Over dinner with a fellow sitarist in the Bay Area, I asked what he thought of a few other players—and immediately felt the drag: vague answers, hesitancy, not much signal. Far more deeply trained than I am, he has opinions.

But I asked a bad question.

Most of us do. In a small music community, “So what do you think of their playing?” is too broad, too loaded, and honestly, a trap. People default to polite answers; negativity can feel toxic. But thoughtful critique is useful-it's part of a healthy culture of improving ourselves, our art, and our community. We want to understand how we hear each other—without being judgmental or harmful.

So swap the question.

Try:

• “What do you hear and like most in their playing?”
• “What would you love to hear more of in their playing?”

Those two prompts pull out highlights and lowlights without turning the conversation into gossip. You get the strengths to amplify and the edges to sharpen—something every musician has, even the greats.

Here’s how it plays in real life:

Old: “What do you think of them?”
Response: “They’re… good! Yeah.”

New: “What do you hear and like most in their playing?”
Response: “Their ability to play fast runs cleanly is mindblowing.”
Follow-up: “What would you love to hear more of?”
Response: “More space between notes, more emphasis on feel.”

In general, our questions are the flashlights we bring into a subject. A broad question is a dispersed beam—it might catch something, with the right person on the right day. Most of the time, it helps to focus the beam. Not an interrogation, not hyper-specific—just enough direction to reveal something true.

So the next time you want an honest read on a musician (or anything, really), don’t ask, “What do you think of them?” Ask what they love most—and what they’d love to hear more of. You’ll get clarity without cruelty, and feedback that’s actually useful for how you listen.