# Is talent/skill or luck a better indicator of success



## sIR dORT (Apr 18, 2020)

You hear about a lot of people who make it big because they simply were lucky, but you also see a lot of people do well because they're just good at what they do. So what predicts success more often?

DJM


----------



## chillbot (Apr 18, 2020)

You make a lot of these kinda posts, huh. And if I recall you are young and just starting out? Just getting my bearings.

Cause it hits on a nerve with me, there are certain big names in our industry that think luck has nothing to do with it, or rather, that you can "make your own luck" just by hustling and bustling and forcing the issue. Which I think is total bullshit. And usually seen through the lens of survivorship bias. Almost everyone needs to get lucky at some point. But to answer your question, you can't point to one or the other because there are so many factors that add into it.

*Luck* - yes you need this, mostly*.

*Charisma* - best example comes to mind is Michael Giacchino... man that guy can hold a room hostage. It doesn't help that most of the rest of us are raging introverts.

*Connections* - ok I love Thomas Newman so much, he might be my greatest inspiration, but it also doesn't hurt to be born into hollywood royalty.

*Wealth* - people who have it have so many more opportunities than those that do not, it's not even close. Sure I can afford to drop 10k on a live orch demo to get a gig. Sure I can afford to do your gig for nothing but EXPOSURE. Sure I can afford to hire the best team of assistants, orchestrators, synthestrators, techies, everything. Sorry to those of you struggling to pay rent.

*Talent* - in the end you have to have it. Otherwise the whole thing comes crashing down. It definitely helps to have like MAD JAW-DROPPING TALENT, but a good amount of talent and education and knowledge should conceivably be enough.

*Production* - talent is pretty much shit without it. Unless you have wealth, then you hire someone for production.

There's probably a bunch more I'm missing. It's not going to hurt you to be male, though that's not a topic I really want to get into right now. It definitely makes a massive difference living in LA, or at least London or NY or one of the other hubs.

Now let's assemble a character from an old-fashioned RPG. You have assembled the perfect film/tv/media composer. From a scale of 1 to 100, his or her stats are:

Luck - 0
Charisma - 100
Connections - 100
Wealth - 100
Talent - 100
Production - 100

*OK this person is killing it. They are working and in-demand and they absolutely do not need luck. The rest of us, at some point are going to need some luck. This hypothetical composer is the only situation I can envision where luck doesn't come into play. Do you see how if you have money, talent, connections, and charisma, you probably don't need to get all that lucky?

I dunno, what's your stats? Would be interesting to see where other people rank themselves.

I've had moderate success I'd put my RPG character somewhere around:

Luck - 95
Charisma - 12
Connections - 81
Wealth - 50
Talent - 26
Production - 45
Male - yes
Lives in LA - yes

So for me it was a lot about being lucky at the right time and place. (BTW money came later, not at the beginning, so I'm just splitting it.)


----------



## Pablocrespo (Apr 18, 2020)

Chillbot I love all your posts...there.. I said it


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 18, 2020)

What about looks? I thought that was at the top of the list, which is why I'm so rich.


----------



## dzilizzi (Apr 18, 2020)

chillbot said:


> You make a lot of these kinda posts, huh. And if I recall you are young and just starting out? Just getting my bearings.
> 
> Cause it hits on a nerve with me, there are certain big names in our industry that think luck has nothing to do with it, or rather, that you can "make your own luck" just by hustling and bustling and forcing the issue. Which I think is total bullshit. And usually seen through the lens of survivorship bias. Almost everyone needs to get lucky at some point. But to answer your question, you can't point to one or the other because there are so many factors that add into it.
> 
> ...


Only thing I might add is consistency and work ethic. You notice all the big names do the work consistently and I'm going to guess they don't blow off deadlines or they don't keep getting jobs. Luck and talent will get you in, but it won't keep you in.


----------



## JohnG (Apr 18, 2020)

Most people composing for major projects are pretty darn good/talented / etc.

I can think of only one or two guys who've scored major pictures who I think are second rate in the ability department. But everyone says one of them is a great guy and he happens to be friends with some people who make movies.

And it's not like he's terrible, either. He's not bad, just not James Newton Howard, who's absolutely amazing.

Separately, I do think looks help.


----------



## bill5 (Apr 18, 2020)

chillbot said:


> *Talent* - in the end you have to have it. Otherwise the whole thing comes crashing down.


Excellent post and I was with you all the way until I saw this. It obviously can (and should) help to say the least, but no, you don't HAVE to have it. History is littered with utterly talent-less hacks who made it big and they continue to thrive while many very talented artists can't make it. Life is nuts.


----------



## purple (Apr 18, 2020)

To get some jobs, mostly luck. To get better jobs, a whole lot of skill and a whole lot of luck. To get the best jobs, 80% luck and 20% skill, but that skill is equal to those with the better jobs.


----------



## bill5 (Apr 18, 2020)

I think it's more knowing how to get along with people and/or how to "work" people than anything else. Really that's the most important skill in any job with rare exception at most. And yeah unfortunately looks go a long way with that. It's no accident that pretty much (for example) all female country stars are hot.


----------



## rgames (Apr 18, 2020)

Talent is a threshold criterion. It gets you in the game but it doesn't get you the win.

People who wind up at the top are usually talented. But there plenty of equally talented people who didn't make it. That's the luck part.

Ambition has a lot to do with it as well.


----------



## Mike Greene (Apr 18, 2020)

First record I ever played on was when my next door DJ neighbor somehow finagled a record producing gig, and he didn't know any keyboard players, so he asked me. The guitar player on that gig was my ticket to a lot more legit gigs.

A local band was desperate to get a keyboard player for a showcase they had lined up with MCA records. I don't even remember how they got my number, but they called me and we made a deal that if they got signed, I would be a 100% full member. I rehearsed and sequenced like a madman for a week, and we indeed got signed. (I'll leave out the part about the label dropping us a year later.)

I was in a weekly poker game, and one of the other guys was directing a Hot Wheels commercial and didn't think the composer "rocked hard enough." He had never heard me play, but he knew I played in a band, so he asked me if I'd do it. The commercial won awards, and every TV/film client I've ever had can be traced back to it.

David Bowie's manager had some 24-track reels that he didn't know what was on them, so he needed a studio to do a quick and dirty bounce to cassette. He knew my neighbor, who said, _"Oh, I know a guy with a studio."_ The manager came over (to the studio before this one), and when he walked in, he heard the track I happened to be working on. He asked me to play him some other stuff, then, amazingly, suggested David work with me. Which we did for a couple months. (Black Tie, White Noise album and the title for Cool, Cool World.) A few months later, David wanted to partner in the studio I was building here.

So yeah, luck, luck, and more luck.

But ... I _killed_ on that first session, plus I'm a friendly guy, so I hit it off with the guitar player and we became fast friends. (We're still friends to this day.)

And I invested every nickel I made into gear, so two racks of keyboards on each side of me probably helped make an impression on the MCA execs.

I can read people pretty well, so even with all the conflicting direction I was getting from the Hot Wheels people (anyone else who's worked for Mattel knows what I'm talking about), I was able to figure out what they _really_ wanted, as opposed to what they were _telling_ me they wanted. Plus I like to think my writing and production skills were pretty well honed by then, too.

When David Bowie's manager stopped by, it was no accident I was "working on a track." Totally staged. I carefully picked _which_ track, turned on every keyboard so all those LED lights would be putting on a show, and carefully posed with my Les Paul to lay down a cool guitar overdub, which I played over and over and over and over again until he finally walked through the door. Yes, walked in, as opposed to knocked, because of course I left the door open. I'm such a schemer.

So I agree that you need luck (with the exceptions Chillbot mentioned), and I've certainly had my share. But luck only opens the door. You need some combination of talent and other skills to capitalize on the opportunity.


----------



## purple (Apr 18, 2020)

Now that I have more time to reply with a more nuanced take:

Skill is most important around the "mid" level on the industry ladder, IMO. At this level, people are checking your work, but you also aren't powerful enough to have people do the work for you. At this level, great skill and efficiency is a prerequisite, because there are gorillions of mid-level composers and producers and so-on that can do the job well. On top of this, you need good people skills, these days you would do well with good website and social media skills as well. Many mid-level musical professionals do have the skills to ascend to "celebrity status" but not the luck or charisma.

At the top end, you can get away with poor skills if you surround yourself with the right people and work for somebody that is very popular in the industry. That's not to say that everyone at the top does this(most really don't), but there are certainly some people who end up with high-profile jobs in the industry because they simply went to high school with a director or something, and the interns, music editors, and other underlings end up picking up their slack. At this level, skills can help, and even the worst people at this level skillwise are at least competent, but most of the you are going to get are the result of lucky connections, popularity, and coincidence.

At the low end, you can probably get a few (often decent) jobs even with poor skills, as long as you _do _have some good marketing/business skills or charisma.


----------



## sIR dORT (Apr 18, 2020)

chillbot said:


> You make a lot of these kinda posts, huh. And if I recall you are young and just starting out? Just getting my bearings.
> 
> Cause it hits on a nerve with me, there are certain big names in our industry that think luck has nothing to do with it, or rather, that you can "make your own luck" just by hustling and bustling and forcing the issue. Which I think is total bullshit. And usually seen through the lens of survivorship bias. Almost everyone needs to get lucky at some point. But to answer your question, you can't point to one or the other because there are so many factors that add into it.
> 
> ...


Great thoughts, thanks. I do just cause I enjoy hearing people's perspectives on these questions. Feel like I'm getting past the just starting out stage, but obviously am always learning, hence this post


----------



## sIR dORT (Apr 18, 2020)

Mike Greene said:


> Luck is almost mandatory (I like Chillbot's RPG analogy), but luck only opens the door. You need that combination of talent and other skills to seize that opportunity.


Literally that answers my question, very interesting.


----------



## chillbot (Apr 18, 2020)

dzilizzi said:


> work ethic.


Yup. I figured I was missing something. That's one for sure. But it might be the easiest one.


----------



## NoamL (Apr 18, 2020)

You need time more than anything else.

Time to master your craft, because most of the people who arrive in LA as "aspiring composers" can't actually write underscore, just thematic pieces that are blatant sidewayses of Williams or Zimmer hits, or a bunch of "music" that doesn't work as score (I was guilty of this x100 and see it all the time whenever someone introduces themselves as "aspiring composer").

Time to develop a circle of people who know you and your work, because credentials or degrees will not open ANY doors for you here anymore, that pony sailed in 2005. And because every gig you'll ever have will trace back to the gig you won because of the gig you won because of some crap project that you worked your heart out on 20 years ago.

Time to actually learn the workflow of scoring because there's pretty much no way to grasp all of the details of the process other than to painfully develop your own system over time, or assist someone more successful and learn their method.

Time to develop your unique compositional voice which is the only musical asset you actually have as a composer, with a unique voice you can get gig after gig despite lacking craft, but your personal voice is no less difficult to develop than all the craft in the world.

Time to develop all of the knowledge surrounding production and mixing, that no composer had to know in 1982, yet no composer can independently succeed without today.

And time for "that guy whose indie short you scored ten years ago" to become a major director.. or not...

The ugly truth is that '*time*' is a product of other factors. AKA money and/or working a not too demanding job until you make it. If you have the resources to stick it out in LA you can PROBABLY eventually get somewhere. If you're working a day job that leaves you completely exhausted then you're not going to have time to work on your success. Sure, on the other hand, if you have a bunch of free time but just sit on your ass all day you'll get nowhere.

All of that, in summary, is to say that what @chillbot said and what @AlexRuger said a few days ago, is spot on. You need money. A lot of people get weeded out who would be EXCELLENT film composers, they just get ejected from the process of becoming a great film composer by financial necessity to get "a real job." The process is incredibly unfair. People know this, if they didn't, you wouldn't have every composer in LA drowning in "can I pay _you_ to be your summer intern" offers from "aspiring composers".


----------



## chillbot (Oct 22, 2021)

ka00 said:


> Just wanted to quote this post, chillbot, so that more people stumble on it. Bang on.


It's funny I was thinking of this exact post as I was reading the talk about luck in the higher education thread but didn't want to bother with it.

I still feel like my hypothetical perfect RPG character (sure, add Stamina) is the only situation where you could maybe, possibly, get by without luck.

There's a certain high-profile agent on one of the big facebook groups that claims you can make your own luck. Bullshit. That's just a way of patting yourself on the back retroactively... "look at me look at me I'm so good and I worked so hard I didn't need ANY luck!"

Anyway, good luck! To everyone!


----------



## chillbot (Oct 22, 2021)

ka00 said:


> part age-related.


So much age related! And/or having a family and kids.

In my 20s I routinely worked 80-100 hour weeks. In my 40s... nope!

The one thing I would add to this is how bad I messed up my hands and carpal tunnel with bad ergonomics working so many hours. Fine, work the long hours but pay attention to your ergonomics and posture first.


----------



## mybadmemory (Oct 22, 2021)

A few aspects I believe are part of it:

1. The ability to assess where the level of quality you need to hit is.

2. The self awareness to gauge your own current level against this level.

3. The ability to analyze and break down the steps needed to get there.

4. The ability to realize it’s not only about the craft but about how you present the craft and yourself.

5. The perseverance to stick at it for a long enough time to get somewhere.


----------



## MartinH. (Oct 22, 2021)

chillbot said:


> I've had moderate success I'd put my RPG character somewhere around:
> 
> Luck - 95
> *Charisma - 12*
> ...



I call bullshit on that low charisma stat. Going by your posts here, there's no way this almost 1 out of 10 points rating reflects how people perceive you. I just can't believe it. 12/100 are people that get banned on VI:C for being arrogant assholes imho. I don't know you in person, you may think it's one of your weaknesses, but it's probably one of your strengths is my best guess. I felt like that for a long time too...


----------

