Welcome
Yup, he sounds just like me (IQ 153), and I don't consider myself a prodigy. Music, along with everything else, came easy to me at that age (still does for the most part). I started playing guitar at age 9 and quickly surpassed the other kids in my class to the point where the instructor told my mom she couldn't teach me anything else and I need to find someone new.
My DD (then 7) was playing two handed piano and writing her own arrangements after only three months of lessons. She learns very quickly and has a natural aptitude for music. She plays by ear as well as reads music and has never had a problem figuring out how to play songs from memory. This year she started clarinet in band (she's now 11) and sat on the counch one day and figured out how to play "In Flander's Fields" by ear... this was in November and she'd only had the instrument for a couple of weeks and hadn't been formally taught anything. Anyone who has picked up a clarinet and tried to get something other than a squeak out of it can attest to how impressive that is, lol.
She also does not seem to be a prodigy.
So here's my question (because maybe I'm wrong about the two of us)... what defines a prodigy? Is it exceptional talent, potential, drive and achievement all blended together, or is it any of those elements alone? To me "prodigy" is a very specific word to be used selectively, and I don't consider myself or my daughter in that category.
Are some kids at prodigy level because they're forced by their parents to spend hours practicing, or does the term "prodigy" encompass an inherent mastery drive that supersedes distractions or other interests?
If I compare myself and my daughter to the kids who I consider are prodigies, this question comes to mind: at what point does a natural aptitude for music cross over into prodigy territory?
