I was a professional classical musician for a number of years before getting into programming. I&#x27;d say that this article lines up with my experience pretty well. Obviously to be successful you need to have some level of hard work and the more you work the better, but really talent is the main delineator at the very top.<p>I think there are basically 3 categories of talent.<p>Top level: I had a friend who practiced about 1 hour a day and now plays professionally in the Boston Symphony. Obviously she had bucketloads of talent. These folks are quite rare.<p>Middle Tier (this is where I was): Folks who worked quite hard for a decade or more squashing all of their performance weaknesses to get to the level where they could perform professionally. There are a fair number of these people.<p>Quixotic: Even when these folks practice 6 hours a day, they never progress beyond a certain ability level. They will never be professionals. Sometimes it takes a couple of decades before they give up. I have a lot of friends that fall into this category of talent.<p>Of course there are people who have top level talent <i>and</i> pour on bucket loads of work. The one guy I knew in college who was like this is now in the Canadian Brass.<p>I spent a couple of decades playing my instrument before quitting and I can say without a doubt that the idea that talent is <i>actually</i> hard work is complete nonsense.<p>There are many technical &quot;sticking points&quot; that most people need to overcome before they can perform at a professional level. The most talented performers breeze through most or all of the sticking points that everyone else has.<p>The non-obvious side effect of this is that the most talented players are often the worst teachers - because they have no idea how to help anyone else get through their &quot;sticking points&quot;. But that&#x27;s another discussion entirely.....