Why Quantity Beats Quality in Mastering Any Skill
He noted that half of academic publications came from the square root of the total participants. You'll see Price's Law in many offices, where many people slouch in their chairs, cracking jokes in the coffee room, taking their sweet time to actually begin working.
Meanwhile, others work with desperate urgency, as if defusing a bomb with every minute of their day.
You see it with online dating. Researchers found that on Hinge, the top 1% of men got 16% of the likes. What does this even tell us? We know that some men are more attractive. We know some employees work harder and faster. We get closer to the answer when we look at classical composers.
Four dominate the radio waves: Beethoven, Brahms, Mozart, and Tchaikovsky. The catch is that you only hear 5% of the songs they wrote. Through implication, they are writing 20ish songs for each of the most commonly being played.
Beethoven, for example, wrote 722 pieces. Mozart wrote 600, despite dying at 35. Michael Jackson wrote roughly 100 songs for every album he published, which leaves about 80% of those songs unpublished.
He nearly cut one of his greatest hits, Smooth Criminal, from the final list. Volume and focused output matter in a big way.
This is an extension of preferential attachment, the scientific phenomenon where things are distributed according to how much something already has. The number of hit songs these artists produced was related to them writing lots of songs (and also having obvious and prodigious talent).
And yet I ask, what can be gleaned from this? Most of us aren't virtuoso musicians. Years ago, a ceramics teacher ran a learning experiment. He divided the class into two groups. Group A was the quantity group. He told them to make as much pottery as possible.
Group B was the quality group. He told them to create a single, great piece of pottery. On the final day of class, when it was time to grade the pottery, he noticed the quantity group was significantly better.
Deep within this experiment, is the code mastery and talent.
A learning curve is less like a curve and more like a mysterious trail. In the pottery experiment, the quantity group wandered down that trail, stepping in holes, hitting their head on branches — learning from mistakes.
The quality group stood near the entrance, contemplating the best route, worrying about tripping and looking stupid. Quantity is unfairly stigmatized, seen only as a way of leeching off quality — which it surely can in the absence of discipline.
Quality matters but it's subjective. Quantity can be measured. It's a number that can be compared to other numbers. When we dive in and start doing things, we are wired to uphold some level of quality. We have internalized standards for effort.
Creative block is when your expectations rise above a reasonable standard. Procrastination is not born of laziness but of perfectionism. Ray Bradbury famously told struggling wPrice's Law was first observed by Derek Price.
He noted that half of academic publications came from the square root of the total participants. More plaintly, among 100 academics, 10 were writing half the publications. You'll see Price's Law in many offices, where many people slouch in their chairs, cracking jokes in the coffee room, taking their sweet time to actually begin working.
Meanwhile, others work with desperate urgency, as if defusing a bomb with every minute of their day.
You see it with online dating. Researchers found that on Hinge, the top 1% of men got 16% of the likes. What does this even tell us? We know that some men are more attractive. We know some employees work harder and faster. We get closer to the answer when we look at classical composers.
Four dominate the radio waves: Beethoven, Brahms, Mozart, and Tchaikovsky. The catch is that you only hear 5% of the songs they ever wrote. Through implication, they are writing about 20 songs for each of the most commonly being played.
Beethoven, for example, wrote 722 pieces. Mozart wrote 600, despite dying at 35. Michael Jackson wrote roughly 100 songs for every album he published, which leaves about 80% of those songs unpublished.
He nearly cut one of his greatest hits, Smooth Criminal, from the final list. Volume and focused output matter in a big way.
This is an extension of preferential attachment, the scientific phenomenon where things are distributed according to how much something already has. The number of hit songs these artists produced was related to them writing lots of songs (and also having obvious and prodigious talent).
So, what can be gleaned from this? Most of us aren't virtuoso musicians. Years ago, a ceramics teacher ran a learning experiment. He divided the class into two groups. Group A was the quantity group. He told them to make as much pottery as possible.
Group B was the quality group. He told them to create a single, great piece of pottery. On the final day of class, when it was time to grade the pottery, he noticed the quantity group was significantly better.
Deep within this experiment, is the code mastery and talent.
A learning curve is less like a curve and more like a mysterious trail. In the pottery experiment, the quantity group wandered down that trail, stepping in holes, hitting their head on branches — and learning from mistakes.
The quality group stood near the entrance, contemplating the best route, worrying about tripping and looking stupid. Quantity is unfairly stigmatized, seen only as a way of leeching off quality — which it surely can in the absence of discipline.
Quality matters but it's subjective. Quantity can be measured. It's a number that can be compared to other numbers. When we dive in and start doing things, we are wired to uphold some level of quality. We have internalized standards of effort.
Creative block is when your expectations rise above a reasonable standard. Procrastination is born not of laziness but of perfectionism. Ray Bradbury famously told struggling writers to do one short story per week. If they wrote 52 in a row, it was highly unlikely all 52 would be bad.riters to do one short story per week. If they wrote 52 in a row, it was highly unlikely all 52 would be bad.
Whether you are learning to code, speak a new language, or bark like a psychotic chihuahua — approach the skill with curiosity, a willingness to 'wander the mysterious path' rather than create a perfect map beforehand.
What's remarkable is how powerfully correlated quantity is to success in every domain. In Academia, the researchers who published the most tend to have the most overall success: more notoriety, higher paychecks, and more promotions.
UC professor, Frank Baron, noted of top academics, 'Voluminous productivity is the rule and not the exception.'
In debate, presenting a higher volume of arguments for your position is more effective when convincing a neutral person. Conversely, with a stubborn person, flip it and use a smaller set of high-quality arguments — or better yet— don't argue with them at all.
Stephen King sets a rule of 2000 words a day until he's done.
He says he loses the feel for his story if he doesn't maintain this steady writing cadence.
On writing platforms, the writers with the most hit articles (20,000+ claps/likes) are almost entirely the writers who publish 15-20+ articles a month and have done so for many months and years.
Even on the roiling drama pit known as X, 10% of users are responsible for roughly 80% of tweets.
When we simply put in the reps, our brain defaults to a level of effort that helps us grow. The time we put in begins to reflect in the quality of our work. This isn't to say that we shouldn't stop, get feedback, or look for ways to improve. Far from it. But on a pound for pound basis, taking action is far more important than contemplation.
Being creative is hard. I've learned this firsthand in my writing career. In this world, it's easy to beat yourself up o ver how bad your 'stuff' is, especially when you look back over your older work.
Consider this: every creative I've spoken with — be it artists, musicians, writers, or YouTubers — are frequently surprised by their hits. In fact, there is a long and illustrious list of musicians who think their most popular songs are trash. So don't be too hard on yourself.
Kurt Cobain hated Smells Like Teen Spirit, saying, 'I can barely — especially on a bad night, get through 'Teen Spirit.' I literally want to throw my guitar down and walk away.'
The lead singer of Led Zeppelin, Robert Plant, dismissed his iconic song, Stairway to Heaven, referring it to as 'that annoying wedding song'.
This poisonous hatred for one's own work extends into every creative realm.
It is oddly encouraging when you know how many geniuses hated their work.
Michelangelo famously attacked his renowned sculpture, the Florentine Pieta. Though the exact cause is not known, one speculation is that his frustration with the work itself, caused his temper to boil over.
I've found that, with productivity and creativity, there's an element of gambling. You never know how something is going to turn out when you start. But you need to be 'pulling the lever' frequently to have a chance.
Your results can be illogical — 1+1 doesn't always equal 2. Sometimes it equals 1. Others time, it equals 100. I've found that creativity and skills are like a pyramid. The wider the base. The taller it gets. And the more your math starts to check out.
In the beginner's pottery class, the 'quantity' students didn't worry about putting on an art show. They kept it simple and learned the feel of the clay in their hands.
They practiced spinning the clay at different speeds. They dropped pots. They overcooked and cracked them.
These mistakes mutated into skill. Why? Because they were able to expose their own flaws and weaknesses through this iterative process, and then correct for them. If they'd sat and worried about what mistakes they would make, they may have never begun. In fact, they typically wouldn't have even predicted the mistake that snuck up on them.
When properly governed, quantity is its own virtue. It can become the brick of habit from which our abilities emerge.
If you aren't sure of where to start on your business, song, art project, or book, start somewhere, anywhere. Then figure out the rest later.
When I'm feeling frozen, I often say, "Just shut up and do it already.'
Make the pottery. Make it ugly. Make lots of it.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
The Bright Side: Leopard seal love songs structured like nursery rhymes, study finds
Male leopard seals compose and sing their own songs to woo potential mating partners, scientists in Australia have found. The songs are structured much like nursery rhymes, making them easy to remember. "It kind of sounds like sound effects from an '80s sci-fi" movie, the lead author of the study said. When male leopard seals dive down into icy Antarctic waters, they sing songs structured like nursery rhymes in performances that can last up to 13 hours, scientists said Thursday. The Australian-led team of researchers compared the complexity of the songs composed by the big blubbery mammals to those of other animals -- as well as human musicians like the Beatles and Mozart. Lucinda Chambers, a bioacoustics PhD student at Australia's University of New South Wales, told AFP that people are often surprised when they hear the "otherworldly" hoots and trills sung by leopard seals. "It kind of sounds like sound effects from an '80s sci-fi" movie, said the lead author of a new study in the journal Scientific Reports. During the spring breeding season, male leopard seals dive underwater and perform their songs for two minutes before returning to the surface for air. They then repeat this performance for up to 13 hours a day, according to the study. The researchers determined that all leopard seals share the same set of five "notes" which are impossible to distinguish between individuals. However each seal arranges these notes in a unique way to compose their own personal song. "We theorise that they're using that structure as a way to broadcast their individual identity, kind of like shouting their name out into the void," Chambers said. The researchers believe the males use these songs to woo potential female mates -- and ward off rivals. 'Songbirds of the ocean' The team studied recordings of 26 seals captured by study co-author Tracey Rogers off the coast of Eastern Antarctica throughout the 1990s. "They're like the songbirds of the Southern Ocean," Rogers, who is also from the University of New South Wales, said in a statement. "During the breeding season, if you drop a hydrophone into the water anywhere in the region, you'll hear them singing." The team analysed how random the seals' sequences of notes were, finding that their songs were less predictable than the calls of humpback whales or the whistles of dolphins. But they were still more predictable than the more complex music of the Beatles or Mozart. "They fall into the ballpark of human nursery rhymes," Chambers said. This made sense, because the songs need to be simple enough so that each seal can remember their composition to perform it every day, she explained. She compared it to how "nursery rhymes have to be predictable enough that a child can memorise them". But each seal song also needs to be unpredictable enough to stand out from those of the other males. Leopard seals, which are the apex predator in Antarctic waters, swim alone and cover vast distances. They likely evolved their particular kind of song so that their message travels long distances, the researchers theorised. Varying pitch or frequency might not travel as far in their environment, Chambers said. Female seals also sing sometimes, though the scientists do not know why. Chambers suggested it could be to teach their pups how to sing -- exactly how this talent is passed down is also a mystery. But she added that this behaviour has never been observed in the wild. The females could also just be communicating with each other, she said. (FRANCE 24 with AFP)
Yahoo
17-07-2025
- Yahoo
One of the most common ways couples meet is also the least ‘satisfying' — and leads to marital troubles: study
Dating app algorithms haven't cracked the code on heaven-made matches just yet. Collectively, dating apps like Tinder, Hinge and Bumble have amassed hundreds of millions of users, and increasingly, they're becoming a more popular way for singles of all ages to date. Indeed, dating apps are arguably the best way to find first dates and no-strings-attached lovers, but psychology researchers wanted to know whether committed relationships born online are built to last. In light of this growing demographic of digitally devised married couples, a new study, published in Computers in Human Behavior, explored how the place a couple meets impacts their relationship down the road. The study revealed that not all of these marriages born in the mainframe hold up to couples who began their relationships IRL. The study issued a survey to 923 married adults based in the US, and around half of the studied adults met their spouse online. According to the study, online daters consistently reported less satisfying and stable marriages than offline daters did, leading to what the researchers called the 'online dating effect.' While differing individual factors like age, prior dating experience, and personality traits can all do their fair share of romantic wreckage, the study focused on 'external influences on courtship such as societal marginalization and geographic distance.' These external influences can impact emotional and physical vulnerability as well as conceptions of external approval. With online dating, couples are typically matched up via an algorithm that detects user data and previous activity to suggest potential compatibility. These couples also typically don't face the same initial pressure from friends or families as online daters tend to introduce their partners to their loved ones after the relationship becomes more established. While this phenomenon can be liberating for the couple at first, it can also lead to a sense of insecurity among one or both partners, especially when considering the lack of initial external approval and the amount of time already invested in the relationship — which may lead an individual to tough it out, though these couples are admittedly less likely to make it to marriage. Typically, the couples in the study who met online were younger and more recently married, which could also factor into feelings of instability. Although the study's pool of online daters reported less satisfying marriages overall than couples who met in person, the quality of these connections was still considered relatively higher than in comparable studies in the past, the researchers clarified. Not all couples who meet online are guaranteed to glitch. As The Post previously reported, online dating can take on a dark side. Those who are insecure about their looks, socially anxious or extra-sensitive to rejection are more likely than others to use dating apps in a problematic way, and often, become obsessed with these platforms. In some cases, a preoccupation with online dating can result in chemical imbalances that can even affect libido levels, so swipe carefully — depending on how you operate, you could end up with a future spouse or hormone instability. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
29-05-2025
- Yahoo
What did Beethoven really look like? Scientists think they finally know — and he was a bit of a grouch
Turns out Beethoven didn't just sound intense — he looked it, too. Nearly 200 years after Ludwig van Beethoven's death, scientists say they've finally pieced together what the famously moody maestro actually looked like — and let's just say he wouldn't exactly be mistaken for a people person, originally reported by the Daily Mail. 'I found the face somewhat intimidating,' admitted Cicero Moraes, a Brazilian graphics expert who used 19th-century skull photos, facial modeling, and AI to reconstruct the furrowed countenance of classical music's original bad boy. The first-of-its-kind digital render shows the German composer just as he's often been depicted in oil paintings: scowling and brooding. 'He was indeed irritable, untidy, clumsy, rude, and misanthropic,' British conductor Mark Wigglesworth said in a blog post — though he added, 'Beethoven could be witty, caring, mischievous, generous, and kind.' So what turned the artist formerly known as Ludwig into such a legendary grouch? Experts say it may have been as much biology as biography. In 2023, a groundbreaking DNA study published in Current Biology cracked open the medical mystery of Beethoven's tumultuous life — and painful death at age 56. Researchers sequenced his genome using five strands of his preserved hair and determined he likely died from liver failure caused by chronic alcohol consumption, combined with hepatitis B and a genetic predisposition for liver disease. Reportedly, the beloved composer began suffering bouts of jaundice in 1821, a symptom of liver disease, and had progressive hearing loss that left him completely deaf by his mid-40s. 'Most people who do genetic testing for fun, including myself, will find that there is nothing wrong with them,' lead researcher Tristan Begg said. 'But in this study we had fascinating results in every branch we looked at, from disease risk to the family tree.' Indeed, Beethoven's tangled roots may have been more than musical — the study also suggested a child may have been born from an affair in his family line. As if that weren't enough, bones believed to be fragments of Beethoven's skull — long stashed in a tin marked 'Beethoven' by the descendant of a Viennese doctor — were recently donated to the Medical University of Vienna by California businessman Paul Kaufmann. 'It is extremely emotional to me to return the fragments where they belong, back to where Beethoven is buried,' Kaufmann told CNN in 2023. Moraes reconstructed Beethoven's famously intense visage — aided by old skull images and tissue-thickness data — and reinforced by a death mask made while the composer still had a pulse. 'I academically explored his genius, revealing what made him an icon of Western music,' Moraes said of his 2025 study. 'I analyzed his revolutionary creativity, resilience in composing despite deafness, intense focus, problem-solving ability, and tireless productivity, despite a challenging personality.'