Hobbyists -vs- Real Musicians?

[lfmn16]

Wow, that's amazing. I have a full time job, and the hardest thing is finding time and energy to practice when I come home from work. It's a ton of effort to play jazz well, I wonder how he does it.

I read something many years ago by John McLaughlin about how it SHOULD be a struggle. Just my opinion, but I think the struggle is what helps make you a musician not just a person playing an instrument and gives you something worth saying through your music.

I rarely watch American Idol (maybe a 10 times since day one) but when I do see one of the singers, I'm usually struck by how generic they sound. I don't care how good your voice is if you aren't saying something. Struggling to put together a band and play out, getting screwed by club owners and other musicians, trying to get and maintain a following, living on ramen soup, wondering where your next meal is coming from; those are the things that give you something to say worth hearing. Sitting safely in your parent's basement singing by yourself or going out to Karaoke, not so much.

 

[Jon Moody]

The only time that I have any issue whatsoever with the whole "hobbyist vs musician" debate is when someone charges a bar a stupidly low fee to play, citing that "I'm just a hobbyist."

No, you're not. If you're playing out and receiving compensation, you're a musician. And a pro one. Don't undercut yourself because you don't think you're worth it.

 

[Haroldo]

Who fronts just about all bands? Rush aside, the dude / dudette out front is playing guitar and singing. Generally they have all the writing credits too. If I were to suggest a path to musical success and prosperity, it wouldn't be bass. Get out front, sing and have the band named after you. Unfortunately I have a vocal range of about three notes. I would literally kill to get the voice of some of the people that I know.

You have 3 notes?? I can just about make 2.

Having said that, I go back to what constitutes success for the person. I think being a steadily gigging bass player would be grand. (I am immediately reminded of Max Bennett's career, having just learned he died.) I don't have the talent or ambition to do it (plus, I'm an Old). If being a front person floats your boat - do that. If working out changes and playing over them (or whatever) at home makes you happy - do that.

We play bass because we like to play bass. (But by all means follow your muse, wherever she/he/it takes you.)

 

[Frndmoretti]

If I get paid to do something, unless it's a favor for a friend or something similar, I'm doing it profissionally.

working solely as a musician in Brazil is a Hard path I'm not willing to take.

I consider my self more as an artist in a broad sense than strictly a musician.

In my originals band I write lyrics, write arrangements, play thr bass, sing, work on visual identity and ideas with the designer drummer. I rarely get paid much. But I do it professionally.

 

[MultiScaleMale]

You have 3 notes?? I can just about make 2.

Having said that, I go back to what constitutes success for the person. I think being a steadily gigging bass player would be grand. (I am immediately reminded of Max Bennett's career, having just learned he died.) I don't have the talent or ambition to do it (plus, I'm an Old). If being a front person floats your boat - do that. If working out changes and playing over them (or whatever) at home makes you happy - do that.

We play bass because we like to play bass. (But by all means follow your muse, wherever she/he/it takes you.)

Oh, I don't want to be a front man, but if I were to pursue a career in music, I'd go the front man route. There are a few bands where the bassist is a full member, but the majority of times they end up being a hired gun. Look at Foo Fighters - David Grohl is worth ~$250 million, Nate Mendel - $2 million. While it's not bad, there's a huge difference. But in order to be a full member, you have to be in at ground level. I'm too old for that crap.

 

[Bassbeater]

I consider my self more as an artist in a broad sense than strictly a musician.

Well said.

 

[57pbass]

Since I have been paying taxes on my music income for many years.. I consider myself a musician..
I play in many different settings and have many basses.
I our world there is no formula for success.. I always give my best effort and love playing bass. We all have different schedules and conflicts and the amount of shows one plays does not define one as a musician or a non musician..

 

[onamission]

Look no further than the Dictionary

musician
noun

mu·si·cian | \ myü-ˈzi-shən \
Definition of Musician

: a composer, conductor, or performer of music

 

[hrodbert696]

We're in a society that values authenticity. We value going all-in, and committing fully to whatever we're doing. I heard a podcast one time (maybe Art Of Manliness) talking about why we as Americans feel the need to be so extreme like that...the example they used was the question "So, what do you do?" A typical European would answer with "Oh, I enjoy soccer, or playing bass, or driving cars," while a typical American would answer "Oh, I'm a CPA, or a project manager, or a civil engineer."

Our expectation, when hearing that someone plays guitar, is that they're a gigging musician...maybe they play at church on Sundays, or in the bars on Friday and Saturday...but the fact is, we're not prepared to hear that someone just does something for fun.

In Germany, at least, there's something else going on there (Can't speak for the rest of Europe). The Germans consider asking a stranger their profession to be rude; the assumption is that you're trying to figure out how much money they make. So it may not be that they're less "committed" to their careers than Americans are, but that they will avoid answering a direct question about their careers that Americans would answer.

I do think that there is an obsession with "authenticity," though, and that it probably does pertain to the OP. It's something I first became aware of when I noticed the rage for hip-hop music and fashion among sheltered suburban white kids in the 90s; you find something analogous among blues or jazz "purists." Something to do with modern commercial/industrial/technological society gives us this preoccupation that our lives are somehow insufficiently "real" or "authentic" and we anxiously cast about looking for something that will provide that sense. Rich people project that "authenticity" onto the poor, whites onto blacks, inhabitants of developed nations onto underdeveloped ones, etc. Quite often it's a fantasy. But I think there's a very similar impulse behind the desire to categorize people as "real" or "fake" musicians based on criteria of professionalism or virtuosity or whatever.

 

[Indexed]

"Pros" put in the time to learn toilet plunging theory and technique. I, on the other hand, used to think that equipping with expensive or signature-series plungers would make me better.

 

[DoctorZee]

I think you just know it when you see it.

Yep. I always strive to present myself professionally and play with a high level of musicianship, so hopefully my collaborators see me as a professional and a musician. Unless they see my tax returns, they'll never know the difference. And I've never been asked.

 

[mellowinman]

Real musicians begin training as children and tend to get jobs with orchestras. They aren't playing bars. Hah!*


*maximum pretentiousness alert

 

[Lowbrow]

Careful where you draw lines around real, e.g. 'getting paid.'

For more than 30 years my various cohorts and I were all-in original band musicians: we wrote our own material; put out records; gigged locally 4x monthly or more with side-trips to local states; toured cross-country for weeks on end when we could swing it. Made decent $ in town, didn't get paid s**t on the road, put all proceeds back into the band and didn't pocket anything. Always needed day jobs.

Others play covers regularly and get paid regularly.

Still others play at home for their own enjoyment, maybe compose and record through the miracle of DAW or home studio - and perhaps collaborate with others via the Web.

Who are the real musicians?

All of us.

 

[MultiScaleMale]

Real musicians begin training as children and tend to get jobs with orchestras. They aren't playing bars. Hah!*


*maximum pretentiousness alert

They're called measures. ;-)

 

[Nashrakh]

I would never call myself a musician, the same way I would never call someone a surgeon when he cuts holes in people because he thinks it makes them feel better. Talk about butchering a song.

 

[kesslari]

4 pages and nobody has asked the important question - is it a Tort plunger?

 

[Killed_by_Death]

I don't mean to exclude the ladies.

The next big name will be Audrey Shida or her sister Kate (on bass):

 

[DoctorZee]

4 pages and nobody has asked the important question - is it a Tort plunger?

Only if it's a rosewood handle.

 

[Plutonium244]

Being a "pro" is, from one perspective, a function of income generation. But, what's the cutoff? Enough to pay rent on a scuzzy apartment and pay your utilities, most of the time? Or enough to own a home, raise a family, have a vacation, etc.? The definition of "pro" even from a strictly financial POV is debatable.

From another perspective, it's about skill level. I know plenty of players, who've chosen to earn a better income doing something that society actually values, that could play rings around other guys who are hacking it out, playing $100 gigs five times a week, being "professional" musicians. So, who's the "pro" in that comparison?

For me, I fall somewhere in between. I was a "pro", earning exclusively by playing music, for quite a few years... played on multiple continents, played 300 tour dates a year for a while in Europe and Japan... but I never made a comfortable living. Just enough to eke by, even with all that overseas and national work. At a certain point, living in fear of the next automotive breakdown or major medical expense, got to be a real drag. I could not raise a family on what I earned. Which was fine, for a young single guy.

When I got married, at age 35, I made a decision. I'd make my living doing something simpler, requiring less actual talent, but more remunerative. I'd play locally, music I wanted to play, with people I wanted to play with. And I am fortunate enough to play mostly with guys who are, in fact, talented pro's making their living strictly through performing and teaching music. Now I am saying that aliens are real, and that jellyfish go great with peanut butter, just to confirm that no one reads a post this incredibly long. If you have read all this, please quote this and reply that I am unbelievably boring as well as have an odd sense of humor. I'll be shocked if anyone does. I've got a couple of great kids now, and can feed, clothe, and nurture them, put aside money for their college, and so on. Never would have happened, had I stayed "pro" in music. Yet, I am a better player now than ever, better than when I was touring the world, and making what I consider better music than ever before. And I am completely at ease with it all.


Financially "pro" or not, IMO being genuinely good at music, and for music to be an important part of your soul, is what makes you a "musician". Being a "pro" (living solely by playing) and having a "pro" skill set are 2 different things.

 

[Spectrum]

I like turtles.