanting to become the next Yo Yo Ma and signed with Deutsche Grammophone, but it would be nice to feel like I'm actually good at it and could graduate from the RCM, ABRSM, ABEM, what-have-you. Think it's reasonable, or is it too late?

(What if they've got a music background: got up to grade 9 piano, done rudiments, but had to quit for many years due to other academic studies requiring more attention? )


----------



## hreichgott

Haven't we just had this conversation?
I think some of the best advice was: if you love music and the instrument, then start, and your love for it will make it worthwhile regardless of what honors you may or may not accumulate.


----------



## PetrB

Statistically, no. 

You may be that one in a million 'natural' who somehow has all the skills, including sight-reading the most dense and highly virtuosic contemporary classical along with everything else, but, statistically, just no.

Most careers are established between the ages of twenty to thirty, most often in classical music with years of preparation from early childhood and continuing straight on through the higher level trainings.

If your goal is actually more of an 'image of yourself in a particular role' vs. learning to play, and improving from where you now pick up and recommence study and playing is not its own reward, you could just as easily choose another future 'role' to costume yourself in.

Start, if you love music and loved playing, and continue. That's all anyone can do, really.


----------



## maestro57

For me, playing cello would be fun. But it would be more fun to be able to play a "decent" piece (and this would require the cellist to be at a "decent" level). Take, for example, the love of driving a motor vehicle. Driving a 1987 Toyota Camry - could be fun; driving a 2013 Ferrari 458 Italia - definitely fun.

Just wondering if it's still possible to get somewhere "decent" with the cello at 30 years of age. If not, I'll start another hobby that I won't suck at, like collecting stamps


----------



## maestro57

hreichgott said:


> Haven't we just had this conversation?
> I think some of the best advice was: if you love music and the instrument, then start, and your love for it will make it worthwhile regardless of what honors you may or may not accumulate.


That thread slipped me! Thanks!


----------



## PetrB

An additional comment. Playing at all well, on any level, is hugely engaging and satisfying. Each little bit of progress, when you get some aspect 'under your belt' so that technical problem is no longer a problem, is also satisfying.

Way too many people lack a 'hobby' which engages them and which is not a passive entertainment. Any hobby which does engage you and is not passive _is more than good for you._

I'd say "GO FOR IT," and do not worry where it will end up.


----------



## Taggart

maestro57 said:


> I'm asking because I'm thinking of taking up the cello. ....
> 
> (What if they've got a music background: got up to grade 9 piano, done rudiments, but had to quit for many years due to other academic studies requiring more attention? )


I know it's lighter than the piano, but otherwise why the cello when you've got all that piano background? I got nearly up to ABRSM 5 in piano at the age of 34 and then gave it up because of pressures of work. I'm now retired, aged 63 and after a couple of years working up to grade 7 and after that who knows? I'm well aware that at my advanced age I'm going to lack some manual dexterity which means that it can only get harder but hey, I'm enjoying it and it makes retirement a lot more fun.


----------



## Jaws

maestro57 said:


> Are there real-life examples of people who pick up an instrument and start learning it, say, at the age of 30 and then have gone on to become successful musicians by playing with symphony orchestras, receiving record label offers, etc.? Do you know someone or have you heard of this?
> 
> "You can do anything if you work hard at it" hardly seems appropriate in this case. I'm asking because I'm thinking of taking up the cello. I'm not wanting to become the next Yo Yo Ma and signed with Deutsche Grammophone, but it would be nice to feel like I'm actually good at it and could graduate from the RCM, ABRSM, ABEM, what-have-you. Think it's reasonable, or is it too late?
> 
> (What if they've got a music background: got up to grade 9 piano, done rudiments, but had to quit for many years due to other academic studies requiring more attention? )


Compared to the skill levels of a professional musician in an orchestra grade 9 is an exam that someone who had just started to play might take. A sort of elementary beginner exam. So it would help with the music reading.

A virtuoso player has extremely high skill levels. For example someone starting college in the UK might be at the level where they could take LTCL, LLCM, or LRSM before they enter college. After another 4 to 6 years they might just get a place in a professional orchestra, if someone retires. A virtuoso player is likely to be teaching masterclasses at a top music conservatoire.

It is possible to get very good starting as an adult, but what usually stops people from becoming good enough to get a place as back desk inside cello in a professional orchestra is lack of time to practise. People who start as children do not have to maintain houses, or earn a living, so they have plenty of free time to practise. To become a virtuoso you would need limitless time to practise. To become a professional player in an orchestra you would need to be able to do several hours of practise a day after you had been playing for about 2 years. In order to reach the standard before you get to about 70 and retire you would probably need to be able to get to grade 9 in about 2 1/2 years from starting. Most people will have played for about 10 years before going to college, of these most will have passed grade 8 before the age of 14. So lets say you start college at age 40 having done your first 10 years. Then the students who are going to get into an orchestra usually do at least another 4 years, where they practise for at least 3 hours a day as personal practise. This doesn't include any ensemble playing like 3 hours orchestral playing. If you have to earn a living as well as practise for any of this time that will slow down your progress. However the training for the orchestral playing has to be done during the day at college, as community orchestras don't rehearse often enough and many at not a high enough standard.

The biggest problem is that adults are limited in their practise time in that they have to earn a living and not many people can afford to stop working for at least 14 years in order to have enough time to do enough practise.

There are people who have changed instruments and have got jobs in orchestras so it is possible. I don't know of any virtuoso players that have though.


----------



## maestro57

PetrB said:


> An additional comment. Playing at all well, on any level, is hugely engaging and satisfying. Each little bit of progress, when you get some aspect 'under your belt' so that technical problem is no longer a problem, is also satisfying.
> 
> Way too many people lack a 'hobby' which engages them and which is not a passive entertainment. Any hobby which does engage you and is not passive _is more than good for you._
> 
> I'd say "GO FOR IT," and do not worry where it will end up.


I'm feelin' you. I'll pay a visit to the local instrument shop to see what advice they can give me in terms of picking out the right student cello. You're very persuasive, man!



Taggart said:


> I know it's lighter than the piano, but otherwise why the cello when you've got all that piano background? I got nearly up to ABRSM 5 in piano at the age of 34 and then gave it up because of pressures of work. I'm now retired, aged 63 and after a couple of years working up to grade 7 and after that who knows? I'm well aware that at my advanced age I'm going to lack some manual dexterity which means that it can only get harder but hey, I'm enjoying it and it makes retirement a lot more fun.


Taggart, it was inspiring to read your journey with the piano. I hope to be able to reach such a level with the RCM (Canada's ABRSM) with the cello at some point. I know people say exams and all that are a waste of time, but it will give me a greater sense of achievement and pressure to work towards a goal. To answer your question, I still play the piano daily (started again two years ago, after a hiatus of about 10 years away from the piano) but I've always been a "cello closet case," if you will, in terms of always wanting to have learned a different instrument while learning the piano. I have nothing against the piano - I love it! But I've always wanted to play the cello, too.


----------



## maestro57

Jaws said:


> It is possible to get very good starting as an adult, but what usually stops people from becoming good enough to get a place as back desk inside cello in a professional orchestra is lack of time to practise. People who start as children do not have to maintain houses, or earn a living, so they have plenty of free time to practise. To become a virtuoso you would need limitless time to practise. To become a professional player in an orchestra you would need to be able to do several hours of practise a day after you had been playing for about 2 years. In order to reach the standard before you get to about 70 and retire you would probably need to be able to get to grade 9 in about 2 1/2 years from starting. Most people will have played for about 10 years before going to college, of these most will have passed grade 8 before the age of 14. So lets say you start college at age 40 having done your first 10 years. Then the students who are going to get into an orchestra usually do at least another 4 years, where they practise for at least 3 hours a day as personal practise. This doesn't include any ensemble playing like 3 hours orchestral playing. If you have to earn a living as well as practise for any of this time that will slow down your progress. However the training for the orchestral playing has to be done during the day at college, as community orchestras don't rehearse often enough and many at not a high enough standard.
> 
> The biggest problem is that adults are limited in their practise time in that they have to earn a living and not many people can afford to stop working for at least 14 years in order to have enough time to do enough practise.
> 
> There are people who have changed instruments and have got jobs in orchestras so it is possible. I don't know of any virtuoso players that have though.


I didn't actually want to play in an orchestra, but it's good to know musicians have actually changed career-instruments and still make the cut for an orchestra. I was being sarcastic to push and make my question more obvious.

Time is always the problem


----------



## Jaws

maestro57 said:


> I'm feelin' you. I'll pay a visit to the local instrument shop to see what advice they can give me in terms of picking out the right student cello. You're very persuasive, man!
> 
> Taggart, it was inspiring to read your journey with the piano. I hope to be able to reach such a level with the RCM (Canada's ABRSM) with the cello at some point. I know people say exams and all that are a waste of time, but it will give me a greater sense of achievement and pressure to work towards a goal. To answer your question, I still play the piano daily (started again two years ago, after a hiatus of about 10 years away from the piano) but I've always been a "cello closet case," if you will, in terms of always wanting to have learned a different instrument while learning the piano. I have nothing against the piano - I love it! But I've always wanted to play the cello, too.


I would like to suggest a more interesting goal than exams.

For an orchestral instrument the best goal is to get into a group to play with other people. Exams won't help you do this because they don't test ensemble playing as this requires a whole set of different skills.

This is what you do. Start in a beginner's ensemble, but aim to be an intermediate one then aim to be in an advanced one the more advanced they become the more interesting the music that you get to play.

Playing in an ensemble speeds up learning and progress, taking exams slow it down.


----------

