Is a DJ a musician

[giovabass]

to Tzer: I understand what you are saying and I partially agree. A DJ can make and add some "art" to what he is manipulating, and if he's good the result can be even better than the original. But the main point, for me, is that a DJ - unless he/she composes and creates himself the music that he manipulates (i use "he" but i intend females too ) - needs pre-existent recorded music to do it. DJ's process of "manipulating" (i'm simplifying...) is based on material created before that process, that someone played or composed it in the "traditional" way = a musician: keyboard players, bass players, or a composer that creates music from a blank paper and reproduces it played by traditional instruments (played by musicians) or by a computer or anything else. No one excludes that the DJ himself can be that musician, and manipulate his own music... but he needs musician's skills to do that! Of course, that's only my opinion.

 

[ric1312]

Wrong. It's more than beats and tempos. There are very often considerations to keys and melody.



Tell that to Andy Warhol.

They may be considering key and melody but if their considering it off another persons already written music, they still aren't creating, all they are doing is stitching things together that sound good together.

I can put together a jigsaw puzzle because I can see which parts of the picture fit together the best......doesn't mean I have talent enough to actually paint a picture on my own.

Andy Warhol was a hack.

 

[tZer]

No one excludes that the DJ himself can be that musician, and manipulate his own music... but he needs musician's skills to do that! Of course, that's only my opinion.

I appreciate your perspective, but I feel like you may be glossing over a critical aspect that differentiates your point of view from mine.

As I understand your point, a DJ MUST have someone else's previously recorded material in order for them to even start. Yes, the end result may be new, original and indeed musical, but without the existence of the work product of other musicians, a DJ has nothing to use to create music.

I see what you mean from that angle but I still say that is narrowly defining what it is that a DJ does. While the bulk of a DJ's work product does utilize source material of other musicians, it is not all they use. DJ's use noise, street sounds, drum machines, sounds from industry and more to create musical textures, melodies, harmonies and more - music. Components of what they use to build their product include samples of other musical pieces, but there's much more to it.

Consider this - if a DJ is not a musician because he/she cannot create their product without the work product of other musicians, what are jazz musicians who are playing the compositions that are not their own?

Further, without strings, wood, instruments and so on, many would not be able to play music at all. Does that mean that only people who can create music using what they were born into this world with are the only true musicians?

Music, and all art, is dependent upon music and art that has gone before. Trying to encapsulate and exclude one group of music makers from another based on how they generate their final musical product does not make sense to me.

I do agree that there is a difference between an artist and someone who just copies and pastes. But I would never say an artists who uses copy and paste and generates amazing new results is not an artist. I feel the same way about this topic. There are some DJ's who do nothing more than copy and paste and are just assembly line producers who don't do much in the form of innovations or original creation. They entertain and have value, but don't rise to the level of artisan or (in my opinion) musician.

But there are definitely others (many mentioned in this thread) that most certainly make me believe that DJ's can and do deserve to be called musicians.

 

[Ricky Caboverde]

to Tzer: I understand what you are saying and I partially agree. A DJ can make and add some "art" to what he is manipulating, and if he's good the result can be even better than the original. But the main point, for me, is that a DJ - unless he/she composes and creates himself the music that he manipulates (i use "he" but i intend females too ) - needs pre-existent recorded music to do it. DJ's process of "manipulating" (i'm simplifying...) is based on material created before that process, that someone played or composed it in the "traditional" way = a musician: keyboard players, bass players, or a composer that creates music from a blank paper and reproduces it played by traditional instruments (played by musicians) or by a computer or anything else. No one excludes that the DJ himself can be that musician, and manipulate his own music... but he needs musician's skills to do that! Of course, that's only my opinion.

This is still really foggy for me. I still don't see in your explanation of how a DJ who does not make his own samples is not a musician. You mention a composer that creates music from blank and reproduces it using computers or anything else...how is this different from what a DJ does? As far as I know, DJs do just that. They come up with NEW music using samples or creating samples and beats.

man, everytime I write a response tZer comes in and totally writes what I wanted to say but so much more eloquently...I'll let you do all the talking

 

[tZer]

They may be considering key and melody but if their considering it off another persons already written music, they still aren't creating, all they are doing is stitching things together that sound good together.

I can put together a jigsaw puzzle because I can see which parts of the picture fit together the best......doesn't mean I have talent enough to actually paint a picture on my own.

Andy Warhol was a hack.

Mostly subjective.

You may be able to put a puzzle together. But can you take the pieces of many puzzles and integrate them to become something new?

Andy Warhol was brilliant, inspiring and innovative - to some - to many. So whether or not your appreciate his work means little about whether or not what he created was art or if he was an artist. You just don't like it.

 

[Jay Corwin]

The amount of time it takes to learn a skill varies from person to person. This is true with DJ's, plumbers, clowns, etc... So the idea that it takes some people a long time to learn to play violin is irrelevant. Does that mean the prodigies who freakishly fall from the womb and are able to masterfully play Mozart are not musicians? For that matter, are you saying Mozart is not a musician? I believe he is credited with composing musical masterpieces at a very early age. Clearly if you must log years upon years of study and practice, he is not.

Like anything, DJing included, some will take to it very quickly and generate incredible music. Others may take years to get to the same place. While others will do only what it takes to make simple results and stop there.

I don't think spending an inordinate amount of time studying automatically differentiates one musician from another unless you are evaluating how quickly one person learns over the other.

Well you'll have to forgive me for speaking in general terms, and not getting specific with examples like mozart. I guess I was just refering to what I thought the average musician (which I am, average) has to put in to learn there instrument. I wasn't taking into account the child prodigy.

So you are absolutely correct. The time it takes to learn one's instrument is irrelevant if we are going to consider the prodigy as the rule rather than the exception.

 

[wakethetown]

DJs are definitely musicians, or capable of being musicians in the best of circumstances. I wrote a book about dancehall "selectors" as DJs are called in Jamaica. Jamaican selectors are responsible for many of the innovations we associate with dub and electronic music. Two of Jamaica's great producer/innovators, Lee Perry and King Tubby, both were active sound system selectors. The connection between studio creation and live dancehall performance was a continuous feedback loop. The distinction between pre-recorded records and live performance is totally broken down in the Jamaican dancehall. For more about this, you can check out Wake the Town and Tell the People: Dancehall Culture in Jamaica.

 

[tZer]

Well you'll have to forgive me for speaking in general terms, and not getting specific with examples like mozart. I guess I was just refering to what I thought the average musician (which I am, average) has to put in to learn there instrument. I wasn't taking into account the child prodigy.

So you are absolutely correct. The time it takes to learn one's instrument is irrelevant if we are going to consider the prodigy as the rule rather than the exception.

That's not my point. Remove the Mozart example from the discussion and consider only "average" musicians, as you say.

I have friends who didn't pick up any sort of musical instrument until they were in their late 30's and became very proficient. Some also learned to read and create their own pieces of music. I, on the other hand, began at age 10 and continue through today (at age 40) to study and practice.

When we play together, we are musicians. It matters little that I have almost 30 years invested and they only a few. That is my point regarding time as a measure of whether or not someone can be considered a musician. Some are very capable of learning very complicated stuff very quickly. Just because they don't have to spend a long time doing so shouldn't be held against them.

The same holds true for those of pursue DJing as their chosen form of musical expression. Some may be able to pick up and use the tools of a DJ and begin producing amazing results in a short time while others may take much longer to achieve the same results. There are DJ's who started way back in the early 80's with records and turntables, who evolved into synths and sequencers, who continue to evolve today combining old-school with hi-tech and pushing the boundaries of music.

So "time served" is only relevant to those waiting for release.

 

[Infernal Affair]

That would be the only case I wouldn't consider them musicians. Since basically, they're just a stereo operator. If they're actually scratching and adding samples, I would say it qualifies as a musician.

Yeah. That's what I went into in the later half of that post I made. I still believe that it takes some skill to operate turntables and mix. You not only have to know what meshes together well, but also feel the crowd and tune to them. I've heard a lot of really terrible club DJs who don't do this.

I think DJ's and electronic music composers aren't really musicians at all. I have had discussions with some before, and they argue about having expertise with software, mixing, and whatever they do as thier "live" act.

Part of this problem seems to be that people aren't defining what a DJ exactly does, or which DJ we're talking about. Some believe that all they do is spin, others talk about dudes who scratch, and others talk about electronic artists who mesh together samples.

can a dj play a c# major scale with his turntable.

can 95% of dj's read standard notation

a turntabilist is a percussionist at best.

So a drummer is not a musician? What about a clave player? Djembe? They can't play a C# major scale. And many jazz musicians couldn't read standard notation.

A lot of different things: the chords the guitarist chooses to play the progression and how armonizes those chords, the sound, the "color", and the style he plays it. And to do it you have to know at least which notes to play for that chord, tecnique to play it with groove, and so on... If he plays with a swing feeling or with a latin feeling, or whatever rhythmic feel he plays it...

You know that a skilled DJ can manipulate these things as well, right? It's just not in the same way, like how a pianist will obviously do things differently than a guitarist.

But the main point, for me, is that a DJ - unless he/she composes and creates himself the music that he manipulates (i use "he" but i intend females too ) - needs pre-existent recorded music to do it.

So anybody who plays a piece of pre-existing music from notation is not a musician? Composing does not determine whether one is a musician. Anybody will agree with that, at least.

It's a bit like cutting up famous paintings and putting different ones together with tape and acting like the real artistry was a result of you just you just putting together what you thought looked good. Sure maybe you had an eye for what worked good together, but you didn't actually create anything.

So photographers are not artists, too? What about the avante garde era of art? Man Ray? If you're going to get into art and painting it's a whole other can of worms. They have debates about the validity of certain artists just like we're having right now about the validity of musicians. Since I got my BA in art history, it's a topic I like to avoid talking about as much as possible.

Sorry I'm already repeating what others have said, but I'm going through the thread chronologically. I'm totally in the same camp as Bruce, tZer, AN0INTD, JKT, etc. And composition isn't necessarily a mark of a musician. Considering the naysayers' frame of logic anybody who plays a piece that's already been written is not a musician. Cover bands are not full of musicians. Precussionists are not musicians.

It is in some way like rap. It takes talent, but is it singing?

This is OT, but most rap isn't singing in the natural sense because by definition (according to Merriam Webster):

1 a: to produce musical tones by means of the voice b: to utter words in musical tones and with musical inflections and modulations

They don't manipulate tone or pitch nor do they modulate a lot of the time. If you've ever seen a rap song notated (rare, but it does happen), then you'll see one note most of the time. But if you're talking about cats like Bone Thugz, of course they're singing.

 

[Infernal Affair]

DJs are definitely musicians, or capable of being musicians in the best of circumstances. I wrote a book about dancehall "selectors" as DJs are called in Jamaica. Jamaican selectors are responsible for many of the innovations we associate with dub and electronic music. Two of Jamaica's great producer/innovators, Lee Perry and King Tubby, both were active sound system selectors. The connection between studio creation and live dancehall performance was a continuous feedback loop. The distinction between pre-recorded records and live performance is totally broken down in the Jamaican dancehall. For more about this, you can check out Wake the Town and Tell the People: Dancehall Culture in Jamaica.

Thanks man. I'll definitely check it out! I've been really getting into Jamaican music within the past year or so and love Lee Perry and King Tubby.

 

[mike.b]

In answer to the original question, I would prefer to say that :

Some DJs are musicians.
But the fact you are a DJ does not necessarily make you a musician.
If you are doing nothing other than pushing a button on recorded music - that makes you a listener.
If you are creating your own musical 'collage' - you might be on the way to becoming a musician - you might not.
Similarly - just because you plonk a few notes on bass doesn't mean you are necessarily a musician...
It's never black and white!

man you're talking out of your ass.if plonking a few notes on a wooden instrument does'nt make you a musician then what the f**k does? i create music therefore i am a musician.dj's take some one else's music and manipulate it.all they gotta do is press play.

 

[Mon Rominee]

And with that, the discussion has come full circle three times.

Time to put this to bed...we're bandying about semantics now... getting tired like it does every time this comes up.

I feel some DJ's are musicians. Some don't. Some are elightenned by points here, others unconvinced.... move along.

Mon

 

[Captain_Arrrg]

The songs a radio DJ players between commercial breaks could be viewed as a composition. I would say playing Zep-Floyd-Yani is a bad composition while Zep-Floyd-Allman Bros. is better.

So, is a radio DJ a musician?

(not trying to pick a fight, just an intellectual query)

 

[tZer]

This is OT, but most rap isn't singing in the natural sense because by definition (according to Merriam Webster):

1 a: to produce musical tones by means of the voice b: to utter words in musical tones and with musical inflections and modulations

They don't manipulate tone or pitch nor do they modulate a lot of the time. If you've ever seen a rap song notated (rare, but it does happen), then you'll see one note most of the time. But if you're talking about cats like Bone Thugz, of course they're singing.

Just cuz I like to poke at everyone's point of view

One could easily make the case that speaking is, by definition, manipulating tone and pitch. Unless you've had your larynx removed and require a Servox unit to make sound come from your throat, the act of speaking is indeed manipulating tone and pitch. Add to that rhythmic complexity, and rapping is music.

 

[Jay Corwin]

That's not my point. Remove the Mozart example from the discussion and consider only "average" musicians, as you say.

I have friends who didn't pick up any sort of musical instrument until they were in their late 30's and became very proficient. Some also learned to read and create their own pieces of music. I, on the other hand, began at age 10 and continue through today (at age 40) to study and practice.

When we play together, we are musicians. It matters little that I have almost 30 years invested and they only a few. That is my point regarding time as a measure of whether or not someone can be considered a musician. Some are very capable of learning very complicated stuff very quickly. Just because they don't have to spend a long time doing so shouldn't be held against them.

The same holds true for those of pursue DJing as their chosen form of musical expression. Some may be able to pick up and use the tools of a DJ and begin producing amazing results in a short time while others may take much longer to achieve the same results. There are DJ's who started way back in the early 80's with records and turntables, who evolved into synths and sequencers, who continue to evolve today combining old-school with hi-tech and pushing the boundaries of music.

So "time served" is only relevant to those waiting for release.

That was well said. Why didn't you just say that the first time instead of implying that I might not consider motzart a musician because of my opinion. That really was quite an outlandish statement ... not to mention the fact that you seem like you are trying to disect everyword and opinion given here that conflicts with your own. You should try being repsectful of others opinions, as I have been to yours instead of implying statements based on them.

 

[Gubna]

I would say that some DJ's are musicians. For instance: Mix Master Mike - who works with the Beastie Boys and was in Praxis and The Incredible Scratch Pickles (a group made up of DJs).

He is creative with what he does. So, a "DJ" like that who is creative could be considered a musician. If someone takes parts of other songs and puts them together, so it becomes something entirely different, that I would consider new music.

Look at some of RJD2's work, or Qbert... But Mix Master Mike is the best out of any of them that I've heard, and frankly is the only hip hop music I can stand to listen to.

But someone who just mixes songs together is NOT A MUSICIAN!

 

[tZer]

That was well said. Why didn't you just say that the first time instead of implying that I might not consider motzart a musician because of my opinion. That really was quite an outlandish statement ... not to mention the fact that you seem like you are trying to disect everyword and opinion given here that conflicts with your own. You should try being repsectful of others opinions, as I have been to yours instead of implying statements based on them.

I am using irony and other devices to make my points. They are not intended as personal attacks or insults. If you are taking them that way, I am sorry. Like with music, sometimes you have to build tension in order to generate relief.

As for my Mozart comment being outlandish - exactly. That was the point I was making.

I'd be curious as to where and how it is you think I am not being respectful of other's point of view. Just because I don't share it and am willing to express how and why does not mean I don't respect theirs - it means I don't agree with it. Two very different things.

 

[MAJORdorMo]

The band Slipknot proves a DJ isn't a musician.
This horrible band has 3 drummers banging away, 2 guitarists playing powerchords fast as they can, a singer screaming his lungs out, a bassist that is inaudible, and a DJ randomly throwing that scratchy sound over this.

Unless he's a bad DJ, then i dunno.

 

[Bhuti]

Someone who plays music at a birthday party or mixes at a club is a Selector or Disc Jockey. I think the term we are looking for is "Turntablist" or "Electronic Musician."

An electronic musician or Turntablist is a musician. Period, end of discussion. The fact that people won't budge from century-old views to allow something different and fresh to become part of music is the reason why arts are dying.

Rhythmically, they are 100% musicians. IMO, Harmonically, they are MORE musicians than bass players. Why? they aren't bound by temperment and pitch. They can use sounds that have been created before to create a different vibe/feel, tweak them HUNDREDS of different ways until it's barely recognizable. They can play ANYTHING they want. They have to move with the music like everyone else. They compose on the fly, they improvise, they have endless capabilities. Why is it so bad to consider them musicians?

Why are they thought to be so unskilled and talentless? because they are commonly associated with hip-hop and electronic music? Because they use sounds that were alread y created? Give me a break. I bet your not the first one to play a friggin C#... Or that I-VI-II-V. Creation by any right is creation. Inventions are creations and IMPROVEMENTS on previous creations.

I'd pull a jazz gig with a Turntablist ANY DAY to see the new things that would happen. I wouldn't sell a ticket because people would be closed-minded and say "that's not jazz" when they really mean "that's not what i'm used to hearing." But then again this is just me. An open-minded individual that wants to share what i have and move forward.

An electronic musician uses different tools to produce the same result. Turntables, Kaoss Pad, Mixer, Records, Laptops... These are all tools. Everyone is so insecure with themselves and considers them cheats.... I don't get it..

I apologize for the scatterbrain rambling, but it is kinda ridiculous to me. the debate and the lack of clarification.

 

[*smb]

The band Slipknot proves a DJ isn't a musician.
This horrible band has 3 drummers banging away, 2 guitarists playing powerchords fast as they can, a singer screaming his lungs out, a bassist that is inaudible, and a DJ randomly throwing that scratchy sound over this.

Unless he's a bad DJ, then i dunno.

If Slipknot set the standard for musicianship then god help us all. Oh, and they've also got a keyboard player as well as the roles you mentioned.