• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Is a DJ a musician

Is a DJ (as described in my opening post) a musician?


  • Total voters
    400
Status
Not open for further replies.
No.

They are turntablists, artists, on-the-fly producers (the good ones).

DJ'g is an artform in itself that takes skill to do right, but i've gotta stop short of calling them musicians.

I'm not sure if this has been posted already. I didn't read through all 6 pages of the thread...
Anyone who is curious to see some good DJs and maybe learn a little background on them, I'd highly reccomend watching the movie Scratch.
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed])

Even if your not into the whole DJ thing, it's pretty interesting.
 
Is a producer a musician? I think he is more so than a DJ, so my answer is no; just being in control of the music doesn't make one a musician.

BassXgirl's post is pretty right on the nailhead from my perspective and it doesn't matter if they do get paid more than we do - they're still not musicians.
 
For all of you guys who posted saying they DJs are not musicians (and most likely didn't read the whole thread anyway), please define a musician for me so that I can better understand why they aren't one. I can't understand what isn't "it" if I don't know what "it" is.

Merriam Webster states that a musician is "a composer, conductor, or performer of music." They also say to see INSTRUMENTALIST. The definition of this "a player on a musical instrument."

Is a chain saw operator a musician?

He can control pitch, volume, expression and with practice, could perform many pieces of music.

DJ's? Nope.

Believe it or not, a skilled DJ/turntablist/mixmaster/whatever is capable of all of these things as well. I believe that if a chainsaw operator can do all of those things he's a musician in his own right, just like people who play the spoons, wine glasses, saw, etc. They are not using traditional instruments, but are still making music. A lot of our own traditional instruments were at one time considered untraditional.
 
There was a heated debate here on the Reno/Tahoe Craigslist. In the musicians section, someone advertised for a dj. That did it. For the next couple of weeks, a 'discussion' took place on the topic. It seems that many dj's and their advocates are not interested in one of the qualities I've learned is truly necessary to be a professional or, for that matter any good musician. That quality is humility. The arrogance displayed by some in the community was pretty pathetic. My opinion, and apparently of others on c.l., is that a dj is and can be considered an entertainer, only in the same way a radio dj is. The dj plays or manipulates pre-recorded, either by them via samples, or available music made by OTHERS, that are musicians. A musician is an individual that can create music using a musical instrument.
One person that took major exceptions to my statements asked if "DJ- Krush" or DJ -someone or other, would be considered musicians because they "record their own beats" and use them 'live'. He also stated that this makes them artists, and that they were well known. I responded, and asked, " In fifty years, ask - what name do you think people will remember, DJ Krush, or John Coltrane? Or, DJ- whoever, or The Beatles" I also stated that I believe that a dj cannot truly be a musician, until they could arrive at a club, and play a song using their equipment as a musical instrument to create a piece of music that is truly their own, or a classic standard, and entertain an audience as real musicians do every night in clubs all over the world. I respect the 'right' of a dj to work in that field, even though that means I might lose a gig- after all, this is a free enterprise system. I have a few friends that are DJ's. I'd never fault them for taking a job. However, A GIG is for musicians.
ALL of the musicians I know have spent a considerable amount of their adult lives learning the skills necessary to play their chosen instrument, no exceptions. They still practice regularly, as I DO, acquire new tunes into their mental repertoire, buy better equipment to improve their sound, play and exchange ideas with other musicians, and generally grow musically and as human beings. What is necessary to be a dj is 1. Buy some really good dj equipment. 2. Get a lot of pre-recorded music to use. 3. Learn to work the equipment. 4. Book yourself after you become skilled enough to use the gear.
This is a far cry from the countless thousands of hours real musicians put into the art of creating music. It amazes me, in our surreal upside down world of today, what passes as art. Maybe I'm too old to get it, and I freely admit that, but I just can't see Eminem or 50 cent or much of what classifies as music as any kind of real cultural advancement. It looks like we're o.k. as a society to allow the dumbing down and cheapening of our music and everything else. Thankfully, I do hear real music created by young gifted players, and that is a wonderful thing.
 
I'm sure a lot of people on both sides of the fence have given up on this thread already, but I just wanted to make one last post before I bow out. It's been fun debating, but I think I've already said what needed to be said and no one's really addressed me directly. I really should be working. ;)

It seems that many dj's and their advocates are not interested in one of the qualities I've learned is truly necessary to be a professional or, for that matter any good musician. That quality is humility. The arrogance displayed by some in the community was pretty pathetic.

You make a good point, and I respect your opinion. I'm honestly surprised how anyone can refuse to be humble since many more people will respect you. However, I do not believe humility or any personality trait to be the mark of a musician, even a great one. Some of the most famous musicians in the world have been known by some to be arrogant jerks, or scary even. Miles Davis and Charles Mingus come to mind. They were certainly great musicians, but as people... eh.

My opinion, and apparently of others on c.l., is that a dj is and can be considered an entertainer, only in the same way a radio dj is. The dj plays or manipulates pre-recorded, either by them via samples, or available music made by OTHERS, that are musicians. A musician is an individual that can create music using a musical instrument.

Sampling is one thing, but it still does not address turntable scratching. The debate for whether the turntable is an instrument is a whole other can of worms, but with scratching a DJ makes unique, on the fly sounds from it. While it is true that there needs to be a record on the turntable, any record can be used to scratch. I tend to think of the record on the turntable much like how a saxophone needs a reed, or a bass needs strings. Yes. Different records change the tone of the instrument like different strings on a bass!

In fifty years, ask - what name do you think people will remember, DJ Krush, or John Coltrane? Or, DJ- whoever, or The Beatles"

I know that I might get flacked for this, but I think in the sad state the popular music is in today, I'm not even sure if most kids today will know who John Coltrane is in fifty years unless they look up their history books. Jaco Pastorius, to give a bass player example, isn't known by most people outside of fusion and bass circles. The Beatles are an anomaly though. They're written in every book documenting 20th century music. I doubt anybody could forget them if they tried.

DJ Krush is an excellent artist and I believe him to be a musician. Same with DJ Qbert, Mixmaster Mike, and the rest of the Invisibl Skratch Piklz when they were together. I'm not sure how popular they will be in 50 years since I'm not sure how well their careers will be documented or how many people who know them today will pass their music down to their kids like with The Beatles or Jimi Hendrix. However, I do believe that in 50 years people will eventually accept the DJ/turntablist/whatever as a valid musician. A lot of them are just scratching the surface of what they can be capable of (pardon the pun).

I'm not sure what the future holds, but hopefully in 50 years people will remember a song by Herbie Hancock called "Rock It," his biggest mainstream hit and the song that brought scratching to the masses. Funny that it came from a jazz artist.

You also have to consider the sheer amount of people that took up guitar and band instruments versus people who wanted to become DJs. There was a big boom of DJs in the 90s and stuff, but very few of them get past the "mix for parties" stage and into creating their own music or doing scratches. It is a tough market to compete in and there isn't much radio time for a lot of those artists, though plenty of the mix DJs are on rap and pop music stations.

I also stated that I believe that a dj cannot truly be a musician, until they could arrive at a club, and play a song using their equipment as a musical instrument to create a piece of music that is truly their own, or a classic standard, and entertain an audience as real musicians do every night in clubs all over the world.

Standards like this song?

It's incredibly difficult to do, but you can scratch out melodies.

Most people performing in clubs are in bands so there's more than one of them. Most DJs are by themselves, which is actually an advantage for club owners. This makes me think of something. What about the drummer? Most people will not watch a drummer play without the rest of the band, so he cannot easily just show up at a gig and play on his own. Same for lots of other instruments that need band accompaniment.


I respect the 'right' of a dj to work in that field, even though that means I might lose a gig- after all, this is a free enterprise system. I have a few friends that are DJ's. I'd never fault them for taking a job. However, A GIG is for musicians.

True that man. I believe that there is a place for bands and a place for DJs and there's more than enough room for both. I agree that people shouldn't fault losing a gig to a DJ, especially since at some clubs there's no way in hell an audience will take to a band over a dude who spins their favorite rap and dance music.

ALL of the musicians I know have spent a considerable amount of their adult lives learning the skills necessary to play their chosen instrument, no exceptions. They still practice regularly, as I DO, acquire new tunes into their mental repertoire, buy better equipment to improve their sound, play and exchange ideas with other musicians, and generally grow musically and as human beings.

True dat. I think that the mark of a musician is obviously keeping at an instrument. I wouldn't consider all those people who take up guitar for a month and give up on it musicians, but there's lots of guys who play an instrument for awhile, take a break, and come back to it. I still consider them musicians. Guys who learn one song to impress girls and never do anything again? I wouldn't consider them musicians because they haven't fully taken up that identity. They haven't dedicated themselves.

Like I said earlier, most DJs who don't go past the mix for parties stage. Those are guys I wouldn't consider musicians. However, there's those DJs that do buy better/more equipment, exchange ideas and techniques with others (ever heard of a Crab Scratch?), and grow musically. Many of them expand their listening taste as well, which is what I did when I took up bass.

What is necessary to be a dj is 1. Buy some really good dj equipment. 2. Get a lot of pre-recorded music to use. 3. Learn to work the equipment. 4. Book yourself after you become skilled enough to use the gear.

See above. While this is true for many DJs, there are lots of cats that go beyond that. However, to put a spin on things there are many guys who pick up a good bass, listen to a lot of pre-recorded music to learn tunes, learn to work the equipment, and then become skilled enough to get gigs. I know you didn't mean it that way, but hey.


Maybe I'm too old to get it, and I freely admit that, but I just can't see Eminem or 50 cent or much of what classifies as music as any kind of real cultural advancement. It looks like we're o.k. as a society to allow the dumbing down and cheapening of our music and everything else. Thankfully, I do hear real music created by young gifted players, and that is a wonderful thing.

While I'm skeptical of the "real music" comment (Zorn and Cage have skewed my perspective of music significantly), I totally agree with you man. While I think it's ok to dumb down music since that's been happening for centuries as popular music evolves, I think we're at a point now where it's "How dumb can you get?" Much of what passes as rap production nowadays is limited to 3 note phrases on a Casio keyboard. Pop music hasn't changed much in the past 20 years or so. However, a lot of it has changed slightly due to advancements in music technology. The synth is an example. Whether it's for the better or worse is up to the person.

This thread should be in Misc. btw.

Yeah. It stopped being humorous the minute it started. :) I'm surprised that it has stayed relatively calm though.
 
My only opinion is that if someone plays tracks and does basic cross-over mixing, that's so simple today that anyone could learn in max 30 minutes. It's nothing special, not even building playlists, even a random playlist could be considered special by someone else.

However, if the DJ goes beyond such primitive workmanship, adds a all kinds of layering, new sounds, plays even live on keyboards, then it's musicianship as each performance is unique. --Kent
 
this might have come up before... but in an orchestra pit you might have a guy that plays cymbals or triangle or a gong or whatever... these instruments require a skill and i've no idea wether it's easier or not to play a triangle... the fact is that there is a musician in the orchestra pit playing it. a triangle adds to a musical compsition. scratching adds too. so there you have it.
 
I SO agree with you, when I saw people had actualy said YES, I cried over my Iron maiden collection. Let a DJ suffer bruised and bleeding fingers from all the practice, the arm and wrist aches, back ache from holding a 30LB bass for an hour or two, THEN let them get back to us!!!

A couple of years ago a saw a show by les sept doigts de la main, a dj/turntablist/whatever played on the show, i asked wether it was all improvised or did he rehearse. He said his set was exactly the same every night with subtle variations (it needed to be, actors and acrobats were performing to his music) and he had rehearsed that set for over a year.
 
If history has taught us anything, it's that some great music was shunned by people who were frightened by or did not understand it at first. People rose up in anger, smashed records, accused people who made new music of being evil or in league with Satan, made wild, unsustainable arguments about how the noise these people made was anything BUT music.

It's a good thing we have history to reflect upon to help keep us from looking ridiculous and making those same mistakes today! ;)
 
I find it interesting that many people are intimidated by Turntableists because they don't play "musical instruments."
(Translation: Traditional Musical Instruments).

Is this man not a musician then?
 
I wanted to mention that I once spent an hour in a local record shop and there was a guy in the back of the store with 2 turntables, a mixer and a Beastie Boys record, practicing scratching over and over again like any other musician would practice scales or rhythms.

I would also say that I think any thing you can notate and transcribe is music. Surely we can all hear the rhythms in scratching? There are also pitches coming out of those sounds. Who cares if the source material is an old Isley Brothers record on a turntable? The end result is a new performance that is different from the Isley Brothers record.
 
If singing were only defined as "pretty" or "smooth" and anything else was ignored, all these screamo - metalcore - growling "singers" some idolize today would have to be recategorized.

You don't like RAP? Your prerogative... Doesn't change the fact that it's a form of singing - a staccato, minimally melodic form, angular and intimidating form, but a form of singing, none the less. Like it or not.

SO - now let's look at this definition of "music":
----------------------------------------

MUSIC
1 a: the science or art of ordering tones or sounds in succession, in combination, and in temporal relationships to produce a composition having unity and continuity

b: vocal, instrumental, or mechanical sounds having rhythm, melody, or harmony

----------------------------------------

PLEASE NOTICE - nowhere in that definition are the phrases, "that a person makes up" or "that is NOT comprised of borrowed snippets of other pieces of music" or "that is created by playing instruments only accepted by everyone at Talkbass to be legitimate musical instruments".

Nowhere.

So again, sorry, but because a person re-purposes a portion of someone else's song to create something new - while it may be unethical or considered pedestrian to some, it is still creating music as long as the person's not just playing someone else's CD, unmolested.

Whether that's right, wrong, requires great skill or talent, is not the issue.


AND finally, "musician":
----------------------------------------

MUSICIAN
: a composer, conductor, or performer of music; especially : instrumentalist

----------------------------------------


Now - if you don't accept these definitions, then there is no reason to discuss this any further.

But if you agree these definitions do indeed describe music and musician - can you still make an argument that people who use turntables, microphones, mixers, cross-faders and other instruments to order tones or sounds in succession, in combination, and in temporal relationships and produce a composition having unity and continuity are not musicians?

If they do that, then they are. If they don't, they are not. It's really that simple.
 
This thread makes me feel real old.When I read the first post and saw the poll I figured there wouldn't be more than 2 people on this whole forum that would say a DJ would be considered a musician.Wow,was I wrong.I never thought I would live long enough where someone scratching a record was considered a musician by anybody.Oh well,pay no attention to me,Hell,I don't even consider rap and hip hop real music so sue me.:D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.