Converted to jazz, rock...?

There are many talented jazz and rock musicians who thought themselves how to play a particular instrument...
I believe that it's possible to teach yourself to play guitar. Trumpet and Sax is OK too, but you'd better have some previous background with different instrument. My friend played a violin... Let's say he was a drop-out student getting bored from Bach, Beethoven, Mozart... He decided to play jazz, rock and folk music with violin and than tought himself to play sax and than later-on to play trumpet.
To teach yourself to play piano I believe is barely possible with preference to have a previous background and ability to read sheet music(which i hated the most times back...). I believe that most of the jazz and rock piano players have their musical education which I assume can be also incomplete in some of its degree(of incompletion).

Now to the questions:

Why people think that the individual with classical music background sometimes is very unsuccessfull in jazz or rock? I cannot imagine myself a piano player who did not excersise with ethudes of Schuman. I believe they give a basics to the improvisation. I cannot imagine any musician on any instrument without "warming up" berfore he/she starts play something and ethudes is probably the best way to deal with it.

I'm also curious about musical education whether you can start from Beatles or Mulligan instead of starting from Schuman or Rubinstain?

I also know that there is such credit you can take as
"basics of improvisation" but I believe that improvisation is something that comes from inside and should have rather a personal approach. Whoever took or takes the personal approach has its own signature on which people distinguish him/her from different musicians.

And finally what is the best way to become a rock or jazz musician?

Plan a)

Start musical education with basics as any musician starts in the school playing some ethudes and sonatas and than drop-out without wasting time and start rock or jazz when you feel yourself strong.

Plan b)

Get yourself onto the guitar and bass way by teaching yourself with different or one private instructor... There is a possibility for you to get kind-of monophonic improvisation with no personal signature unless you're born guitarist or so...

Plan c) Get yourself a complete musical education, play in some orchestras or conduct it; getting bored of this start improvise and get to the stage with rock or jazz band. Probably too long but if that's that case there are more possibilities to improvise using stronger and more sophisticated techniques(probably grabbed from Schuman ethudes with 64th notes or Rachmaninoff for instance). If people believe that in this case the musician is only adopted to read from the sheet, well, it's again either yes or no imo.

And finally, the question:
Can you feel that your son or daughter is a born rock- or jazz- musician from its childhood?:^)

P.S. for vocals is the whole different story where I tend to agree that singer with opera background less-likely to be successfull in jazz.
Interesting questions. It's my belief that quality musicians can play any type of music reasonably well, but that the best musicians in any type of music ony sound their best when they play their specialty. However, the difference between playing music reasonably well and the best is enormous. An analog can be made to professional athletes. NFL players are tremendous athletes who in high school and college usually also excelled in baseball and basketball, but virtually nobody can play at the professional level in more than one sport.

Implicit in your musing is the assumption that classical music is somehow above both jazz and rock. While at some intellectual level there is certainly some truth in such a statement, each type of music presents its own specific challenges. The ability of a classical musician to read and interpet a written score in no way translates to an ability improvise interactively with other musicians while playing "Giant Steps". I don't know why, but these are two very distinct talents. Rock covers a fairly wide range of music types, and while their are exceptions, most rock does not require a high degree of technical ability. Rock is more about attitude and aggression.

One last point. Both jazz and rock, historically speaking, at their cores are products of the American black experience. As such, the music contains the experience of slavery, lynchings, the rural south, segregation, the civil rights movement, urban ghettos, etc. Some musicians (of any race) are better to bring out these elements of the music than others. But then again, Ray Charles once said that "it's all folk music, 'cause donkeys don't make music."

The absolute best way to become a rock musician is to play in a band. This is also true about becoming a jazz musician, but a little formal training would go a long way.
Marakanetz-it's difficult to know where to start on this one..
First up I don't think it's true to say musicians with classical backgrounds don't make good rock/pop or jazz artists-there are some maybe even plenty who have-there are a few hidden ones too- I believe both Eddie and Alex Van Halen were classically trained-Alex apparently has perfect pitch although as drummer in Van Halen you would never know.
Why it might happen that a classically trained musician doesn't cut it in rock/jazz is that all the technique in the world won't work in rock or jazz without perhaps a maverick type of spark,a dirty edge if you like .
Another point to your posting is that professional musicians are that,professional,often playing in a band or style that only shows one aspect of their talents.
The great beauty of rock/pop was that lack of technique could be over come with passion and energy.
I don't think that can be pulled off in Jazz so easily.

As for planning to be a musician,I don't think you can safely sit down with a plan,you just need to do it and hope what talent you have is met with a whole load of luck.
If you are wondering about all that kind of stuff you posted you are probably beat before you start,follow your heart and work hard.
As for musical talent I believe it can be learned and developed to the highest of standards but the true geniuses of all genres are born in my opinion.
Your posting made me think of the time Miles Davis was jamming/recording with Jimi Hendrix and was amazed that Hendrix couldn't read music however he soon realised that it didn't matter and that Hendrix was working on an instinctive musical knowledge rather than a trained one.
At the end of the day both these giants of music had travelled very different paths to the same destination.
Interesting comments.

I think the true talent of a musician can be found in his/her creativity. This comment assumes that they can play their instrument very well. Also, many of the very best musicians in the Jazz/Rock genre, didn't or don't know how to read sheet music.

As for converting between styles. The only style of music that a musician will be truely succesful playing, is the type that they enjoy playing. So many of these conversions that we see or hear today are based on monetary decisions not personal preference.
the above comments mentioned a number of talented guitarists. well i mentioned that guitar you can learn by yourself. simply record a sequence of chords played through the tape player and than improvise to follow the harmonics.

what about piano or keyboards?
i do play accordion which also has piano-like keys for the right hand and buttons on the left.
i tried to teach myself(having a pretty solid accordion background) to run with left hand as good as I can do with the right... well, it's a tough effort i can say. if i wasn't too lazy on my previous time reading sheet music i would probably found myself a number of appropriate Schuman ethudes to excersize my left hand... all my reading of a sheet music was made by memorizing 5...10 bars(maybe voicing them first) and than playing without looking on the sheet and so-on...

the whole different situation would be if i would want to convert from piano to accordion or to guitar or maybe any other instrument with alot easier conversion process.

many composers starting from the end of 19th and beginning of 20th century realized a flexibility of that instrument to vary harmonics to deviate them from standard and turn them to dissonances by means of which they could create more realistic picture of their thought. so jazz i can has probably only afro rhythm influence, but the jazz itself is much more.

there also a lot of judgements can be made on behalf of jazz or rock vs. classical music.

for example i would never judge to this category "Green Day" where none of the musicians can hold an instrument in their hands. simply saying they've got no background and how they moved on the stage only hell who knows.
Marakanetz-guitars are the main stay of the rock world however keyboard / piano players were very much part of the British 60's& 70's pop and rock movement especially in 70's progressive rock.
It was very much part of the British middle classes mentality (post-war) to ensure your children had at least rudimentry piano skills and piano's were commonplace in most homes of this type.
It was not unusual irrespective of their main instrument for musicians of this era to be adept on piano.
In the 80's it was more part of the synth/pop thing and the emmergence of affordable keyboards led to a universal growth in this field although I would argue on the whole the level of musicianship fell dramatically although obviously some great new bands broke through doing for keyboards (i.e. very basic skills but high excitment)in the 80's and 90's what guitars did in the 50's and 60's.