Does playing an instrument make you a musician?

[willg95]

i think if you play an instrument and you love music, decent to excellent at it, and dedicated to playing it you're a musician. i hate the people that think they're b.a.m.f. just because they can play smoke on the water in E on guitar

 

[IanStephenson]

If you play football regularly you're a footballer..

If you play music you're a musician...

Just because you do some things doesn't mean you have to be good at either of them.

If you crash your car you were still the driver. You could be an AWEFUL driver, and I an AWEFUL musician.

Ian

 

[QORC]

Definition of "musician" from Merriam's Dictionary: " composer, conductor, or performer of music; instrumentalist"

Definition of "bassist": "a person who plays an acoustic or electric bass "



again, where is this snobby notion that you have to be subjectively "good" to be a bassist?

 

[QORC]

I personally believe that being a musician means approaching music as an occupation. I for instance can call myself a part time musician because of the studio work and gigs I do (which draw a nice supplementary income to augment my day job's paycheck).

I think in the artistic sense, one that plays with great dedication should be called just that, an artist.

so people that play for free and those who only show lukewarm dedication are called what? Belgian Waffles?

Even if one says a musician is one "who is SKILLED at playing a musical instrument."

Skilled? That is subjective. Means to do something "well". What defines "well"?

I'm not sure this debate gets us anywhere. If you play an instrument, for money or not money, you're a musician. Period.

 

[emblymouse]

I've always felt that if music is the what everything else revolves around inside you than you are a musician. It would be your strongest influence and sensitivity, your 'nature'.

 

[mjolnir]

so people that play for free and those who only show lukewarm dedication are called what? Belgian Waffles?

Even if one says a musician is one "who is SKILLED at playing a musical instrument."

Skilled? That is subjective. Means to do something "well". What defines "well"?

I'm not sure this debate gets us anywhere. If you play an instrument, for money or not money, you're a musician. Period.

This debate can go in so many directions depending on the crowd. After seeing this thread I took the question to some of my personal friends and we talked about it for hours upon hours, and they eventually changed my mind, though my opinion still differs from yours.

There's nothing wrong with that, however, and in this case I am content to agree to disagree.

 

[The Golden Boy]

Playing music makes you a musician.

That means both kinds of music- country AND western.

 

[speedkills]

"Music is well said to be the speech of angels."
Thomas Carlyle

"You just pick up a chord, go twang, and you've got music."
Sid Vicious

 

[bburk]

"You just pick up a chord, go twang, and you've got music."
Sid Vicious

Hehe, but was Sid a 'musician'?

 

[speedkills]

Hehe, but was Sid a 'musician'?

It's all relative isn't it??

Was Picasso an artist?

Not to me.

I've got fridge art my kids did in kindegarten that's better "art" than things I've seen by Picasso in a museum.

So is what Sid did music?

Yeah, to me it was.

 

[Samthebassist]

wow i'm glad i posted this up...very good forum!!

 

[iceshaft07]

A "musician" is a vocation, the work in which a person is regularly employed. It doesn't have to be your primary income source - there are plenty of part-time people in all sorts of job descriptions - but to me, it has to be 1) regular (recurring more or less on a schedule, not just once) and 2) employed (paid) to count.

Knowing how to play an instrument just means that you are trained in that particular instrument. I know how to speak on a stage because I took a drama class in high school; that does not automatically make me a "public speaker." I have a Missouri real estate broker's license; even though that technically, legally makes me a "real estate broker," I would never introduce myself as one unless I was buying a house (in which case I would be legally required to disclose it, under Missouri real estate law).

If you know how to cook, does that make you a cook?

Even beyond that, I think there are two ways to look at this: A musician is an umbrella term for anyone who gets paid regularly for playing any instrument. You can be a bassist, and more broadly, a musician. If you play more than one instrument, which one you want to call yourself (pianist, bassist, etc) is up to you, but you're still a musician - so long as you also get paid regularly for doing it.

For someone who knows how to play an instrument and doesn't get paid, well, the term for that is hobbyist, no different than gardening or fishing or playing pool or anything else that some people make money doing/do for a living and others don't. By the way, that is not an insulting term; it's just a fact. If you do some activity for which professionals doing it would get paid and you're not, or you could also say if you get paid less than it costs you to continue doing it (net loss) beyond a reasonable period of breaking into a new field, you're a hobbyist. There is no shame in that.

Some people use the term "professional musician," which to me means, a musician (someone who gets paid regularly for playing some instrument or instruments) whose PRIMARY source of income is playing/writing/recording music. You can also be a part-time musician, if you get paid regularly for doing it, and you *make* money overall as a result of doing it (like a second-job as a part-time cook, for example). If you break even or lose money regularly, face it, you are a hobbyist, and you are doing it not as a job, but as a hobby, because you enjoy it. That's not a bad thing, but it doesn't make you a musician.

I think a big problem for Westerners, especially Americans, is that they identify too much with what they do in order to make money. Who you are is not what you do, but "musician" is a job title just the same. You can love playing music and not be a musician. There are plenty of professional musicians who hate the music they play, who do it just for money, or get as little enjoyment out of it as they would any other job. You could be a hobbyist who loves music way more than those guys, but that doesn't make you a musician, if it's not at least a part-time job earning you a net increase in your bottom line. There is no shame in that; one thing has nothing to do with the other. It's just a job. It's *great* when a musician loves his job, but if playing/writing/recording music isn't your job (or at least earning you a net profit), and we're talking about definitions, you're a hobbyist, not a musician.

Hope this helps, and this is IMO, blah blah blah

I need to disagree with you here. I don't think 'musician' is just a job title.

For example, you used a public speaking example.

Let me support myself with a counter example. Consider a pilot who flies airplanes as a hobby, and a pilot who flies commercial 747's. Would the hobbyist not be considered a pilot because he does not get paid to fly?

Also, consider what would happen if there was a phenomanal musical score writer who couldn't get a job because of little demand in the area he lives in, or simply just has not been recognized yet. Would you then define a muscian to be someone who has the potential to earn money for his or her musical skills?

What then of a person who writes such modern music that it hasn't been accepted, similar to how everyone used to think the earth was the center of the universe?

In the end, it is probably impossible to define exactly what a musician is. It's closer to a strong government (a musician must know all areas of music, be able to play X instruments, and have written accepted work) vs weak government (a musician must know how to play at least one song) arguement. There is most likely no clear answer.

 

[Samthebassist]

I need to disagree with you here. I don't think 'musician' is just a job title.

For example, you used a public speaking example.

Let me support myself with a counter example. Consider a pilot who flies airplanes as a hobby, and a pilot who flies commercial 747's. Would the hobbyist not be considered a pilot because he does not get paid to fly?

Also, consider what would happen if there was a phenomanal musical score writer who couldn't get a job because of little demand in the area he lives in, or simply just has not been recognized yet. Would you then define a muscian to be someone who has the potential to earn money for his or her musical skills?

What then of a person who writes such modern music that it hasn't been accepted, similar to how everyone used to think the earth was the center of the universe?

In the end, it is probably impossible to define exactly what a musician is. It's closer to a strong government (a musician must know all areas of music, be able to play X instruments, and have written accepted work) vs weak government (a musician must know how to play at least one song) arguement. There is most likely no clear answer.

EXACTLY!!! omg!!!! thats wut im sayin!!!!

 

[DanielleMuscato]

I need to disagree with you here. I don't think 'musician' is just a job title.

For example, you used a public speaking example.

Let me support myself with a counter example. Consider a pilot who flies airplanes as a hobby, and a pilot who flies commercial 747's. Would the hobbyist not be considered a pilot because he does not get paid to fly?

Also, consider what would happen if there was a phenomanal musical score writer who couldn't get a job because of little demand in the area he lives in, or simply just has not been recognized yet. Would you then define a muscian to be someone who has the potential to earn money for his or her musical skills?

What then of a person who writes such modern music that it hasn't been accepted, similar to how everyone used to think the earth was the center of the universe?

In the end, it is probably impossible to define exactly what a musician is. It's closer to a strong government (a musician must know all areas of music, be able to play X instruments, and have written accepted work) vs weak government (a musician must know how to play at least one song) arguement. There is most likely no clear answer.

I think you have to make an exception for licensed titles. For example, like I said in an earlier post, I have a Missouri real estate broker license. I do not work in real estate and have never represented anyone other than myself in a real estate transaction. To introduce myself as "Dave Muscato, Real Estate Broker" would be misleading because people would think that's what I do for a living, but it isn't. I therefore do not introduce myself as a real estate broker. However, I have to legally disclose that I am a licensed broker anytime I'm involved in a real estate transaction, even if not in the capacity of representing someone else. Technically, I am a broker. Similarly, a pilot (who has a valid pilot's license) can say, "I'm a pilot," but s/he might want to clarify that he is not a commercial pilot if he doesn't want to mislead people into thinking that's what he does for a living.

Along the same lines, if someone isn't a professional musician, I think it's only appropriate that s/he introduce himself as an "aspiring musician," "part-time musician," "hobbyist musician," etc, in the interest of not misleading people into thinking s/he is a professional. If you introduce yourself as "Firstname Lastname, Musician," people will presume you mean that you are a professional without further classification.

All I was saying is that musician, unclassified, is presumed to be a job title. Does that make sense? lol... kinda roundabout way of putting it, I know.

 

[QORC]

who introduces themselves with their title anyway???

that being said, if I am discussing my life I will say something like "I'm an executive with ...., also a Dad and a husband and a part-time musician."

Which indicates not my skill level, not whether I get paid or not (I do), but that I don't do it as a full time job.

I'm not "aspiring" to be anything more than what I am - a musician, an instrumentalist, a bassist, an occasional vocalist. I am all of those things already. I AM a professional musican, excuse me. Means I GET PAID.

Nowhere does "professional" indicate that you're in the top 5% of all musicians. I'll bet I'm a better bassist than tons of full-time, so-called "professional" bassists.


Definition of professional - "engaged in by persons receiving financial return." If you get paid $5 or $50,000 for a gig, you are a "professional."

So now not only do you have to be GREAT (by some subjective standard) to be considered a musician , but now we are establishing a MINIMUM ANNUAL INCOME from it too? Says who?

Who would ever term themselves as a "hobbyist musician"?? there is some amazing snobbery in this thread.

 

[Geezerman]

It's a joke.
Electric Bass players have been traditionally considered the janitors of the music world by "real" musicians for decades.
Many other instrumentalists do not realize the importance of bass

Pretty much

 

[sixtwofour]

who introduces themselves with their title anyway???

that being said, if I am discussing my life I will say something like "I'm an executive with ...., also a Dad and a husband and a part-time musician."

Which indicates not my skill level, not whether I get paid or not (I do), but that I don't do it as a full time job.

I'm not "aspiring" to be anything more than what I am - a musician, an instrumentalist, a bassist, an occasional vocalist. I am all of those things already. I AM a professional musican, excuse me. Means I GET PAID.

Nowhere does "professional" indicate that you're in the top 5% of all musicians. I'll bet I'm a better bassist than tons of full-time, so-called "professional" bassists.


Definition of professional - "engaged in by persons receiving financial return." If you get paid $5 or $50,000 for a gig, you are a "professional."

So now not only do you have to be GREAT (by some subjective standard) to be considered a musician , but now we are establishing a MINIMUM ANNUAL INCOME from it too? Says who?

Who would ever term themselves as a "hobbyist musician"?? there is some amazing snobbery in this thread.

Sage opinion.

Who cares what people call themselves, anyway? It's not what you say you are, it's what you do.

 

[FuturePrimitive]

I can't believe I read the whole thing. Oh well, I'm at work so it's not like it was taking time away from my bass.

Anyway, I gotta agree with Dave on this one. The word "musician" to me has always implied some vocational component, not just skill or love for music. Furthermore, I can't accept any definition that uses vague or highly subjective terms like "soul" or "spirit" in them.

 

[Rickett Customs]

Hey, OP,
Tell your buddy that yes, he can play bass, but he doesn't think like a bass player when he plays it.

The rest of it is just:

 

[iceshaft07]

All I was saying is that musician, unclassified, is presumed to be a job title. Does that make sense? lol... kinda roundabout way of putting it, I know.

That definately makes sense, and I agree with you. And, after thinking of what you said, I should refine what I have said.

I definately would not introduce myself as a musician, not even a bassist. However, if someone were to ask me if I were a musician, I would without a doubt reply "Well, I play bass and know some of music theory", or at least say "I am a bassist in a band". The word "Musician" is such an abstract word that it depends on the context that it is used. And therefore, trying to debate it's over all meaning would not really get anywhere.

I guess what this will eventually lead to is that words only have as much meaning as the person you are talking with.